Clayton Kershaw pitched and labored through five innings with an injured left hip, but he managed to limit the Reds to a lone run. Adrian Gonzalez homered twice to emphatically break out of his slump, and he helped power the offense to a win. But perhaps the biggest surprise goes to Juan Uribe, who managed to … uh … get a hit.

Still, despite the team’s best efforts, their playoff chances actually dropped because both the Cardinals and the Brewers were victorious, thus keeping the Dodgers three games back of the final Wild Card spot with nine games to play. Their chances now sit in the 5-7 percent range, depending on what methodology you choose to employ.

—–

Given Kershaw’s performance, I suppose one could look at as if pitching him was the right decision since the team ended up winning, but ten baserunners, including five walks over five innings against the B-lineup of the Reds, didn’t exactly strike me as normal, nor did it really change the fact that the Dodgers playoff hopes are still slim. Honestly, it was just fortunate that the sequencing of his struggles weren’t different, and that the results somehow managed to remain positive.

Simply put, the risk wasn’t worth the reward no matter what happened, because as even Orel Hershiser noted on the ESPN broadcast (Via Eric Stephen), Kershaw indeed struggled with his mechanics:

“We’re watching Clayton Kershaw throw a lot of balls to the right-handed batters box, or away to Votto, or inside to righties. That right hip, as it gets a little fatigued, his upper body is going to take over and it’s going to over-rotate over that hip and he’s going to start pulling pitches like he is. It’s just that little less bracing that makes the upper body go too far and…instead of that arm speed being braced against that front leg and having some direction, there is less bracing on that front side. The arm and the upper body take over, and you happen to pull the ball to your glove side. So if he’s not putting as much weight on it or using as much strength in that front leg for direction, his mechanics will make him start pulling the ball to his glove side.”

As I’ve said on this issue before, I just didn’t see the upside in starting him. This wasn’t a playoff game, it wasn’t a tiebreaker game, and, heck, it wasn’t even a particularly important regular season game.

—–

In news that I enjoyed the most, A.J. Ellis snapped an 0-for-30 skid with a double in the ninth. The Dodgers dugout made light of his streak by asking for the ball.

So with the Dodgers basically looking at everybody, and with the Carlos Lee trade falling through, the team has now revealed five teams that their scouts are watching intently as potential trading partners.

Dodgers scouts have an increased presence with Milwaukee, as well as continued coverage of the Chicago Cubs, Colorado, Philadelphia and Minnesota.

The players believed in their sights include Brewers sluggers Aramis Ramirez and Corey Hart; Cubs starting pitcher Ryan Dempster; Rockies outfielder Michael Cuddyer; and Phillies starting pitcher Cole Hamels. At the top of the club’s wish list are a productive corner infielder and a starting pitcher.

I thought the five players were intriguing options, so I decided to take a detailed look at all of them.

=====

Aramis Ramirez – 3B – Brewers

Dodgers third basemen on the year have combined to go .245/.319/.340/.659, and that’s being kind because utility man Jerry Hairston Jr. has a .326/.380/.500/.880 line in 50 plate appearances there. Hairston operates best as a super utility guy though, so Ramirez would essentially be a Juan Uribe (.200/.259/.280/.539)/Adam Kennedy (.228/.319/.289/.608)replacement.

Ramirez has hit .263/.341/.471/.812 so far in 2012 and he projects to improve on that a bit at .274/.341/.484/.824. Uribe and Kennedy are about average defensively, while Ramirez is well below average, bordering on poor. There’s a five to ten run gap on defense that Ramirez will have to make up, and that he does. For the rest of 2012, Ramirez projects to be about 20-25 runs better offensively than the combination of men he’s replacing. If you buy into his splits, which for his career have him ~60 OPS points higher in the second half, the disparity could be even more significant. Also, despite being 34, his peripherals show little sign of decline.

Of course, there’s the problem of the contract that the team would be taking on. Making $6 million in 2012, $10 million in 2013, and $16 million in 2014 with a 2015 mutual option/$4 million buyout, the Dodgers would hypothetically be on the hook for about $32 million for 2.5 years of service.

A bit painful but perhaps not overly terrible for a 3-4 WAR player, even one due to regress because of age. Ramirez would basically have to be worth around 7 or 8 WAR to make it work, and he figures to be in the neighborhood of that figure. Furthermore, he plays third, and unlike the corner outfield positions, third basemen are a much rarer asset. This is particularly true for the Dodgers, who have a complete dearth of internal options. Now factor in that the free agent market might come down to Maicier Izturis, and Ramirez isn’t such a terrible shot to take.

For the Brewers part, the Dodgers will probably have to wait until the last minute. Milwaukee sits a mere seven games back of first right now, which may seem like a lot, but with two wild card spots this year and the Cardinals late charge in 2011 fresh in everybody’s memory, they’ll probably be taking this decision down to the wire. One winning streak and they may not end up selling off at all.

—–

Corey Hart – RF – Brewers

Dodgers left fielders have hit .242/.300/.333/.632 on the year, which is amazingly bad. Hart would be a boon for the team, as he’s currently at .251/.313/.505/.818 and projects to hit .264/.327/.484/.811 the rest of the way. An average fielder, he would improve that area of the outfield as well, as they are basically stuck with Juan Rivera and Bobby Abreu as their primary options.

Hart is signed through 2013 and makes $9 million in 2012 and $10 million in 2013. His contract is more than reasonable for a 3-4 WAR player, and he’s a potential addition who could make upwards of a 25-35 run difference over the rest of the year (that’s being conservative, really).

Like Ramirez though, he may never become available, as the Brewers may never end up selling.

—–

Ryan Dempster – RHP – Cubs

I already addressed his potential addition here, but his acquisition makes even more sense now with Ted Lilly being transferred to the 60-day DL, health unknown, as Dempster would be a huge improvement over Nate Eovaldi.

The Cubs are 14 games back and are shopping everybody, so he’ll be on the market.

—–

Cole Hamels – LHP – Phillies

I like Hamels for the same reason I like Dempster, except he’s even better than Dempster and has a longer track record of excellence without the immediate injury history. He’s a consistent 3.5-4.5 WAR pitcher and a solid #1/#2 to slot behind Clayton Kershaw if the Dodgers can make the playoffs.

A 2.79 ERA/3.05 FIP/3.02 xFIP/3.03 SIERA in 2011 and a 3.08 ERA/3.28 FIP/3.24 xFIP/3.25 SIERA in 2012 basically says it all.

Hamels makes $15 million in 2012 and is slated to be a free agent, one that will probably be pursued by the Dodgers either way. The Phillies are 12 games back and should be sellers.

—–

Michael Cuddyer – RF – Rockies

Like Hart, he would be replacing a terrible concoction of outfielders that the Dodgers have trotted out in left field. Like Hart, he’s a solid hitter. Putting up a .284/.346/.459/.805 line in 2011, he has dropped a bit to .260/.313/.480/.793 in 2012, but projects to finish at a .281/.338/.485/.823 clip. Unlike Hart, he’s a rather poor defender, and I do have concerns that Coors Field is playing insane again, yet he’s still down a bit. That concern is especially true because he’s 33.

As far as his contract goes, he makes $10.5 million in 2012, 2013, and 2014, with performance bonuses that could up it by $1.5 million in 2014. A reasonable deal for a 2.5-3.5 WAR player, but I think Hart is both the better overall player and the one with less risk.

The Rockies are 14 games back at the moment and surely would be willing to sell, even if it’s within the division.

=====

Overall, all of the rumored players mentioned represent significant improvements to the team. Unlike Carlos Lee, they are likely to be difference makers for the Dodgers, thus making it understandable that they surrender assets for them. Whether the trades are workable or worth it obviously still depends on what the Dodgers give up and the finances involved, but if these are the types of players the team is pursuing, they definitely seem headed down the right road.

Matt Kemp and Clayton Kershaw are the two Dodgers who will represent the team at the 2012 All-Star Game.

Matt Kemp and Clayton Kershaw are headed back to the All-Star game.

Kemp and Kershaw were selected to their second National League All-Star teams Sunday. Both players made their All-Star debuts last year.

Both played well enough, but both partially got in due to name recognition…

Excluded from the team were Andre Ethier, who is tied for third in the NL with 55 runs batted in, and Chris Capuano, who is 9-3 with a 2.69 ERA.

…which is exactly why it’s hard to complain about Andre Ethier and Chris Capuano getting left out. Especially when Zack Greinke and James McDonald didn’t even make it.

As I watched Houston Astros catcher Jason Castro get absolutely lit up in a home plate collision with Mat Gamel of the Milwaukee Brewers, I wondered to myself why this aspect of baseball was even necessary.

I’m obviously not the first person to suggest this, and I’ve read all the criticism of writers who have previously suggested such rule changes, but there’s generally minimal logic to be found in the dissenting corner.

Their arguments usually go something like this:

“You’re ruining the tradition of baseball!”

“It’s always been this way, so why change it now?!”

“You could get hurt doing anything! What’s next? No sliders?!”

This would be a straw man fallacy if these weren’t the most common arguments I actually see against the idea.

Oh, and don’t let me forget the best of all:

“It’s people like you who are pusssssifying Amurrrrricccccaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrr!”

Well, that’s great.

—–

Despite my mocking, I actually understand where they’re coming from. No, really.

I was raised on traditional, hard-nosed baseball where doing things like wrecking a second baseman and blowing up the catcher was just considered “playing the game the right way”. Hell, my great-uncle was initially reviled in Japan for busting up the double play, and I learned a lot of my baseball from a guy who taught my great-uncle how to play ball, my grandfather. So I don’t feel the “you just don’t understand” reasoning applies to me.

I do get it, but I didn’t grow up believing in statistical analysis either, yet I was drawn to it anyway because I sought out things like logic and facts, not tradition and romanticization.

In that same vein, I can’t see the logic or sense in continuing to allow collisions at home plate, and I’ll even take it a step further than others and add takeout slides as well.

—–

The hit on Jason Castro would be cited as a blow to the head of a defenseless player in the NFL, and would probably lead to a fine and perhaps a suspension. In the NHL, a player just got suspended for 25 games for an elbow/shoulder to the head of a defenseless player. Yet, in the MLB, for whatever reason, these actions are completely legal and legitimate.

Why?

In sports like football, hockey, basketball, and yes, even soccer, exerting physicality and strength over an opponent is not just “part of the game”, but an active and legitimate strategy that is frequently employed by dominant teams.

Physicality in baseball? Eh … not so much.

No matter how often people repeat this rhetoric about beanballs and intimidation or whatever, baseball never was and never will be a contact sport. Exerting one’s physicality on an opponent has minimal to no effect, especially in the modern game, so why even bother keeping this “tradition” alive?

Two roughly developed rule changes (that you can help me adjust) would instantly address the issues I have:

1) Treat home plate like any other base. The catcher may not interfere with the runner’s path to the base and the runner may not collide with the catcher.

2) A player sliding or diving into a base must do so directly in line with the bag unless attempting to avoid a tag. In essence, this eliminates the need for the neighborhood play, as there will no longer be batters sliding five feet out of the basepath trying to take out the legs of infielders.

—–

I can’t see how the product on the field would suffer with those rule changes implemented. People don’t watch baseball to see infielders get taken out or catchers blown up, because if that was the actual appeal of the sport, then they’d be out of business.

The reality is that baseball has been and always will be a finesse sport, regardless of how people try to twist it. As such, both rule changes would have a minimal impact on the actual game, but would help avoid a number of potentially horrific head, knee, and ankle injuries, which I think would both protect players and improve the quality of the product on the field.

Most importantly, it just makes sense.

The popular discussion about this game will revolve around the blown call that ended it, but that kind of stuff will happen from time to time, just ask the Padres. For my interests, the real discussion should revolve around exactly what Don Mattingly was thinking late in the game.

—–

As it got down to the late innings of a tie game on the road, it wasn’t hard to see that Mattingly was going to save closer Javy Guerra for a save situation. Many of us speculated on that move well before it happened, and sure enough, Matt Guerrier entered the game in the ninth.

Now Guerrier has been excellent this season and Guerra has struggled lately, but overall, Guerra is the better reliever and he’s the team’s closer. Yet instead of making sure that, you know, the game actually continues, Guerra was saved for when the Dodgers took the lead, a lead that never came.

That was a managerial mistake, and Guerrier compounded it by making a mistake of his own with the walk of Jonathan Lucroy. The Brewers gave the Dodgers a gift by bunting into an out without advancing the runner, but the Dodgers gave it right back when Nyjer Morgan stole second and advanced to third on a throwing error by A.J. Ellis.

Now this is the point where I felt Mattingly’s decision making got really odd.

Mattingly proceeded to intentionally walk Rickie Weeks to put runners on first and third with one out. If you’re going to go that route, the next course of action is to:

1) Walk George Kottaras to load the bases and create a force play at home.
2) Play the corners in and at double play depth up the middle, and try to induce a grounder.

Instead, Mattingly brought in Jerry Hairston Jr. from the outfield to make five infielders and then proceeded to play all of them in, negating the point of walking Weeks to begin with. The fact that the walk was useless was further driven home when Weeks took second base on defensive indifference, thus showing that the Dodgers never cared about creating a force at second.

So if they had no intention of using the force play at second, why didn’t they walk Kottaras after they walked Weeks? Presumably because they didn’t want to face Ryan Braun with the bases loaded, but if that was indeed the case, why not pitch to Weeks since they weren’t banking on a force play being around to begin with?

1) Pitch to Weeks and pitch to Kottaras.
2) Walk Weeks, play the corners in and the middle at double play depth, and try to induce Kottaras into hitting a grounder.
3) Walk Weeks, walk Kottaras, and face Braun.

I prefer going with option one or option two over option three by a lot, but all seem to make some semblance of logical sense. Instead, Mattingly went with option four, which involved still having to face both Kottaras and Braun, both with no force play in tact if Guerrier did his job, meaning they actively choose to face one of the best hitters in the National League and gave the Brewers two chances to win it.

With option one, you potentially miss having to pitch to Braun. With options two and three (especially two), there’s a chance you can get out of it with one pitch. Yet, Mattingly seems to have chosen the scenario that both gives the opposing team the most attempts at driving in the runner from third and results in having to face the best hitter on the Brewers.

Swell.

Granted, most of this discussion was negated when Guerrier unintentionally walked Kottaras, but it still revealed a lot of what Mattingly was or wasn’t thinking.

It’s just so … what?

Ugh.

—–

As far as the last play of the game, he was out, as Mike Petriello‘s GIF shows.

I initially thought Ellis completely whiffed on the tag, but having now seen it slowed down, I see where the glove bends back as he makes contact with Morgan.

Terrible setup and throw by Matt Kemp, by the way.

—–

What is Adam Kennedy on the team for?

I feel no more confident with him up at the plate as opposed to a pitcher, and quite frankly, he’s done nothing in recent years to prove he’s a significant improvement.

—–

Let’s not lose sight of the fact that Guerrier was signed for three years by Colletti and is the 4th best reliever to 3 guys making $500k.

— Chad Moriyama (@ChadMoriyama) April 19, 2012

While Ryan Braun’s suspension over a positive drug test has ended with it being overturned, I think everybody recognizes that his trial has only just begun.

While the suspension being lifted was a boost to the Milwaukee Brewers, it probably would have actually been better for Braun’s reputation had he gotten suspended but for reasons that were shown to clearly be a mistake or unintentional, much like J.C. Romero.

Sad? Maybe, but utterly true.

As it stands, the debate in the court of public opinion over his guilt or innocence is just getting started.

—–

The fact of the matter is that nothing is clear as of yet.

Yesterday I wrote an article in response to the mainstream media not covering what I believed to be pertinent and relevant information acquired from anonymous sources, same as anybody else reporting on the story.

The point of writing it was to attempt to provide a moment of clarity in what I felt was quickly becoming nothing more than a witch hunt, even though the reality of the situation was that there is still so much that we don’t actually know.

Anybody who has followed me for any amount of time knows that I don’t believe anybody 100% when it comes to athletics and drugs, and I’m a skeptic by nature, but as of this moment I can’t see any reason to go around destroying Braun and pretending the “I know he’s guilty!” version of the story is the absolute truth.

The actual fact of the matter is that we don’t know for sure what has transpired in the Braun saga, despite people acting like they do.

—–

With that established, isn’t it a bit soon for a bunch of people who were all wrong on a judgment about a suspension to regroup and instantly rush to judgment on the same individual yet again? I just found it … sad, really. It was as if nobody had learned the lesson that was just proven to them.

I know some apparently feel comfortable with ruining a guy’s reputation over information that still has questions about it, but I don’t.

The sad fact of the matter is that — while it would be wrong — what could provide clarity and closure to this debate is a leak of the ruling from Shyam Das. If that were to happen, then we wouldn’t have to speculate on what he did and did not know any longer.

At that point I think we could probably make an accurate judgment on exactly what transpired and why Das ruled the way he did. Until then though, everybody’s just guessing as far as I’m concerned.

Doing it over trade rumors and potential performance is one thing, but I’m not okay with dragging anybody’s life through the mud based on assumptions.

=====

Before I found the information I used in my previous post on Braun, I had actually intended to make a light post about the controversy, simply stating something I had observed on the day the suspension was overturned.

CBS Sports

Fox Sports

NBC Sports

Sports Illustrated

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

ESPN

I’m not accusing anybody of anything, perhaps ESPN just happened to be the outlet that acquired the Braun leak and also ran the only headline questioning Braun and also all their writers legitimately believe that Braun appears more guilty than innocent, but it just looked funny to see all the headlines from other outlets and then ESPN’s.

The contrast was amusing.

As you already know, Ryan Braun of the Milwaukee Brewers will not be suspended by Major League Baseball after his positive drug test was overturned by arbitrator Shyam Das.

As such, those who relentlessly moralized about Braun from the moment his positive test results were leaked surely took a step back and apologized for their hasty jump-to-conclusions approach, right?

Um … not quite.

They continue to do exactly the same thing even after the suspension was ruled null and void, primarily because every major media outlet reported that it was overturned due to a technicality and not science (1/2/3/4/5).

Almost immediately after the suspension was overturned, the stories started to pile in, sharply shifting in tone from being about Braun’s exoneration to Braun simply getting off on a stroke of luck. As such, the public continues to spew this rhetoric that Braun is definitely guilty of using drugs, it’s just that he wasn’t caught because of MLB’s incompetence.

The problem is that it’s not exactly true.

As many have already shown, the chain of custody is part of science, much like the process aspect of the scientific method is as important as the results, yet people don’t seem to care about that because … uh … science is hard and stuff (1/2/3/4/5).

Additionally, it actually is a matter of science for other reasons as well, as two relatively important findings have been omitted (willfully or not) from almost every news story and opinion piece on Braun. Will Carroll and Lester Munson both offer interesting findings on the decision via their own sources.

Sources have told Carroll that the defense showed that the circumstances which led to the positive drug test was able to be repeated using the errors of the handler, which he explained on WEEI.

In shorter bursts, he explained it on Twitter as well (1/2/3/4/5)

Quit calling Braun decision a technicality, media. It was decided on science.

Repeatable result showed exactly how Braun’s single test showed positive. Arbitrator agreed. Simple, isn’t it?

Know what makes a good soundbite? “44 hours” and “FedEx”. Know what doesn’t? Technical details about urine flora.

Joe Sheehan: So the delay in processing the urine was repeated, and shown to be the cause of the high levels of T?

Will Carroll: More or less. It deserves an answer longer than 140.

JGERRITWULTERKENS: confused; so the sheer act of leaving out a sample in the wrong environment by itself raises the testosterone ratio by >3x?

Will Carroll: To vastly oversimplify, yes.

JGERRITWULTERKENS: Fair enough except if that’s a widely known, medically accepted fact you’d think MLB/testers would have been cognizant, no?

Will Carroll: Tester made a mistake. Its not usually an issue.

Do yourself a favor and read the article that he posted up on Amazon. Not only is it great work, but it benefits The Jimmy Fund.

Carroll’s information is not only relevant, but it’s monumentally important to the argument people are having over whether Braun case was overturned because of the chain of custody or because of doubts involving the actual sample. Carroll’s sources explain quite explicitly that their failure to keep up with the chain of custody caused a failure in the integrity of the sample. Then, not only was the sample’s validity questionable, but they were able to replicate the results and show how it happened. Thus, not only was it a failure in the process, but in the results as well.

In essence, this would break the case of anybody left moralizing, which is a reason I find it curious that nobody wants to run it. For Carroll’s part, he says Fox Sports isn’t silencing him, he was just beaten to the punch, but I preferred his insight over the article by David Epstein and Joe Lemire that actually was run.

Why does nobody want to talk about this? It’s beyond me.

Furthermore, Munson reports that Braun offered his DNA to check whether the urine was actually his, but was refused, suggesting that there were further questions about the legitimacy of the sample.

A failure to follow the delivery procedure seems like a technicality. Does it mean that Braun was clean and had not used any prohibited substance?

The failure to follow the delivery procedure casts significant doubt on the integrity of the collection procedure. That alone might have been enough for Braun to prevail in the arbitration. But Braun’s side went one step further. He and his lawyers, sources say, offered a DNA sample that could have been compared to the urine sample to determine whether the urine came from Braun. It was a bold move by Braun attorneys David Cornwell and Christopher Lyons. But instead of agreeing to a DNA test that would have determined conclusively whether it was Braun’s urine that tested positive, MLB declined the offer. The refusal to agree to the DNA test likely pushed the arbitrator toward a ruling for Braun. It was also a major first step for Braun in the effort to clear his name. He and his attorneys can now argue that he was clean and that MLB deliberately denied him the opportunity to prove that scientifically.

Odd.

If we accept those two pieces of information as true (which I have no reason to doubt), it’s a bit of a no-brainer for the arbitrator, in my opinion. Not only could Braun have potentially won solely on the grounds that the entire methodology was compromised by the handler of the sample, but additionally, the test results were duplicated by the defense, giving ample reason to suspect that the positive test was useless. Adding the fact that the MLB didn’t allow Braun to prove his innocence by checking the DNA to confirm it was his urine, and everything Das decided becomes quite clear.

Even if you don’t fully believe Carroll or Munson, because for whatever reason you think you have sources that they don’t, it’s more than enough doubt for me to not write articles that basically say Braun’s definitely still guilty.

And no, I’m not talking about angry Twitter commenters or angry bloggers, but mainstream sportswriters (1/2/3/4/5).

Why? Who knows? Perhaps blindly believing Braun got off the hook on a technicality is more interesting than the details of how and why things actually happened.

Either way, it’s inexplicable to me that the process worked and Braun still ends up as the bad guy to 89% of the people out there (at least according to one poll). The public chooses to spew religiously charged hate, conspiracy theories, and goes around blindly calling him a liar when they don’t even bother to check out all the facts and what we actually know.

People know for sure that he used steroids, people know for sure that he got off on a technicality, and people know for sure that he lied to them at his press conference. Apparently just like they knew for sure he was going to be suspended for 50 games.

I guess it’s just frustrating to me to see the blatant denial of logic and reason that’s thrown right in their faces, all so that they can feel okay with the assumptions they ran with after the positive test results were announced. The fervent and insistent nature of it just shocks me.

Actually, I take that back. I guess it’s par for the course now.

While there’s nothing wrong with pipe dreams, and the speculation about the Los Angeles Dodgers and Prince Fielder was inevitable given the team’s needs and his need for a team, it was never all that realistic.

As such, Buster Olney‘s suggestion was understandable, but Bill Shaikin‘s rebuttal was reasonable, as Mike Petriello pointed out.

As you can imagine, I tend to agree with Shaikin on this. While Olney’s points are valid, we’ve been talking a lot this week about just how much money the Dodgers are expected to go for – by all indications, it’ll be record-shattering. I find it hard to believe that a franchise which might already come close to doubling the previous MLB sale record would get an even further boost by adding Fielder; as Shaikin suggests, it might actually lower the price. Besides, if you’re willing to toss more than a billion dollars into purchasing a baseball team, you almost by definition have a large ego. I’m thinking that a new owner would prefer to be the one seen as rescuing the team and bringing in big stars, not inheriting someone that McCourt brought in.

Earlier today, as if to drive a stake through the heart of a rumor on life support to begin with, essentially all scenarios involving Fielder landing in a Dodgers uniform were squashed out.

Dodgers taking a shot in the dark by discussing a contract with him at all? Nah.

The #Dodgers, at the moment, are not involved in the Prince Fielder sweepstakes, source says.

One year deal with the Milwaukee Brewers and then sign with the Dodgers next year? Nope.

I’m told #Brewers invited Fielder to return for 1 year so as to get mega-deal from new #Dodgers owner next winter. Boras showed no interest.

Frank McCourt rewarding Dodgers fans by signing him? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

McCourt laughs at question about #Dodgers interest in Prince Fielder. “We’re not going to talk about that,” he said.

While it’s depressing that the Dodgers won’t be able to fill a gigantic void with an MVP candidate, the probability of that happening was always slim-to-none, but at least we all got yet another peek at why McCourt is a gigantic worthless asshole.