Baseball Musings
Baseball Musings
October 30, 2005
The DePodesta Aftermath

Steve Henson writes the news article for the LA Times. With all around him chaos, DePodesta manages a dignified quote on his way out the door:

DePodesta learned that he would be fired from a reporter Friday. McCourt did not speak to him until Saturday morning, but by the afternoon DePodesta seemed to have come to terms with losing his job. He has three years left on a five-year contract and will be paid about $2.2 million.

"I truly believe that this franchise is poised to begin the next great era of Dodger baseball," DePodesta said. "I have a tremendous amount of affection for the players, staff and front office and I wish everyone the best of luck. Most importantly, I want to thank the fans for their unparalleled support of the team."

We also find out that being a Dodger is very important:

Now Hershiser is considered a candidate for a front-office position as well as for manager. A source said Dodger special advisor Tom Lasorda twice met with Hershiser in Texas about a month ago.

"He obviously keenly understands what it means to be a Dodger," McCourt said. "We want to restore the glory and we want to achieve greatness. The Dodgers are a special franchise and we want Dodgers here."

Look for the team to have great pitching and an overrated first baseman in the future.

Bill Plaschke doesn't attempt to hide his glee at the computer geek getting fired:

Some will say this means the Dodgers are in chaos. I say this means they are finally seeking order.

Some will say DePodesta wasn't given a fair chance. I say he never should have been hired in the first place.

Some say this makes Dodger owner McCourt look like a man who has lost control. I say this is about him finally taking control, however clueless and callous he appears.

Some say, a hasty firing. I say, a smart trade.

DePodesta and his strange managerial candidate list have been dealt into our memories for Pat Gillick, Orel Hershiser and Bobby Valentine.

T.J. Simers goes to the source to see what Tommy Lasorda had to do with it:

A FEW months ago, Ken Rosenthal, a writer for the Sporting News who has since moved on to Foxsports.com, reported disharmony in the Land of the Clueless, suggesting Tom Lasorda was sticking a knife in DePodesta's back and badmouthing him to McCourt.

I don't know where these guys get that kind of stuff. Lasorda called it a "lie," but with DePodesta lying in pool of blood at McCourt's feet Saturday, I asked Lasorda again — you know, just to make sure — was there any truth to it?

"That is the biggest lie; in front of God, it's a stinking, no good lie," Lasorda shouted, and I noticed he shouted a little louder when he saw a TV camera rolling. "He has absolutely no proof of that. I never said anything bad about Paul DePodesta. I have never, ever said a bad word about Paul DePodesta to Frank."

Why not? I asked. Everybody else has been critical of the guy from Day 1, which makes you wonder why McCourt's top baseball advisor wasn't knocking the guy who was in over his head from the outset.

Maybe McCourt could just see it in Lasorda's eyes.

It also appears that Lasorda will be picking the new GM.

I (Simmers) don't know anyone who has been working harder than Lasorda, at times the only one in town praising two people who can't seem to do anything right.

"I might be a lot smarter than you guys," Lasorda said when asked to explain why he seems to be alone in his assessment.

I know he was the only one paid by McCourt standing in our group — and although he was quick to point out, "I didn't pick the last GM" — name me someone else in the Dodger organization you'd like to see pick the new GM.

"I've mentioned my selection to Frank, and you'll know as soon as we get a new GM if he was listening to me," Lasorda said with that smug smile he gives when he already knows the answer.

Lasorda's blog, however is quiet right now. Come on, Tommy, if you're going to blog, give us the inside scoop!



Posted by David Pinto at 08:27 AM | Management | TrackBack (0)
Comments

I've heard that there are stats that evaluate the psychol-
ogical makeup of a player. Are these used much?

Posted by: susan mullen at October 30, 2005 01:00 PM

All the same, I think I would be more confident in my assessment of DePodesta's abilities if he were given one more year at the job. But given the facts, it's hard not to conclude that he was a failure. Yes, they were decent last year but bad this year. Is that a wash? No. Last year was his first year, and the team didn't quite so nearly reflect his makeup as it did this year. Injuries or not, there's no way a Dodger team should have put up as crappy numbers as they did this year. I don't hold out any great hope for McCourt and Lasorda to come up with a winning strategy, but I'll be happy to deal with an unknown rather than the known disaster that DePodesta has been.

Posted by: Adam Villani at October 30, 2005 01:49 PM

One 71-win season does not a disaster make. Just wait for the years of mediocrity that Pat Gillick will send this team into.

Especially considering that 2006 is now a lost year, considering that we're getting into the off-season and there's no GM yet. DePodesta gave the 2005 season a kick in the pants with his trade for Milton Bradley and his late-season dealings. Will "Stand Pat" be able to pull off the same things?

Posted by: Jason at October 30, 2005 11:18 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?