OT: World Series 2020 Champions - Los Angeles Dodgers

Submitted by WolverineinLA on October 28th, 2020 at 12:11 AM

Los Doyers are the 2020 World Series Champions!

No asterisk as they probably would have won with a full season anyways.

Sleepy

October 28th, 2020 at 12:38 AM ^

The Rays had baseball's third-lowest payroll this year.  And they were two wins away from winning it all.  And the Dodgers haven't won since 1988.  And the Yankees haven't even been to a World Series since 2009.  And of baseball's 16 highest payrolls this season...

1) NYY

2) LAD

3) BOS (didn't make 16-team postseason)

4) HOU (finished under .500)

5) PHI (didn't make 16-team postseason)

6) NYM (didn't make 16-team postseason)

7) CHC

8) SFG (didn't make 16-team postseason)

9) SD

10) STL

11) WAS (didn't make 16-team postseason)

12) LAA (didn't make 16-team postseason)

13) TEX (didn't make 16-team postseason)

14) ATL

15) COL (didn't make 16-team postseason)

16) ARI (didn't make 16-team postseason)

...less than half could even qualify for a completely bloated postseason field.

TL;DR - Your comment is dumb.

NYC Fan3

October 28th, 2020 at 12:44 AM ^

Dodgers had the 2nd highest payroll and they won the World Series, yet my comment is dumb.  
 

Dodgers have made the World Series 3 of the last 4 years.  Glad they were able to spend $61 million this year alone on Betts and Price, which is more than the entire Rays roster.

You probably thought all NBA teams had a shot at Anthony Davis too, right?

FrozeMangoes

October 28th, 2020 at 1:13 AM ^

Spending money doesn't guarantee success but it sure helps if you have someone who knows what to spend it on.  The most recent winners are all at the top of your list.  Drafting well is still the most important part of building a team.  But, small market teams can rarely afford to keep a star even when they draft well.  

Perkis-Size Me

October 28th, 2020 at 7:48 AM ^

Come on, man. I used to be in that camp too but analytics have seriously leveled the playing field. The Dodgers have one of the highest payrolls in baseball, and this is their first championship in over 30 years. The Yankees haven’t won a World Series, or even been to one, in over 10 years, and they can buy anyone they want. The Red Sox have one of the highest payrolls in baseballs as well and yes they did win one a few years ago but they’ve been pretty bad ever since. Having a crap ton of money at your disposal is in no way a guarantee of success. 

The Rays have one of the lowest payrolls in baseball, if not the lowest, and they were two wins away from winning at all. The Royals won a series a few years back with one of the lowest payrolls in baseball as well. If memory serves, they almost swept the Mets, who I’m sure have one of the higher payrolls in baseball as well.

This is not college football where it’s the same 3 to 4 teams playing for and winning it all every year. I won’t debate that having a big payroll helps your team, but I think what helps you even more is having a great front office that knows how to draft And knows how to properly develop Those players in a well-stocked farm system. That is what the Rays have and that is what allowed them to beat the Yankees, the Astros, and get them to this level. 

NYC Fan3

October 28th, 2020 at 8:51 AM ^

Last 5 World Series winners and their payroll rank at the beginning of that season.

’20 Dodgers, 2nd.

’19 Nationals, 3rd.

’18  Red Sox, 1st.

’17 Astros, 12th.

’16 Cubs, 4th.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.baseballamerica.com/stories/world-series-champion-opening-day-payroll-ranks-in-the-wild-card-era/%3famphtml

Out of the past 5 winners, 4 had payrolls in the top 4.  The one that didn’t acquired a 22 million a year player in Justin Verlander later that season.

Cali Wolverine

October 28th, 2020 at 11:03 AM ^

OK “NYC” fan...Yankees are the king of paying players and taking them from other teams.  Most of the talent on this Dodgers team is home grown talent that they drafted And developed.  Dodgers have failed to pay the giant contract under this management because they are bad deals.  But Mookie Betts is a special player that they recognized could elevate this team, which he did.  Plus we got him from the Red Sox not some small market team.  Red Sox were stupid to get rid of him. 

FoCoManiax

October 28th, 2020 at 10:23 AM ^

As a former baseball player and now a coach, that move infuriated me. The analytics play makes sense over the long haul, but if you are simply going to follow a spreadsheet and not rely on intuition, feel, etc., in the most important moment of the postseason, WTF is a manager being paid for?

If all one needs to do is follow some script on an iPad, my 12-year will manage the Rays for 1/10th of what Cashman is paid. Then perhaps the Rays could afford that additional bat they so desperately needed against LA.

nappa18

October 28th, 2020 at 1:09 PM ^

Back in the day, what Cash did was called “overmanaging.” Gene Mauch and Casey Stengel, if anybody here goes back that far (doubtful) were infamous for this before “analytics”. Relying so much on analytics all the time will inevitably come back to bite you in the ass. Got Cash last night. Didn’t Warren Buffet ? say if you think you re the smartest one in the room, you re in the wrong room.

rob f

October 28th, 2020 at 3:03 PM ^

I 'memba them.

And on the other side of the equation in baseball back then was a World Series winner many here are very familiar with, Mayo Smith.  Mayo, God love him, had a reputation as a "hands-off" manager, a reputation that has led some to under-appreciate and diminish his role as the Tigers skipper.  I obviously disagree. How many other managers back then would have made the bold and risky move to switch Mickey Stanley from CF to SS just 9 games before the end of the season, and then keep him there all World Series? 

FrozeMangoes

October 28th, 2020 at 3:31 PM ^

The Rays were able to make it that far with a small percentage of payroll, and a small percentage of offensive talent because they exploit teams who do things based on outdated expectations of roles on a roster. One of those is that a SP should rarely if ever see a lineup a 3rd time through.  How a pitcher has fared the first 2 times through a lineup has no impact on predicting how a pitcher will fare a third time through. 

Snell had a 1.45 ERA the first 2 times through in the postseason and a 12.00 the third time through.  And that is just a small sample size, but the numbers show this over and over. 

Citing the fact he was dealing as a reason to keep him in the game makes no sense.  He always deals the first 2 times through. This is one of the biggest logical fallacies in baseball.  

Pitchers get tired, stuff gets worse and hitters have seen that stuff more.  The advantage switches. 

Add on top of that the fact that Betts had the platoon advantage and it was the correct call. 

People who don't understand that don't understand what makes the Rays the Rays. 


The biggest problem was that Anderson said after the game he was fatigued but he never shared that with Cash.  If Cash had known that he probably goes to a different pitcher. 

It is like when Smoltz goes on and on about a grounder that gets through the shift that would have been fielded for 100 years but ignores 3 line drives into the shift that were base hits for 100 years.  

If you make the correct decision every time over the course of time the outcomes will be in your favor. 

Mike Damone

October 28th, 2020 at 1:11 AM ^

Sorry - But to hell w the Dodgers, Yankees and the rest of the big money MLB teams. With a payroll double the MLB average - easy to buy your way to a title.

I give more props to clubs like the Rays and A's, who have to make smart decisions w limited budgets, and develop good players into great teams.

I guess congrats are in order on more effective big $ spending of free agents than the Yankees.  Great job!

 

Rabbit21

October 28th, 2020 at 9:01 AM ^

I am willing to buy the argument that the Dodgers can afford to keep their drafted players who payoff and turn into something, I am not willing to buy the argument that all the Dodgers do is sign big free agents.  Full props to the Rays for figuring out a way to make it work, especially in a tough division, but this argument that the Dodgers don't have to be smart as well is complete bullshit and anyone who follows baseball should know better.  The Dodgers have won 10 of the last 13 NL West Division Titles, you don't do that without a sustainable system in place.  

Mookie Betts - Acquired by trade, available for just about any other team, only available because the Red Sox could not come to terms with him.  Arguably the only Dodgers mainstay who was acquired by trade where he was the centerpiece.  He is the first multi-year big money contract the Dodgers have given out, even Clayton Kershaw signed an extension for a limited number of years.

Clayton Kershaw - Dodgers Draftee

Walker Buehler - Dodgers Draftee

Corey Seager - Dodgers Draftee

Cody Bellinger - Dodgers Draftee

Joc Pederson - Dodgers Draftee

Will Smith - Dodgers Draftee

Julio Urias - International signing by the Dodgers

Justin Turner - Mets castoff who was given a chance to fix his swing

Chris Taylor - Mariners castoff the Dodgers developed

Max Muncy - A's castoff that the Dodgers developed

Various Role players  like Mat Beaty, Gavin Lux, Dustin May, Victor Gonzalez, Edwin Rios and Tony Gonsolin were Dodgers Draftees or international signees.

Bullpen arms like Pedro Baez and Kenley Jansen were international position player signees the Dodgers converted to the Pitching Staff

Other role players like Austin Barnes, Brusdar Graterol, Kike Hernandez, and Dylan Floro were acquired via trade and not as the centerpieces.

So for free agents, you are left with AJ Pollock(4 year deal, signed when the Dodgers decided to pass on the big free agent names in the class) Joe Kelly(3 year deal), Alex Wood(1 year deal) and Blake Treinen(1 year deal).  Like I said I will buy the argument that the Dodgers can afford to re-sign their own big name players.  But to say that they went out and bought themselves a championship is off the mark.  

GoBlueTal

October 28th, 2020 at 1:19 AM ^

Dodgers have been near the top of the payroll and it took them 32 years.  Tigers have been up there, and haven't won in 36 (and counting).  Yankees are perennial top salary and haven't won in more than a decade.

Big budget helps, but can't guarantee anything.  You have to have coaching, you have to have chemistry, you have to have luck, that's why sports is compelling.  

 

Cali Wolverine

October 28th, 2020 at 2:36 PM ^

Since 2000, the Lakers, Dodgers, Kings and Rams have played in 14 Championship Games/Series and won 9 Titles for the City*.  This is particularly impressive since the Lakers went through the inept Jim Buss era, the Dodgers went through the dark Frank McCourt era, and we have only had an NFL team for 5 seasons.  (As a Michigan fan, this has kept me somewhat sane, and given me faith that Michigan will get over the hump, eventually...at least in basketball ?). 

*Saint Louis Rams -‘00, Anaheim Angels ‘02, Anaheim Ducks ‘07 don’t count for LA, and the San Diego Chargers and San Diego Clippers are not supported by real LA fans, and will never win a Championship while in this City.