Odds & Ends: Mets, McCourts, Cardinals

So Basically McCourt needs to sell the team.

What could we get in return for any of those three? I mean, with the uncertainty of the returns of Holliday, Derosa, and Piniero, we could potentially have some holes to fill. I am assuming if any trades are made, it will be for pitching, cause behind Waino and Carp, its doesn't look to good. But why trade say, Ludwick for a SP, which would then create another hole. I guess we could trade Ludwick, move Skip to RF, and hope that we resign Holliday. If we were to trade Ludwick and move Skip to RF, I don't really want Lugo playing 2B everyday. Ideally, we would then trade for either Kelly Johnson or Dan Uggla, preferably Uggla. What does everyone else think?

If McCourt sells the team, maybe the Wilpons will sell the Mets to buy their beloved Dodgers.

O'Malley was always profits first and baseball a close second. That's a discussion for another day, but he was a Brooklyn guy and moved the team cross country because the city wouldn't build him a new stadium. To be fair, he tried to say in NY, but it just wasn't meant to be I guess.

As for the McCourts, if it means "messing them up for next year" and selling to an owner with deeper pockets, as a Dodgers fan, I'm in.

What it certainly means is that barring a highly unlikely Manny opt-out, no John Lackey and probably not long-term deals for the likes of Kemp and Ethier.

The McCourts will have to sell the team.

Neither of them can buy out each other, or have the means to raise $250 million in short term loans. They still have much of the Dodger organization already up for collateral for the loans they used to buy the team..

A judge may divide up ownership of the team, but the banks and hedge funds will forced the sale of the team.

Too bad neither one can use the "Chewbacca Defnese"

It just doesn't make any sense. Why would a nine-foot tall Wookie want to live with a bunch of three-foot tall Ewoks? It just doesn't make any sense!

"We could sign Adrian Beltre and Placido Polanco. Beltre plays 3B, Polanco plays 2B, and Skip gets moved to the OF."

I actually like this idea some.

The Cardinals should probably be careful with Holliday, they need money to keep Pujols, Carpenter and Wainwright around, and they still need to sign another starter to replace Pineiro.

I would much prefer Beltre over DeRosa. DeRosa will walk more, but Beltre has superior power potential, and he's still an elite defender at third base.

With the emergence of Colby Rasmus, and the fact that their best position prospect, Daryl Jones, is an outfielder, the Cardinals should focus on shoring up the infield and pitching staff, with a Schumaker/Rasmus/Ludwick outfield in 2010.

Id like to address the more sensationalist writing I been seeing on this website. Declaring the dodgers instable...tell me this who is leaving the organization ??? everyone is locked up or not leaving so thanks for interjecting your copycat opinion. Also, the media is eating this up and making it sound worse than it is if thats possible. Stop adding to the hogwash. Lastly, Adrian Gonzalez is available and you better believe that situation has something to do with Kevin Towers being let go and his eventual comments. There was disagreements and that was his guy. He isnt Hoyer's guy and just because you wouldnt trade him doesnt make him unavailable. Thanks for less opinions from the writers in the future. I miss that.

I agree that, from what the FACTS are right now, the press is overblowing this. And the McCourts situation is in a completely different context that Moores' and the Padres.

First off, there's a possibility that Frank McCourt is legally the sole owner of the team. Frank says this was stipulated in the ownership agreement, and for all we know it might very well stand up in court.

Second, if there is a split ownership situation, who says the McCourts would need to buy each other out? They might very well sell it to a third party, which would remove any need for more debt. The Dodgers franchise is valued in 2009 (per Forbes) at $722M. With the sale, the McCourts could easily liquidate the outstanding $250M loan and walk away free and clear.

The math... The McCourts list assets of $1.1B. Sell the team for $722M and they still have $378M in assets, as well as $482M in cash, plus any cash they had going into this transaction. In other words, even if they were $482M cash NEGATIVE going into this divorce (which I believe would be practically impossible, but this is a worst case scenario) they would still break even. Or, if they were cash flow positive, and in selling the team they were forced to do so at 50% below current stated asset value, they would still break even. And these scenarios don't even get into the possibility that they may have other assets that they could sell if need be.

I think the Dodgers' outlook depends on whether or not Frank continues to own them. If he has to liquidate Jamie's portion of the loan, I don't think that Frank would be unable to scrape up $120M in financing... given the Dodgers' value of $722M, you could, at worst, find a partner to cough up the $120M in exchange for a 16% ownership interest. Sure, its not optimal to have some other person taking 16% of your profits, but then again, its probably preferable to the alternative situation in which he'd be giving a full 50% of the profits to his ex wife, so she can fly around the world and boink her driver...

Here is a little bit of what the McCourts are carrying in personal real estate...

http://realestalker.blogspot.com/2009/10/frank-and-jamie-mccourt-have-lot-of.html

Dodger Stadium and the stadium property is used for collateral for one McCourt's loans. There is a reason why parking went up. If you think that McCourt raise parking prices by 50% because he is greedy, it is more likely he just using the cash to pay off one of his loans.

I don't know what is going on with the Vero Beach Site, but the value may not that great, given no other MLB has shown interest in the site.

The Glendale AZ Spring Training site is jointly used by the White Sox and Dodgers, and I believe it was built by the City of Glendale..

The Dodgers aren't worth $800 million. They are worth how much the banks are willing to lend in the purchase of team.

Forbes's market value of the team has risen from $179 million in 2005 to $309 million in 2009. Even though revenue has stayed the same, and the team has a has a high debt value for a team not building or financing a stadium. I think Forbes's give a good guesstimate of team valuation, but I don't see market value grow $130 million in four to five years that is impervious to a major recession.

The McCourts bought the team with little money down. They financed financed running the team with more loans, their personal spending is profligate. They have income, but it is in $15-30 million a year after overhead, taxes etc

Baseball is kind of quirky business, there is money to be made, but huge overhead, and part of the business, like gate receipts is closed down for six months a year. Besides with Baseball Anti Trust extemption, it looks like MLB teams keep two set of books..