Second, let me say that the Dodgers were terrible this year compared to their resources. This team stank. No excuse can make up for how awful the on-field performance was.

Third, bringing DePodesta in from outside and putting him on top of baseball's most insular organization was a disaster waiting to happen. There is no way that one man, no matter what position he occupies, can remake the Los Angeles Dodgers by himself. The organization runs too deep, it's far too traditionally minded to adapt quickly to such a sudden change of approach.

But fourth... what the heck are the Dodgers thinking? They are one year removed from a division title that was universally applauded. I agree that you can't just pretend 2005 didn't happen, but it's pure fantasy to ignore that this team has spent most of the last 25 years aggressively bouncing back and forth between being decent and being mediocre. Often I think that the Dodger organization still thinks of itself as the Dodgers of the 50s and 60s, but since the end of the 70s they've not been the consistently excellent team that they should be. The Dodgers have consistently dealt from strength and ended up on the losing end of the bargain.

Maybe this is an indication that that isn't going to be acceptable anymore. Maybe winning 90 one year and losing 90 the next, like the Dodgers did through the Lasords era, or winning 85 games a year like in the 90s, isn't going to cut it in the Frank McCourt era. But if that's the case, you'd be a lot better off not handing the reins back to the gang who made you into that organization in the first place.

I believe you might be referring to my comment that I posted here. I feel I should state that I know little of what McCleary's job entailed other than being the expert on the vagaries of baseball contracts and transactions. To tell you the truth, I have no idea who is in charge of negotiating contracts. Would the GM do this, or would a lower level employee handle the negotiations?

Well, I believe they lost something like 1400 man games to injury. Gagne was out, Bradley was out, Odalis Perez, Cesar Izturis, JD Drew (although thats probably Depodesta's fault for signing him.) Injuries happen, although with that much money they should have coped better.

Bottom line, DePosdesta getting fired at this juncture, with presumably better days ahead (especially given their farm system) is a pretty hasty decision

For anybody who didn't see this, it's a link to more speculation on the A.J. Burnett Sweepstakes.

Here's hoping.

Jose Lima wants his shutout back.

That's right! Thanks for reminding me. Still, the Dodgers were completely overmatched in that series and it took an amazing performance like that to chalk up just one win.

The Dodgers were 39-36 at the end of June and 54-33 after that. They weren't "cruising" early in the year in any way, shape or form.

I'll take issue with this, though. The certainly were cruising between the end of June and the trading deadline of 2004, going 25-7. After the trading deadline they went 29-26 the rest of the way.

I can't believe anyone would argue that DePod made out well in the 2004 trading deadline. IMO, that was one of the worst things I've ever seen a GM do. Sabermetrics have a role, but the mistake is when someone swallows that philosophy - or ANY philosophy - whole. You don't see JP doing this. He's always talking about "character guys" and players who "fit in". How could you possibly dismantle a team that has gone 25-7 in the previous 2 months? To prove a point?

DePod did himself in long before 2005. Why do we care that he got dismissed anyway? He's not going to starve to death. And if there is one less sabermetrically inclined GM in MLB does that not work to the advantage to the Blue Jays?

I raised an eyebrow at $65 MIL over 5 as well -- $13 MIL a year is a lot of money. I say we offer him no more than Roy in any individual year, and the rest would have to be made up with a signing bonus.

Nonetheless, I agree with the calls from VBF and Braby that what we need are more top-shelf kind of guys, rather than guys who are good, but not the superstar-type.

I don't like the proposed Burnett signing, period. The Blue Jays don't need a pitcher who will put up a 4+ ERA in the AL. They have plenty of those already.

Toronto needs someone who can slug more than .400. I'd take Halladay, Chacin, Bush, Towers, Lilly and a real bat over Halladay, Chacin, Burnett, Towers, Lilly and another .265/.335/.415 hitter.

Random fact: Dave Bush's career ERA+ is 111. Kevin Millwood's career ERA+ is 114. A.J. Burnett's is 110.

The number of years on a contract is more critical to me. Anyone the Jays sign this offseason is going to look like they're overpaid (but if most players look overpaid are they really overpaid?). But when you have the room to do it there's no reason to keep the money in your pocket just because it's a little more than think you should pay.

Take Giles for example. I'd sign him for 2 for $30 before I'd pay him 4 for $40.

I'm not too concerned about the Jays being willing to go the extra dollar as JP was willing to do this for the SS Loogy (although that's obviously on a smaller scale).