SOSG 42 MOVIE CONTEST - WINNER, WINNER CHICKEN DINNER

After going through hundreds of entries**, we have our winner for the first ever 42 Movie Contest. If they ever make the sequel (43? 42.2?), we're game for another contest. Thanks again to Regal Cinemas and the mysterious unnamed man I met in the darkened parking garage who brought us the groovy prize pack.

Honorable Mention goes to Tony, who turned in a late entry not for fortune or glory, but for the love of the game.

Third prize goes to Kemp Kershaw, featuring a post steroid Andruw Jones.

Second prize - and it was a close call - is Evan, who managed to make Jamie McCourt look like Rocky Dennis from Mask.

Our grand prize winner is TEAM KILLEEN. I'd write about this one, but I keep getting lost in Tommy's blue blue eyes.

To all four of you, thanks for the stellar posters and please send your mailing address to sosgdelinodeshields@gmail.com for your exceedingly valuable prizes. Yes, it's camp rules - everyone who enters gets a prize.

** By hundreds, I mean four people entered.

Missing You

One thing I never wrote about from my previous Blogger Night Postings, was a private conversation I had with Frank McCourt. ("McC" as he liked to be known by those closest with him). Away from the Homeboys, Stews and Tragic Illnesses in attendance, Franky M opened up about the stresses he faced and how being confused with the Angela's Ashes author couldn't even get him a decent seat at The Ivy.

(On Phone) Yes dear. Love you more. LOVE YOU MOST. Stay up for me, Jamie. Stay up for me. (Hangs up)

You married? It's the best thing in the world.

(Surveying the Blogger Family in attendance)

Why do they despise me? They eat my hot dogs, drink my Dr Peppers, and take my free second-tier bobbleheads, but all they do is treat me with ridicule and scorn.

Your site likes me, right?

ME: Of course. We defend you all the time. Especially Sax and Orel.

That's great. Just great. Which site are you again?

ME: (Pausing)

(Pausing)

(Sweating)

ME: CNN-SI.

Ah, great. I... these bloogers, They've cut me too deep. I could have changed things. EASILY. We get our beer for under a nickel a cup now. I could offer garlic fries at every hot dog stand. Heck, there's actually an underground tunnel already built which could make traffic disappear in minutes. Would only take an additional $80 per game to get it running. But the bluggles. Are vampires. All of them. ALL OF YOU.

ME: I only work in sales.

HOME? I. HAVE. NO. HOME. Hunted, despised. THE JUNGLE IS MY HOME. But I shall show the world that I can be its master!!! (phone rings)

Hi Jamie. No, I love YOU more. (Cries)

Maybe our problems with Frank McCourt were really just our problems with ourselves. And no amount of hundreds of millions will tame the beast of despair we created in him.

Vaya Con Dios.

Dear New Owners: Please...

1. Long-term Clayton Kershaw. Self-explanatory.

2. Figure out Andre Ethier. Can he remain healthy enough to bat next to Matt Kemp? Was that Gold Glove a true indicator of his defensive talent? Can his dickishness be overlooked? If yes to all three, lock him up.

3. Put Ned Colletti on notice. He may have been handcuffed lately, but that doesn't excuse poor signings like Jason Schmidt, Andruw Jones, Juan Pierre, Juan Uribe, etc. Logan White, Kim Ng and/or De Jon Watson are waiting in the wings.

4. Find us a catcher. It's arguable if Russell Martin is the one that got away, but it's less arguable that A.J. Ellis is the long-term solution. Ever since the Carlos Santana debacle (which was preceded by the Mike Piazza debacle), the backstop position has been a source of great inconsistency.

5. Sign some free agents. Cole Hamels and Matt Cain will be free agents after this season, and Joey Votto will be after 2013. Just some names to consider.

6. Beef up Dodger Stadium security, unobtrusively and consistently. When Frank McCourt did it, it seemed reactionary. When you do it, it'll seem responsible.

7. Restore international scouting and player development. The Dodgers were once forerunners in this field, and it's time for them to return there.

8. Make Magic the public face of the franchise. We love Magic, have you noticed?

9. Get players out in the community. To be fair, the Dodgers did a good job of this under the McCourt regime, but it's more important for guys like Kemp and Kershaw to show their faces around town than, say, forcing new signees to make donations to ThinkCure.

10. No nepotism, no Vladimir Shpunt, no "perquisites." Thank goodness you dudes are already loaded, because the McCourts' nouveau riche act wore thin really fast.

11. Lower beer and parking prices. Show Arte Moreno who owns L.A.!

Frank McCourt Will Be a Billionaire, Albeit Briefly

"My preciousssss."

From "Economists: $1B for Dodgers is realistic" by Arash Markazi at ESPNLA.com:

A record price tag of $1 billion can be expected for the Los Angeles Dodgers, Dodger Stadium and the surrounding real estate, according to several sports economists following the team's upcoming sale.

"If you're talking about the asset value of the Dodgers franchise, the stadium, the parking lots and the surrounding acreage, I think a number in neighborhood of $1 billion is reasonable," Andrew Zimbalist, a professor of economics at Smith College, said last week. "I believe the reasonable or final offer will be $900 million to $1 billion."

One of the biggest reasons for the Dodgers' value is all the undeveloped real estate surrounding Dodger Stadium, which sits on 275 acres of land that is largely used for parking.

Three years ago, Dodgers owner Frank McCourt outlined a $500 million project around the stadium that would include parking structures, a Dodgers museum and a plaza behind center field with year-round shops and restaurants. Such a sweeping project could add more revenue streams for the future owners and potentially raise the price of the team.

"As a comparison, the Chicago Cubs went for $845 million two years ago, and I think most people looking at the revenue streams between the Dodgers and Cubs would have them being pretty comparable," said Victor Matheson, a sports economist and an associate professor of economics at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass.

"It's probably more in favor of the Dodgers because they have such a huge area that could also be redeveloped. The Cubs' deal includes Wrigley Field, but that's tied into the city grid there so there's only so much you can do. The Dodgers really do have space there for other projects."

Think Jamie regrets settling for a measly $131 million?

photo by Brian Vander Brug/LA Times

No Worries, We Didn't Need That $21M Last Year Anyway

Frank and Jamie McCourt have apparently decided to cap their legal squabbling at the low low price of $20.6M in cumulative legal fees regarding their divorce. And that's just since July!

Frank and Jamie McCourt have reached a divorce settlement under which she would get about $130 million and relinquish any claim to a share of the Dodgers, multiple people familiar with the agreement told The Times.

The settlement would remove Jamie McCourt as an obstacle to Frank McCourt's plan to retain ownership of the team by selling the Dodgers' television rights in U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The agreement also would appear to set up a winner-take-all court showdown for the Dodgers between Frank McCourt and Commissioner Bud Selig.

The people familiar with the agreement spoke on condition of anonymity because the settlement has not been finalized. However, such a settlement would conclude what is believed to be the costliest divorce in California history.

The McCourts incurred $20.6 million in legal bills related to the divorce through July, according to Los Angeles Superior Court filings by each of the parties. To settle the outstanding dispute over whether the Dodgers were the sole property of Frank McCourt or community property could have added at least $14 million to those bills, based on estimates in a filing on behalf of Jamie McCourt.

Let's assume that half of that $20.6M is Frank's, right? So for just over $10M, he earned the right to pay his ex-wife $130M to get her out of the Dodgers. Sounds like a bargain! And this way, Frank can forge ahead and lose the Dodgers himself:

For two people presumably so good at business -- say what you will about how the McCourts managed the Dodgers, but they made enough money to put themselves in position to buy a Major League Baseball team and mansions all over the country -- it is amazing they each let pride and emotion cloud their judgment so badly.

There is no way this should have gotten to this place, no reason all the gory details of their opulent lives needed to be spilled in court filings for all the world to see and gag over.

Those details are why this has become more than a divorce case. They damaged the McCourts' businesses and brand, then exposed both of them to future risk -- Selig's intervention and public scrutiny of their finances.

This settlement should have been reached quietly years ago in a law office off Wilshire Boulevard, not in court rooms across America. It would have been the right thing to do for the Dodgers and the right thing to do for the McCourts. But more importantly, it would have been a good business decision.

There are sunk costs for both sides in every divorce, money and wealth earned that goes away in the process of dividing assets and can never be recovered. A smart businessman assumes the loss and moves on without making it worse.

But this was never about business. It was, in fact and metaphor, a modern day bonfire of the vanities. And now, perhaps fittingly, all that selfish pride and ego stand to cost each of them dearly. The details of the McCourts' extravagant lifestyle that should never have seen the light of day, let alone been read aloud in a public courtroom, will likely sink both of them.

Without their fight in divorce court, Bud Selig never would have received the ammunition to act in the best interests of baseball. Los Angeles never would have known the depths of the McCourts' financial depravity. The Dodgers never would have been cast into purgatory.

At the end of this month, a Delaware bankruptcy court will hear arguments and then render a final judgment on this sorry matter. The team will either be sold and a city will move on with a clean break, or Frank McCourt will come out the other side, his credibility battered and bruised. Neither option is palatable. Both of them were avoidable two years ago.

Prince Fielder earned $15.5M last year. Albert Pujols was at $14.5M. Both figures are less than $20.6M.

Jamie's Investor Circle Might Include Burkle?

"Everything that has transpired has done so according to my design. It was I who allowed the Alliance to know the location of the shield generator. It is quite safe from your pitiful little band. An entire legion of my best troops awaits them. Oh, I'm afraid the deflector shield will be quite operational when your friends arrive."

Frank McCourt is digging around to find out who ex-wife Jamie McCourt is wooing to back a bid to buy the Dodgers. But according to Bill Shaikin in today's LAT, Jamie says it isn't Ron Burkle:

Did Jamie McCourt enlist billionaire Ron Burkle in her efforts to buy out her ex-husband Frank McCourt as owner of the Dodgers?

As Frank McCourt launched an unusually personal attack on Commissioner Bud Selig, and as Jamie McCourt charged her ex-husband with waging "jihad" against Major League Baseball at her expense, the newest development in the Dodgers' long-running ownership saga revolved around the potential involvement of Burkle.

Jamie McCourt has said for more than a year that she would line up investors in a bid for the Dodgers, but she never identified any potential partners. In an email dated May 31 and included in a Los Angeles Superior Court filing, an attorney for Frank McCourt asked for documents related to "the proposed deal with Mr. Burkle."

Dennis Wasser, an attorney for Jamie McCourt, would not say whether his client had spoken with Burkle but said she had not reached a pact with him or anyone else.

"There is no deal," Wasser said. "There is no draft of a deal. There are several qualified prospective buyers with a very keen interest who have called and inquired about the availability of the team."

Burkle, who owns a home in Beverly Hills and whose net worth is estimated at $3.2 billion by Forbes, is believed to be interested in buying the Dodgers. Steve Garvey said in April that he had partnered with Burkle, then conceded last month that the two men had no formal agreement. Burkle's spokesman declined to comment Thursday.

Jamie and Steve Garvey, both bringing up Burkle? Where there's smoke, is there fire?

photo: Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times (June 17, 2011). By the way, I couldn't think of any other words that rhyme with "Burkle", so I'll take suggestions.

Latest McCourt Settlement Continues Greedy Record

Reading all the articles about the latest McCourt settlement is not the way one would want to start his or her Saturday morning. The only thing that isn't confusing or up for question is how the McCourts have "settled" to take care of their extensive needs first and foremost.

First I read Bill Shaikin's piece, "Divorce settlement heightens prospect of a Frank McCourt-Bud Selig showdown over Dodgers", which recaps the divorce settlement news:

Frank and Jamie McCourt have reached a settlement that does not settle the question that has troubled Dodgers fans during a divorce battle that has lasted nearly two years: Who owns the team?

The agreement reached Friday requires Frank McCourt to clear two significant hurdles in order to maintain ownership of Los Angeles' cherished ballclub. The commissioner of baseball has to approve a long-term television contract between the Dodgers and Fox, and a judge has to rule that the team is the sole property of McCourt.

The settlement becomes "null and void" if Commissioner Bud Selig vetoes the television contract — and he is likely to do so, according to two people familiar with the matter but not authorized to discuss it.

Dennis Wasser, the attorney for Jamie McCourt, said he believed Selig would decide promptly whether to approve the Fox deal.

"It is either yes or no," Wasser said. "We should know by Monday or Tuesday."

With a yes, the McCourts would proceed to a one-day trial on Aug. 4, to determine whether the team belongs solely to Frank McCourt.

If the judge instead rules the Dodgers are community property, the settlement says the team "shall be sold." The sale would include the team, the stadium and the surrounding parking lots, with an estimated value of close to $1 billion, and the McCourts would split the proceeds 50-50.

If Frank McCourt is declared sole owner, Jamie McCourt would receive $100 million, the couple's seven luxury homes and indemnity from any tax liability.

So it continues to all hinge upon the Fox lifeline, which is now forced inot the hand of Bud Selig. It is the only way out for Frank McCourt, so he's basically arranged a contingency deal with ex-wife Jamie that allows an outcome no matter how the judge rules on the ownership issue.

But what really got me was the detail on how the two McCourts have agreed to split the $385M cash infusion from Fox, should the judge rule that the Dodgers are community property in this one-day bake-off. As ESPN reported:

Terms of the settlement spell out how the $385 million from Fox would be spent. Each party would receive $5 million for lawyers' fees. Each party would receive $5 million to use as they see fit. Approximately $235 million would be used for the Dodgers (including repayment to Frank McCourt money that was advanced to the team in 2011 but not exceeding $23.5 million). Another $80 million would be used to pay off indebtedness. And the remaining $50 million would be put in an account subject to the court's orders.

So right off the top, $10M that should have gone to the Dodgers will go to pay for the lawyers in the McCourts' spat. And another $10M goes to the owners to do whatever they hell they want to do. And $80M goes to other debts, and $50M goes to a slush fund.

Which leaves only $235M of the $385M--just over 61% of the total payment--to go toward the team. Almost 40% goes to management, including a portion which is just at their whims. And this only comes because the Dodgers are ceding television rights for the future, rights which extend so far out we have no way of knowing whether this was a good deal for the team.

If MLB was actually bothered by the McCourts' avarice--most notably mentioning the ~$100M that the couple had siphoned from the team to pay for their extravagant lifestyle--then Selig needs to consider the merits of this additional siphoning on those grounds as well.

The LA Times' Shaikin posted a companion piece later on in the day yesterday which made this very point, going on to say that it was highly unlikely Selig would approve the Fox deal on these grounds. Steve Dilbeck reached the same conclusion, contrasting McCourt's flag-waving statements of virtue against his duplicitous actions.

I understand McCourt's strategy to try and force Selig's hand. I'm surprised that he isn't bringing his best cards to the table, as well.

Winner Takes it All

From ESPN: "McCourts reach divorce settlement"

LOS ANGELES -- Jamie and Frank McCourt agreed Friday to have a one-day trial to determine if title to the Los Angeles Dodgers is in Frank McCourt's name or if the team should be considered community property in their divorce, the former couple and their attorneys announced.

The agreement anticipates Major League Baseball's approval of a lengthy TV contract between the Dodgers and Fox, Frank McCourt said outside court. That deal has been reported to be worth $3 billion and Frank McCourt would receive $385 million upfront.

"Nothing exists if not for the Fox deal," a source close to the negotiations told ESPN The Magazine's Molly Knight. Frank McCourt expressed extreme confidence in the outcome of the trial set for Aug. 4 and he said that he and his former wife had already agreed on what would happen in either outcome. The source also said that if Superior Court Judge Scott Gordon rules the Dodgers are community property, the team will almost certainly have to be sold to split the couple's assets. If Frank McCourt is awarded ownership, Jamie McCourt would receive $100 million, the couple's homes and would receive indemnity from tax liability.

But it's highly unlikely MLB would approve the TV deal, a source told Knight, in part because Gordon could force a sale of the team and saddle a new owner with what could be a below market television contract in the future. Frank McCourt said all other issues in the divorce were settled. The McCourts' lawyers had spent several sessions in front of Gordon to reach an agreement. In December, Gordon deemed invalid a postnuptial marital agreement which gave Frank McCourt sole ownership of the Dodgers. That cleared the way for Jamie McCourt to seek half the team under California's community property law.

Jamie McCourt had asked Gordon to order the sale of the team. In April, Major League Baseball took the extraordinary step of assuming control of the troubled franchise. Former Texas Rangers President Tom Schieffer was appointed to monitor the team on behalf of baseball Commissioner Bud Selig. Selig said he took the action because he was concerned about the team's finances and how the Dodgers are being run.

The former couple's lavish lifestyle was exposed in court documents where it was revealed that they took out more than $100 million in loans from Dodgers-related businesses. Their spending habits were likened to using the money from the team as though it was their personal ATM or credit card. Another judge in November declared an impasse after the McCourts and their attorneys could not reach an agreement.

Neither of the McCourts has acknowledged one another throughout the divorce proceedings. At one point on Thursday, the former couple sat a few feet away from each other, without their attorneys, in Gordon's courtroom. Jamie McCourt busied herself on a tablet, while her ex-husband sat quietly.

I like the sound of a one-day WINNER TAKE IT ALL Battle Royale.

McCourts Rank 30th of 30 MLB Owners

Jim Caple of ESPN.com ranked the 30 MLB owners, and guess where the Dodgers' first couple ended up? Dead last:

30. Frank and Jamie McCourt, Dodgers: The team has performed fairly well (two NLCS series), but then again, a lot of real estate portfolios performed well for a while, too. The McCourts paid an astrologer six figures to be a team consultant ("I sense big things for Juan Pierre in Dodger Stadium"). They're so over-leveraged they might not meet payroll, and even attendance is plummeting. It's so bad that Walter O'Malley would have a higher approval rating in Brooklyn now than the McCourts have in Los Angeles.

Hat tip to Jason for finding this yesterday. May 31 is only five days away.

Jamie's Got A Gun

And that gun happens to be attorney Dennis Wasser, who yesterday helped Ms. McCourt argue to the judge that husband Frank should be ordered to sell the team:

LOS ANGELES -- Ex-Los Angeles Dodgers CEO Jamie McCourt on Thursday asked a judge to order the sale of the team, saying her ex-husband has badly mismanaged the franchise since he fired her nearly two years ago and brought one of baseball's most storied franchises to the "brink of financial ruin." [...]

Outside of court, Jamie McCourt's attorneys said their client could no longer wait to see what may occur with the Dodgers.

"As I've said all along, my goal is to resolve this situation for my family in a way that also advances the best interests of the Dodgers fans, players and franchise," she said in a statement. "This motion will hopefully provide some momentum in the right direction."

Strangely, I continue to be amazed at how both sides continue to scorch the earth with unabated flamethrowers. There's some full-on napalm bombing going on. In fact, John Yzurdiaga of Los Angeles had it right when he wrote this letter to the LA Times (published May 6 2011):

The audacity of the McCourts and their nasty divorce litigation has compelled me to pass on an old saying and an anecdote. Before embarking on their vicious divorce war, the McCourts would have done well to heed the old lawyer's admonition: "Enter the courtroom a hog and exit a sausage."

I was also reminded of the occasion when I was a young public defender in the courtroom of the Honorable Kenneth Gale, a fair, great and no-nonsense judge. Judge Gale was handling a divorce trial when he was moved to tell the lawyers on each side:

"Your clients remind me of when I was a young boy at the Hermosa Beach Pier with a friend of mine. There was a snow cone stand there, and we both wanted a snow cone, but couldn't afford one. They were 10 cents. We each had five cents, so we pooled our money to buy a snow cone to share. The fellow made the snow cone and handed it to my friend, who immediately spit in it, so I couldn't have it. Then I spit in it. So then, neither of us could have it."

So go the Dodgers.

But let's get back to this one. Watch Wasser's careful wordplay as he casts aspersions while at the same time admonishing those who cast aspersions:

The former couple's lavish lifestyle was exposed in court documents where it was revealed that they took out more than $100 million in loans from Dodgers-related businesses. Their spending habits were likened to using the money from the team as if it was their personal ATM or credit card.

When pressed about his client's contribution to the Dodgers' financial woes, Wasser sidestepped the question and said the focus should be restoring the Dodgers name.

"What I think you have to do is not cast aspersions on anybody," Wasser said. "You have to deal with the situation we have now, and the situation we have now is a situation and a need for action. We've put a very short fuse on it to get it resolved."

Okay, so let's not cast aspersions. I'm putting away my rod and reel. But then Wasser also said this:

"Over the past year-and-a-half, Frank has mismanaged the Dodger assets, and in the last few months, his management of the assets has become so unprofessional and commercially unreasonable that it is threatening the very ownership and value of these assets as part of the community estate," attorney Dennis Wasser wrote.

Nope. No casting asperions here. Move along, nothing to see.

Everybody Hates Frank

"You hate me! You really hate me!"

• Jamie wants to wet her beak a little. Jamie McCourt is expected to ask judge to order sale of the Dodgers (Bill Shaikin, LA Times)
• Remember how Giants fans pooled their money to fly those stupid banners over Dodger Stadium? Michael C. wants Dodger fans to pool their money to buy an anti-McCourt billboard. Sell the Dodgers
• We mentioned this before: The beautiful dream of public ownership is still alive. Own the Dodgers
• This one needs no explanation. Mark Cuban Save the Dodgers

photo by Jon SooHoo/Dodgers

There Must Be Someone Left In This Town Not Related To Any McCourt Litigation

But apparently, finding individuals who have not been swept up in the McCourt maelstrom may be a challenge. Case in point, a newly-appointed assistant to Tom Schieffer had to be quickly rescinded:

During a Monday morning radio appearance in New York, Commissioner Bud Selig announced that he had appointed former San Diego Padres President Dick Freeman as an assistant to Dodgers trustee Tom Schieffer. Within hours, Major League Baseball had rescinded the appointment, citing only a "potential conflict."

The conflict: Freeman advised Jamie McCourt last year, during her divorce proceedings against Dodgers owner Frank McCourt, according to a letter sent Tuesday from Robert Sacks, an attorney for Frank McCourt, to Brad Ruskin, an attorney representing MLB.

"Unfortunately, this latest episode reinforces the concern that Mr. McCourt is being subjected to discriminatory and unfair treatment," Sacks wrote, "through a process designed to reach a predetermined outcome, without appropriate diligence, independence or care." [...]

"Once the potential conflict was brought to our attention by Mr. Freeman, we immediately determined not to proceed with his appointment," MLB Executive Vice President Rob Manfred said in a statement.

Whoops. Well, I'm sure there's someone out there free from McCourt tentacles.

Dodgers Return Fire Against Bud Selig

The fun continues. From ESPN:

New Los Angeles Dodgers executive Steve Soboroff came to the defense of embattled owner Frank McCourt on Thursday, blasting commissioner Bud Selig's decision to have Major League Baseball assume control of the team. Soboroff, the Los Angeles civic leader and former mayoral candidate whom the Dodgers hired Tuesday as vice chairman, said Thursday the Dodgers are in good shape financially and Selig's move was "irresponsible" and came as "a shock."

Soboroff cited the Dodgers' potential 20 year, $3 billion television deal with Fox as evidence McCourt has sufficient funds to operate the team.

"All this momentum is building and then all of sudden this letter comes in and says, 'You don't have any money. You don't have this or that.' I think it was irresponsible," Soboroff said.

He added: "That letter was not expected. [It] was a shock. ... Let us show the exciting things that we can do, that Los Angeles can do for Major League Baseball." The television deal, which McCourt reportedly presented to MLB representatives on April 5 as a long-term solution to the team's financial problems, has yet to be approved by Selig.

"Frank has money in the bank," Soboroff said. "He has a $3 billion deal with Fox. Not on [the credit card]. He's got it on [the ATM card]. The only thing [preventing] him from sticking [the ATM card] in the machine, is this letter. "Can't we talk to the commissioner? Can't we talk to the people that are going to vote on this?" Soboroff said he was unsure of McCourt's plans to challenge Selig's decision. Soboroff spoke with the owner Wednesday after the letter had been delivered and said McCourt had a "mature" response.

Any thoughts on what a "mature response" would entail? Is "nanny nanny boo boo" still considered mature?

Soboroff added: "How do you single him out when you don't single the Mets out? Come on."

The Mets have reportedly borrowed $25 million from MLB to keep baseball operations afloat as the Wilpon family looks for someone to buy a share of the team. Ownership needs to raise funds as it battles a lawsuit by the Bernard Madoff trustee that could potentially cost the team $1 billion.

Selig bristled Thursday when asked if he sees any similarities between the Dodgers and the Mets.

"The only thing I'm going to say is that there are a lot of differences," Selig said, according to multiple media outlets. "The situations are clearly not similar, and that's in a myriad of ways. ... So if you ask me is the analogy is a proper one, I say no. "Anyone who portrays that as the case ... is incorrect. Very incorrect. That's based on the facts, as I know them."

Saying we're not the Mets is like when the owner of my son's (former) daycare defended her treatment of staff by saying "I'M NOT HITLER". (100% true story)

And I thought the only link between the Mets and the Dodgers was me, SoSG Delino DeSheilds. Apparently financial incompetence and general schmuckness is also in that ven diagram. (Not unlike me too).

PS - I'm gonna just keep posting my concept art for the War of the Roses reboot until it goes viral!!!

McCourtia

• Frank McCourt has made a statement. And what do you know, Jamie McCourt has made a statement too:

  As the 50% owner of the Dodgers, I welcome and support the commissioner's actions."

• Frank is robbing Bingham to pay Fox. From the above article, by Bill Shaikin at the LA Times:

  McCourt needed a $30-million loan from Fox in order to meet payroll last week, secured with funds he does not have and might never have.

  In the event McCourt cannot repay Fox, he has promised the company $30 million from any settlement with or judgment against Bingham McCutchen, the law firm that drafted the since-invalidated agreement that McCourt had relied upon to establish his ownership of the Dodgers.

• Tim Brown dismantles Frank. Nice work, Mr. Brown. Will McCourt surrender the Dodgers quietly? (Yahoo! Sports)

Where's the Ref?

Yes, I posted these WWF pics last year re: the Jim Joyce non-perfect game botched call. But after today's announcement that the MLB will be playing the role of the Arbiter from Chess: The Musical...

...suddenly, the Earl / Dave Hebner evil twin ref plotline feels much more applicable to the current state of the Dodgers.

Thursday Linkfest

• Our fave McCourt divorce writer Molly Knight updates us on the kids' latest shenanigans. Jamie McCourt wants more information (ESPN The Magazine)
• It'll never happen, but the thought is nice. Enjoy sports -- life -- go offline (Steve Rushin, SI.com)
• Who knew Mike Scioscia was such a cheeky (rally) monkey? Angels’ Scioscia is a purposeful prankster (Steve Henson, Yahoo! Sports)
• "Promising young players simply turn baseball people gooey." Sound familiar? Frenchy And Hope (Joe Posnanski, Joe Blogs)

Wilpon Lawsuit Could Make McCourt Divorce Seem Like Cakewalk

The New York Mets have long benefited from the Dodgers' idiocy, from landing Mike Piazza and Pedro Martinez to former Dodger Paul "F*** the Dodgers" Lo Duca being hand-fed both Jeff Kent and J.D. Drew at home plate during the 2006 NLDS.

But since that ill-fated double dip, the Metropolitans' fortunes have taken a decided turn. They've returned the favor to Dodger fans, with bloated payrolls and poor contract decisions (Oliver Perez? Jason Bay?) helping take the sting off our own shortcomings.

And like a hemophiliac blood donor, the Mets aren't done giving. The more I read about this bombshell lawsuit filed against against Fred Wilpon and Saul Katz by Madoff trustee Irving Picard, the more it smacks of phrases Dodger fans have become used to.

"Could drag on for years." "Might have to sell the team." "Fans have reason to worry." Somewhere, Padres fans are sipping their post-divorce cocktails and looking forward to rebuilding their team. Dodger fans are in limbo, and Mets fans are just entering lawsuit hell. Enjoy!

More scandalous Mets reading:

• The Know-Nothing Mets? There’s a Pattern Here (George Vecsey, New York Times — includes dirt on recent Mets embarrassments, including Steve Phillips, Charlie Samuels and Tony Bernazard. 3:15 a.m. firing of Willie Randolph not mentioned)
• Wilpon’s Ownership of Mets Is Threatened (New York Times)
• Wilpons are in trouble, no matter what (Ian O'Connor, ESPNNewYork.com)

Your Sly Understatement Amuses Us Not, Jon Heyman

From Jon Heyman at SI.com:

The support among other owners for Dodgers co-owner Frank McCourt is at an alltime low, and ultimately his ownership could be doomed, though there's a major question as to whether Jamie would have MLB's support, either. Neither McCourt is believed to have enough money to own the team by themselves, so either is thought to ultimately need to take on a partner and Jamie McCourt is said by sources to have richer friends who could prop her up. THIS SOAP OPERA CARRIES THE POTENTIAL TO DRAG ON A LITTLE WHILE.

(Italics mine.) (Bolding mine.) (All-capsing mine.) Gee, you think? Dodger fans have been living with this divorce nightmare since October of 2009. It's just another daily kick in the 'nads for us. There isn't much exciting about the 2011 Dodgers, yet at least watching this team will take our minds off this ridiculous ownership situation. So thanks for telling us what we already know, Heyman.

Which McCourt Picture Is More Frightening?

Perusing Big League Stew, I couldn't help but jump back from my monitor when I came across this photo:

I can't tell which one is more unflattering. I'm actually kind of scared by both sides. (Not as scared as this guy, of course, but still pretty scared.)

Wednesday Notes, 'Already Looking Forward to 2012' Edition

Awwwwwwwwww.

• Congratulations to Clayton Kershaw on getting hitched. How can you not love this guy? A (Dodgers) Wedding Album: Clayton & Ellen (VSIMH)
• Congratulations to Jay Jaffe for being voted into the BBWAA. Be expecting a call from Steve Garvey. The Call-Up (Futility Infielder)
• JoePo breaks down the magical 7-year/$126 million contract. Texpensives (Joe Posnanski, SI.com)
• The Dodgers were Joe Torre's last (managerial) stop. Torre mulling over broadcasting, club roles (Ken Gurnick, Dodgers.com)
• Tom Verducci clears the air. Setting the record straight on Hall of Fame vote for Miller (SI.com)
• And here's a bevy of legal links:
  • Dodgers ownership in limbo after judge throws out McCourt property agreement (Bill Shaikin & Carla Hall, LA Times)
  • Jamie McCourt wins court ruling (Molly Knight, ESPNLosAngeles.com)
  • Dodger Divorce
  • Settle in for a long winter, Dodgers fans (Ramona Shelburne, ESPNLosAngeles.com)
  • It may take awhile to round the bases, but Dodgers fans can start their home run trot (Bill Plaschke, LA Times)