From: C Robert Claydon <cclaydon@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re:  How to get rid of Strawberry
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 05:47:38 GMT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]


stown@pyramid.COM (Scott Townsend) writes:

>Well, the Dodgers very, forgettable year is almost over. Only 4 more weeks of
>misery for the team and their fans. Looking to next year, there are many
>questions to be answered for the Dodgers. One of the more interesting ones
>involves the Straw. I am sure there are many opinoins of what the team should
>do about him. Let me here your opinoin! Below is mine.

Well, OK, I'll take you up on the offer... :-)

>I think that the Dodgers need to get rid of Strawberry for the following 
>reasons

>1. He is injured and has refused to have surgery. He has a chronic
>back problem that can only be fixed by surgery. The surgery is
>not guaranteed and is risky business. He has known this for several
> months, and still thinks he will get better with physical
>therapy.

Only fixable by surgery by whose expert opinion?  IF the surgery is so risky, 
why is it so much better of an option?  You might say if he goes through with 
the surgery he has a 30% chance of returning to top form, 40% chance of being a
lesser player and 25% of being a cripple.  If the PT gives odds of 10%/90%/0% 
I'd take that, just because a marginal Straw is more worthwhile having around 
than paying for someone who's done with their career... (sure he wouldln't be a
superstar, but could contribute, whereas if the surgery ruins his back, he's 
done and your stuck with the contract).
Besides, who ever said that this back problem couldn't be solved with PT and 
required surgery?  If Darryl has thought things through and sees as a better 
option (remember he will get paid on his next contract based upon his ability 
to come back and put up numbers the next few years) who's to say that it might 
not be solvable by PT???

>2. The Dodgers will be building a young team. The youth movement has
> begun. Straw is not the right role model to have around for all
>of these younger players.

Hmmm, I was under the impression he had a pretty good attitude since he moved 
to Los Angeles--between being happier being in LA, enjoying playing for Lasorda
and becoming a Christian.  Sure, he got into a fight with Kal Daniels over 
Kal's work ethic, but he wouldn't be the first to either criticize Kal or get 
in a fight with him (most opinions I've heard in baseball put Kal as a first 
rate talent with no disire to work with it, and a first rate a** hole and the 
mouth to go with it).

>3.  Perhaps some other team will take a risk on this ex-superstar,
>and give the Dodgers something worthwhile in return.

I would say yes, especially a team that's power desperate and a contender (just
off the top of my head, the Padres, Cubs (especially if they loose Dawson--I'd 
rather take a chance on Straw than Dawson, myself) and Brewers could use a 
run-producing outfielder in a bad way).  So why all the sillyness below???  #1 
and #3 mean giving up a proven commodity for 0 return, a good way to become the
new Cleveland Indians.  #2 is a good way to at least get a few prospects in 
return, but the salary _is_ a big issue, especially with the TV contract 
running out.  But this often becomes overlooked in a pennant race... if LA is 
out of it next May or June and the Cubs, Padres or Brewers (or whomever) are in
it and want a bat, see if they won't trade for Darryl.

But I really don't think dumping Darryl would be the smartest thing for the 
Dodgers to do.  I think he's got a better chance of putting another good season
together than Eric Davis, and a much better attitude, too.  Plus, he isn't 
_that_ old (what, 30? 31?)-the Dodgers could put another contender together in 
2-4 years, and Darryl could very conceivably be around to be a power cog/leader
for it, and still be near if not in his power hitter's prime. (Power hitters 
tend to peak between 27&32, no?).  Besides, if you're playing for 2-4 years 
from now anyway, why not let Darryl try the PT, and if by next June it looks 
like it won't work, tell him to have the surgery then and work to get back into
shape for the '94 season...?


>How to get rid of Strawberry??
------------------------------
>1. Don't protect him in the expansion draft. More than likely
>either Miami or Denver would take him to sell tickets and
>This will definitely get rid of the guy and his big contract
>and his lousy atitude.

>2. Hold out for a trade with either a NL or AL team. Again it
>is the gamble factor. Straw has the big contract ($4m/yr),
>and the Dodgers will need to convince the other team that
>they are getting a good deal. Like selling an Edsel!!

>3.  Assign Daryl to AAA. Straw will definitely not report
>to AAA and the Dodgers may be able to get out of his
>contract if he won't report.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball