LA Dodgers: Analyzing What the Offer to Roy Oswalt Means
After seeing Roy Oswalt throw in Mississippi last week, the Los Angeles Dodgers and General Manager Ned Colletti decided to offer the 34-year-old right-hander a contract, according to Tim Brown of Yahoo! Sports. While the three-time All-Star is not expected to sign with Los Angeles, the fact that the Dodgers offered him a deal sends a message.
The first point that this contract offer gets across is that the new ownership group is not going to be shy about spending money for short-term success. Under Frank McCourt, the Dodgers constantly failed to pull the trigger issuing the money as an excuse.
The Dodgers, who currently hold the best record in baseball, are now showing willingness to spend money to improve the team, even with the reported $7.5M asking price on Oswalt. If the Dodgers would consider giving Oswalt a deal even close to that amount of money, Magic Johnson and Co. are clearly not afraid to open the checkbook.
While the willingness to spend is a huge victory for the Dodger faithful, the offer also may show that the front office has a serious concern. Yesterday, the Dodgers placed Ted Lilly on the 15-day DL with shoulder inflammation, calling up Nathan Eovaldi to fill the void on the 25-man roster.
This offer to Oswalt has to make one wonder if maybe Lilly's injury is more serious than the front office has led on. Lilly currently boasts a 3.14 ERA to back up his 5-1 record. However, the injured shoulder leaves concerns after Lilly had arthroscopic shoulder surgery in 2009 to fix a fraying labrum, and it appears that its that same labrum giving him the issue.
With Chris Capuano and Aaron Harang pitching as well as they both have so far this season, there would be little to no reason to spend big money on Oswalt unless the front office has legitimate concerns about Lilly's shoulder.
It is only a matter of time before Oswalt makes a decision and more details about the contract will be unveiled. But for the time being, the Dodger front office clearly has plenty on its mind.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?