OK, I'll just go ahead and throw this out there:
Remember when the Indians' need to rebuild combined with the Expos' sudden contention/impending contraction led to the perfect storm that was the Colon trade?
I'm wondering if something similar is shaping up, in reverse:
The Dodgers are a mess and, according to some reports, in danger of not making payroll. Of course, we know MLB or someone will bail them out, but you would think whoever bails them out would also insist that they shed as much payroll as possible.
The problem? Which team is best positioned to take on payroll? Say, a young, low-payroll team that suddenly, unexpectedly finds itself atop its division in early May? Like, say, the Indians?
Now the problem, of course, is the Dodgers with the biggest albatross salaries -- say, Lilly, Kuroda, Furcal, dare I say it, Casey Blake -- are guys no one would want at this point in their careers, and certainly not the Indians. But again, the Dodgers are desperate. So let's assume that, to shed a salary or two from that list, they'd also have to tadd something of value as an incentive -- say, a Billingsely or Kershaw or an Ethier or a Kemp -- and then get decent prospects in return.
So let's think -- which team has:
* A low enough payroll to possibly take on a bad contract or two, especially if there's a chance that their unexpected success and growing fan excitement (which a deal like this could only enhance) could mean an unexpected increase in revenues over the summer?
* A collection of prospects stocked throughout the minor league system to make such a deal work?
* A need to strike early and show the fans you're serious "spending when the time is right" while also acquiring a young star/building block so as to not mortgage the future on Casey Blake?
Like I said, the perfect storm. So how does this sound:
Pomeranz or White (they're going to get another high pick this year anyway); Kipinis or Chisenhall; Chen or one or more of the legion of young pitchers at the lower level;
For:
Billingsley or Kershaw and Lilly or Kuroda to solidify a rotation that many think is the team's weak link. (and maybe a Casey Blake also as a cost of doing business).
On further review, that sounds like I'm giving up way too much. (That's why I don't play poker.) But you get the idea -- get a young star or two at the cost of some prospects and a couple bad (hopefully shorter than longer term) contracts?
Thoughts?

