1. Daniel Hudson
This inclusion might be surprising because, at his best, Daniel Hudson is a better option than a number of other players that the Dodgers have on the 40-man. Most Dodgers fans would trust Hudson in a do-or-die spot over someone like Andre Jackson, who really struggled in the minors last season.
However, Hudson not belonging on the 40-man roster has more so to do with the macro situation of the Dodgers. LA is going to eek over the luxury tax threshold for the 2023 season with Friedman confirming that the team is not expecting to go under the $233 million mark.
This makes no sense because the Dodgers could reasonably get under the threshold, based on current projections, without sacrificing much. By doing so, the team would reset its luxury tax penalty and would avoid paying 50% on all dollars above the mark next year if they were to go big for someone like Shohei Ohtani.
Plus, if you're going to go over the tax, then go over the tax. Don't pinch pennies like a small-market team only to land just barely over it. How does that financial approach make any sense?
One way to get under is to trade Hudson, and the Dodgers could easily do so. The right-hander has enough value that some team would be willing to take him in for a player to be named later. This would squeeze the Dodgers right under the threshold, as they would free up $7 million.
Why the team decided to accept the option for a reliever who tore his ACL is confusing, especially when there's so much young talent in this organization that probably would pitch better than Hudson eventually (or even immediately).
Hudson really shouldn't be on the Dodgers 40-man roster. But since he is right now, he likely is not going anywhere (unless he lands on the 60-day IL so the Dodgers can pay him to sit at home).