Oh, I don't dismiss it, but the $70 million more they spent than the Phillies, and their financial might/savvy to employ deferrals, was also still a factor. The advantage the Dodgers had on the three Japanese players could have been reduced had the Phillies spent more (or developed better players, or had more tradeable depth, but....). As AF notes, the edge it gives you to spend on younger players is probably the real edge, whereas the Phillies had significant money committed to Wheeler, Castellanos, Walker and Nola that they couldn't do anything about, and couldn't have really spent their $ on anyone that great in free agency or this past trade deadline either (Tucker still would have been the guy to get but he cost a lot in trade). The Dodgers not only have the Japanese players to make up for that but just threw money at seemingly redundant expensive pitchers who turned out not to be.
But the advantage LA had was not just about their history with Japanese players or California. It was also, would you rather sign with the team that's been to the playoffs 11 straight years and the World Series three times, including one win (when Ohtani and Yamamoto joined them)? Or a team that had just started being good again for a few seasons (also true of the Mets)?
For all that, yes, Phillies (and Jays) could compete. A champagne problem compared to being a fan in Miilwaukee.
