The Dodgers figure to come up in the news quite a bit in the coming days as the team’s focus now shifts to the offseason after last night’s loss to the Mets in Game 5 of the NLDS. Earlier today, Jon Heyman already touched down on topics including Don Mattingly’s future, Zack Greinke’s opt-out and qualifying offers for Howie Kendrick and Brett Anderson.
Here’s  more on the Dodgers…
- Yasmani Grandal will undergo arthroscopic surgery on his left shoulder on Wednesday of next week, writes the Orange County Register’s Bill Plunkett. The switch-hitting catcher termed the procedure “just a cleanup” but said he looks forward to no longer dealing with pain in the joint. As Plunkett notes, Grandal played through that discomfort for two months, which resulted in a woeful seven hits over his final 104 at-bats.
- Also from Plunkett’s column, Kendrick says that he very much wants to return to the Dodgers in 2016, though he declined to get too far into specifics. The Dodgers are “on top of [Kendrick’s] list,” the second baseman said before neglecting to elaborate any further. Heyman reported this morning that Kendrick will receive a qualifying offer from L.A.
- One last note from Plunkett’s piece — right-hander Joel Peralta will pitch again in 2016. The 39-year-old nearly underwent neck surgery that could have ended his career earlier in the season, but he returned for a strong final month of the season, prompting him to decide he’d like to pitch for at least another season. He’ll head to winter ball to make up for some of the innings he lost. Peralta logged a 4.34 ERA with 7.5 K/9, 2.5 BB/9 and a 33.7 percent ground-ball rate in just 29 innings this year, but he allowed just two runs with 11 strikeouts and no walks over his final nine innings of the season.
- While Mattingly’s job security figures to be a topic of discussion after another NLDS exit, members of the clubhouse seem to be behind him, writes Zach Helfand of the L.A. Times. Hefland quotes Justin Turner, J.P. Howell and Enrique Hernandez each emphatically defending Mattingly, stating that the reason for the team’s early postseason exit stems from a lack of run-scoring, which shouldn’t be blamed on the manager. “I would play for Donnie any day of the week,” said Turner. “…I’m behind him 100 percent. I think he’s an unbelievable manager, did an unbelievable job handling everything that goes on both on and off the field with this club, and he’s got my support 100 percent.”
- Buster Olney and Keith Law of ESPN discussed the Dodgers in today’s podcast (audio link, with Law appearing around the 27-minute mark), specifically last night’s game (including managerial decisions on both sides) and the future of Mattingly. Both Olney and Law feel that Mattingly will be dismissed. Law opines that while Mattingly isn’t one of the game’s better tactical managers, he’s not among the worst, and much of the team’s postseason struggles must be blamed on the front office and the roster construction. Olney discusses the fact that Andrew Friedman’s strategy of building platoons and part-time roles worked in Tampa Bay with less-established players, but it’s highly difficult to make that strategy work when dealing with veteran players on expensive contracts. Also discussed is how the Dodgers should be willing to overpay to retain Greinke, with Law projecting Greinke’s style of pitching to hold up well over the life of a theoretical free agent contract.
As usual the finger-pointing will begin and those most in the spotlight will be made to wear this embarrassment, and the those who are really responsible will slide. The fans who turn out in record numbers to support this team year after year deserve far better. But what we are likely to get is more turmoil and recriminations, resulting in season #28 of coming up short.
BlueSky… I was rooting for the Dodgers, especially after the whole slide fiasco… I gotta ask though… Now that the Dodgers have been eliminated (not trolling) How do you feel about trading for Hamels, after seeing his performace? I think he would have gotten the Dodgers into the NLCS. But my main discussion point is the thought process in overvaluing unproven prospects vs proven veteran ace pitchers…. I know it stinks to give up top prospects… I’ve been through it during the philles run. But adding Hamels who won 10 or 11 straight starts of his, and most def should have been another one… is that not worth 3 of your top 5 prospects/? So again, what would you offer for Hamels now? Just an interesting baseball question. to see if the logic will swing back… sometimes you have to go for it.. .all…. imo. Not trading for Hamels help due them in early.
I’m not good at coming up with theoretical trades (neither is anyone else really but it cautions me from trying). That said the Dodgers really can’t afford to give up top starting pitching prospects, since they really have only the one (Urias), and we can be sure his name came up frequently on trading teams’ demands lists. One of the big problems (again) this year was rotation depth after losing Ryu and McCarthy right out of the gate and having nobody with any sticking power who could be promoted even for spot starts. They got way more than they could reasonably expected out of Bollsinger and some of the others they had to throw into the mix out of desperation. Next season the situation is no better and arguably worse and I don’t see how it improves by trading anyone.
Ok, fair enough in a way. From an outside perspective, I think the Dodgers should have made the deal. They probably could of left Seager out of it in the end,but IMO, the Dodgers should have gone for it. It was probably their best window. Now you gotta deal with the Cubs, and they are looking like a real powerhouse. The Mets are overacheiving but thats IMO. If they had Hamels in this postseason, I really believe they move to the next round. Now everyone is left wondering. One of my points is, that by not doing the deal, and by not winning it all this year… even with holding onto those unproven prospects, its a good chance the dodgers will be good enough to make postseason but not win it all. Thus being in the same position in the future that they are now… minus the top prospects to spend. Your current prospects will replace current players and years down the line, you might not have those top prospects to get the top player you need at the deadline. Its cyclical, and its hard to keep the prospects coming when your team is winning so much. Who knows, maybe the dodgers keep the pipeline flush with prospects. Hard thing to do. Will see, either way, good luck in years to come to the Dodgers. Just interesting to review deadline philosophies for Proven veteran players vs highly regarded prospects … Basically going for it with your best foot forward or to hope you got got enough and see what happens..
Couldn’t agree more with Olney’s comments about the front office and roster construction. Friedman and Zaidi have a lot to learn about constructing a roster with big money players. Hope both Olney’s and Law’s take on Mattingly is wrong. You need a manager who understands the egos in the clubhouse and knows how and when to platoon and soothe those egos. Letting him go would be [another] front office mistake.
This is where ownership’s approach will really be tested. Do they serve someone’s head up on a plate (namely, Mattingley) or do they find and fix the organization’s real problems?
If all they are looking for is someone who knows how to soothe player’s ego’s, knows how to win (3 rings as a manager), then try and talk Francona out of his deal (discreetly) that runs through 2020 with Cleveland.
Fans might find out that doesn’t work out eventually also. His penchant for sticking with his buddies, not playing rookies, unless nearly forced to by ownership.. Sometimes it’s better to stick with what you have than the pot of gold you wish for.
ew032, you hit the nail right square on the head. This failure is on the Dodgers front office.
2015 was Friedman & Zaidi first year w/ the Dodgers.
I honestly wouldn’t mind a shake up with the staff. I think we could use a new manager and new hitting coach. Would love to see Duty Baker come manage the Dodgers, would love them to bring back Howie, trade Puig and Crawford even if you gotta eat most of Crawfords salary.l and care what we get back. Sign Cespedes, bring back Grienke, sign Price and gotta address the bullpen. I know I’m sitting here playing GM and hoping and dreaming but that’s just what I would love to happen lol
$300M in payroll wasn’t enough… make it $400M.
Mattingley is not the problem. Maguire probably isn’t the problem (wasn’t he the guy who was supposed to have performed miracles in St. Louis?). If those two get fired in favor of somebody who’s already been cut loose from several other teams it’s going to look like organizational panic. If that’s the solution then what was the problem? Personally I keep the coaches and manger another year. Freed-ziti get no more time than that to fix this roster, or they should be the next to go.
Agree. Firing the mgr and coaching staff creates even more upheaval among the players that remain. The NEEDS to be continuity on the field staff, because teams turn over every three to four years. Start by re-signing Greinke. Rebuild the underperforming bullpen with “smart” arms for all situations. Purge the outfield by moving those that spend 2/3 of the season on the DL, and keep Ethier. Schlebler and others are coming, but the front office needs to be smart about the moves. Sign one more big arm, cause Ryu and McCarthy can’t be counted on. Just sayin’.
Said it before the season, by trading Kemp they were essentially gambling the season on the readiness of Pederson. For a few months that looked like a smart gamble. They didn’t leave themselves much of a Plan B.
Kemp was struggling w/ a hip & an ankle injury. He wasn’t much of a CF. He had the most trade value. They acquired Grandal in the trade & he was great until a shoulder injury in mid Sept.
2015 was Fried-ziti first year w/ the team
I also think the Ned caught to much grief and was wrongfully fired. He did a lot of great things with this team, he did make some bone head signings but he was doing what he could with no money under that idiot ex owner. I think we failed badly at the trade line. Yea you don’t want to give up the young studs but with the cash we have we could’ve made something better happen.
The Yankees of the early/mid ’90’s didn’t trade their top prospects (Jeter, Rivera, Posada, Pettite, Bernie Williams &….) , and if my memory serves correct, didn’t they end up winning 4 titles in 6 yrs
Dodgers need a run producing right handed bat, Need to keep Greinke, improve the middle of the rotation, and improve both middle relief and get one back and guy to go with Hatcher and Jansen.
You mean a run-producing right-handed bat not named Turner, Kendrick, Grandahl, or Puig?
Chris Davis 10/265
IF they trade Ethier &/or Puig (to a team that needs their skill set) for RP, replace them by possibly acquiring Upton, LF & Heyward, RF.
So a manager’s job is in jeopardy because his team didn’t score 2 more runs? Sounds kinda silly.
No, his job is in jeopardy cause he he couldn’t make it to the World Series year after year after year.
Neither could his four predecessors. Does six sound like a lucky number to you?
Don Mattingly is a Good Guy, But he’s not the Manager for this team with so many Veterans.
Mattingly should be dismissed as his in/game management undermined the team’s efforts. There was just no excuse to manage himself and his team into a corner last night by being forced to hit AJ Ellis in the ninth-inning against a dominant right-handed closer. That blunder alone should get him fired. Using Baez in the 7th inning of game 1 when Kershaw tired. In a 1-0 game (this post provides clear evidence that Peralta was the better option) was another inexcusable mistake.
Dee Gordon lead the NL in Hits, BA
…And stolen bases. Kemp drive in 100 runs and proved way move valuable then Crawford and Puig.
I didn’t like the Kemp trade but it’s unfair to compare the performance of a healthy player to an injured player. The same was being done to downgrade Kemp’s value when he wasn’t playing or playing hurt for a couple of seasons, and it made no sense then either.
According to Baseball Reference, Kemp was a 0.6 WAR player last year. That’s not very good and likely going to get worse in the coming years of that terrible contract. Also, while Crawford was a -0.1 WAR player, Puig provided 1.1 WAR last year. So, no, Kemp was definitely not “way more valuable” and likely less valuable than Puig. And why are you comparing him to Crawford and Puig, anyways, when you should be comparing him to what Pederson (2.3 WAR) and Grandal (1.4 WAR) brought. Not to mention the improved clubhouse trading him away supposedly accomplished.
I do agree with you that in retrospect, the Dee Gordon trade doesn’t look great in the short term, but they did get several promising players in that deal. Kike hernandez looks like he could be a heck of a player and Chris Hatcher started slow but also looks like he has the potential to be a shut down arm in the bullpen. The Dodgers think they have a really good catcher in Barnes and Kendrick was a solid player all year. So, we may look at this in a year or two and have a different opinion just like we have a different opinion on the deal today than we did last year.
Right, so where did everyone who thought the Dodgers were “selling high” on Gordon go now that it’s clear they sold low?
I’ll play Devil’s advocate, he played in arguably the weakest division in MLB. Those teams do not have good pitching staffs