Kemp really didn’t play THAT well - he isn’t half the player Kevin Pillar is - and at $21 million a year getting rid of him was a pretty good move.
I would much, much rather have Yasmani Grandal than Matt Kemp. That isn’t a close call.
Yes. Most definitely.
Total agreement. Dumping Kemp was the smart move, no matter what the naysayers opine.
Thank you! I would also rather have Howie Kendrick et al than Dee Gordon.
Sometimes I feel like the rest of Dodgers fandom are insane. This was a good team hobbled by injuries… Again. Conte packing his bags is a huge victory. Under his watch the Dodgers have been one of the most injured teams in the mlb.
Also, by all accounts Mattingly left and wasn’t fired. The front office apparently offered him an extension.
A truly classy move by the Cubs: They gave the third base bag after the game last night to David Wright.
I’m not a Kemp fan, but he did better this year than any of our current outfielders. The closest was Ethier, who had a good, but not a great year by any means. Puig, Peterson, Crawford, Van Slyke? Horrible years, unless you count the three months before the league figured Peterson out. He started out good.
I also happen to really like Grandal, but we only got little more than a half season out of him before his arthritic shoulder made him worthless at the plate. O for 43 or something like that. Will he be healthy enough to return at the start of the season? Who knows?
I’ll take the guy who stole 150 bases over the past two years and has the batting title over a great but aging player that probably just played his last game with us. We have nobody currently that can fill that leadoff spot, nor do we have a good prospect for 2nd base waiting in the wings.
I agree regarding Conte but, you can’t tell me with a straight face that we had a good bullpen. We did great if the starter got the ball to Jansen. Anything else was a crapshoot.
Not officially they didn’t. That was the plan but it quickly became apparent during talks that they didn’t see eye to eye on much of anything. It was a mutually agreed upon decision. And if the reports of them micromanaging every one of the Manager’s decisions are true, I can’t say I blame him for not wanting to be a part of that.
All coaches were told to start looking for new jobs, so I’ll be very surprised if we see Lopes or Honeycutt or Wallach next season, and I’ll be very, very surprised if we see Greinke.
If we are a better team next year, I’ll eat my hat. I’m guessing we’ll finish third.
Building bullpens is a crap shoot and anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves.
I’ll take that action on where we finish next season. Friendly wager? I say that they will be a 90+ win team again which should be good enough for at least 2nd. Don’t know if Greinke will be back or not. I say it won’t matter. I would rather have him back, but I expect him to go to the highest bidder, and I think there are other options out there.
I’d disagree on that one. Neither has any power to speak of, but Gordon probably gets on base more often and definitely steals more. I saw a decent amount of Kendrick with the Angels and he always seemed to me like the guy who would go 3 for 4 in a blowout but was likely to strike out with runners on base in a close one.
Greinke is gone. We might as well get used to that. He can make 3 times as much as a free agent, and pitching with Kershaw isn’t enough to overcome that carrot.
If it were my team (well, there wouldn’t be the wholesale coaching changes for one!), I’d just accept that next year is a rebuild year and go young. The end of the season showed what kind of young talent the Dodgers have. It just needs time to grow. So don’t worry about the record too much and get Seager, et al into the regular lineup. Shebler and Ruggiano can fill in the outfield when Ethier, Pederson and Van Slyke want a day off. Seager and Hernandez can vie for the spot at second. Bundle Puig, Crawford, Peralta, Bolsinger and about half of the rest of the bullpen and trade for a young starter or two. Then just let the team gel.
Manager-wise, who knows? Is Bud Black looking for a job? I always liked the way he handled the Padres.
That’s pretty awesome! True class by the Cubbies. As a Mets fan, I got to see David Wright stay with an at times horrible Mets team when he easy could have left for a better situation, so to see him get honored this way as the Mets make it to the series is very special.
This is an interesting comment. Matt Kemp’s WAR this year was 0.6 (his defensive liabilities basically wiped out all of his offensive gains). Ethier had a 2.7, but he only had 445 plate appearances and for those plate appearances he had great numbers - .294/.366/.852 - well, far better than Kemp anyways.
I’m not saying Puig had a great year, but even he had a 1.1 WAR. Pederson had a 2.3 WAR. Van Slyke had a 1.3 WAR. Crawford, though, had a -0.1 WAR.
And now behold:
The Murphy Curse. :eek::eek::eek:
I said before he ever played for the Padres that Kemp really should have been picked up by an AL team, had his glove taken away, and made a DH the rest of his career. He’s be far more valuable and it’d extend his career. He is a truly awful outfielder.
[QUOTE=Barkis is Willin’]
I’d disagree on that one. Neither has any power to speak of, but Gordon probably gets on base more often and definitely steals more. I saw a decent amount of Kendrick with the Angels and he always seemed to me like the guy who would go 3 for 4 in a blowout but was likely to strike out with runners on base in a close one.
[/QUOTE]
Stealing bases is really the least important difference betwene the two; for all the flash of stealing bases, it doesn’t help you much unless your success rate is incredibly high, and Gordon’s isn’t. The difference between Gordon’s basestealing and Kendrick’s isn’t worth any more than the difference between them in home runs.
What is somewhat more intriguing is that analytical stats claim Gordon was a terrific defensive player this year, while Kendrick was horrible. Why I find that intriguing is that until this year, the same analytical states thought Gordon wasn’t an especially good fielder at all, and that Kendrick was pretty good. So Gordon LEAVES Chavez Ravine and suddenly he goes from being mediocre to a Gold Glove candidate; Kendrick ARRIVES in Chavez Ravine and goes from being a damn good fielder to a bad one.
I mean, those things might be true. After all, Gordon was in his age 27 year and had a terrific year with the bat, so why not also with the glove? Kendrick is 31, so maybe this was the year he lost a step, even though he was just fine right up to last year. But… you have to wonder if the numbers aren’t being fooled by some sort of illusion of context. That seems like a weird coincidence.
Gordon’s SB% was 74%. A general rule is 75% or higher is acceptable. So ok, Gordon’s SB% was not great. One could argue that his team’s inability to generate much offense led to taking more risks, but that doesn’t really matter. Let’s say I’d take Gordon over Kendrick then because his WAR was much better. 4.9 vs. 1.1.
Well, I’d take Gordon just because he’s younger and he won the batting title. Actually, I’d take him just because he’s younger. Let’s be honest, he’s got more games left in him than Howie Kendrick does.
But it’s not like the Dodgers traded Dee Gordon for Howie Kendrick, a move that would have been mind-bogglingly silly. They traded Gordon for four players and flipped one to get Kendrick. They still ended up with Enrique Hernandez, who looks pretty good, and a decent relief pitcher in Chris Hatcher.
I don’t really get the hatred for the moved made by a team that, you know, won the division. Again.
I really have to question what’s the point of instant replay if they’re going to blow obvious calls like that fan interference on the homer.
What was that? I thought the ball had to clear the fences in the KC ballpark. And the kid leaned over those fences.
I thought the call was that the ball would have been over the wall regardless of the interference. So the fan’s interference didn’t make any difference. As a Jays fan I’m comfortable with the call.
They called it inconclusive.