I do not think any Dodger fan can possibly disagree about the disappointment over the last three years. I use three, because realistically that has been the span where the Dodgers were in a position to win it all. Certainly Doc has had a problem of “thinking too much” in the playoffs. It was never more evident as it was in Game 5 of the NLDS. But the players have failed as well, and they deserve much of the blame. After all, they are the ones between the lines.
AF acquired Yu Darvish, Tony Watson, and Tony Cingrani in 2017, and Manny Machado in 2018. So you cannot say he has not acquired quality players. They just did not work out. He missed in 2019, but not without trying. He was apparently not willing to include Gavin Lux in a deal for Felipe Vazquez. What other quality reliever or starting pitcher really was available? How much criticism would he have received had that deal gone thru with Lux becoming an AS for Pittsburgh and Vazquez perhaps in prison. AF acquired Daniel Hudson for 2018 and he pitched fine, just not as well as he pitched this year, especially for Washington (notwithstanding WS Game 1). Who knew? I do not remember reading from anyone who said the Dodgers needed to re-sign Hudson for 2019. That goes along with the paradigm that relievers are fickle. You can always use hindsight and complain about Yordan Alvarez for Josh Fields. I do not remember reading any complaints in 2016 about the trade. You could probably count on 1 hand how many fans outside of MLB even knew who Yordan Alvarez was. Don’t come back 2-3 years later and complain what a bad trade it was. You can certainly make the observation that the results did not help LAD, but the last time I checked the NL does not have a DH for Alvarez, and Josh Fields was not a bad reliever. He had the same problem that most of the relievers (and Clayton Kershaw) have. He served up too many HRs, and usually at the wrong time (again like Clayton Kershaw). For 2017 and 2018 he had a 2.57 ERA with a 0.959 ERA and a 3.58 K/BB ratio. That is not a bad pitcher.
What seems to be lost on many who criticize AF about FA acquisitions or lack thereof, is that nobody outside of the organization have any ideas what mandates the owners have placed on AF, and nobody outside of the organization have any ideas what mandates MLB put on the LAD with respect to debt compliance. Whether anyone likes it or not, the direction from MLB was clear…get payroll down or we will. In 2016, the LA times wrote…
“the rule, (that’s) designed to ensure teams have the resources to meet their financial obligations, generally limits debt to no more than 12 times annual revenue, minus expenses. The Dodgers were not profitable in any of the first three full seasons under new ownership, co-owner Todd Boehly said last year. Their debt is believed to be in the hundreds of millions.”
Pure and simple, there was a debt compliance issue that needed to be addressed. It did not have to be immediately solved. There had to be a plan. The Dodgers advised MLB that their payroll would be reduced to around $200MM by 2018, which they made. It is believed that the Dodgers could not trade for Justin Verlander because of this. Anyone is free to believe it or not. One of the co-owners, Todd Boehly, has said on numerous occasions that they (Dodgers) have planned to always be around the CBT. Sometimes they may go over, but they will get back on track quickly thereafter. The funds to improve the stadium have nothing at all to do with the debt compliance for the operations. That needs to be ignored.
AF was hired specifically to meet this “rule”. He has been routinely criticized for not signing the “big” free agent, even though he may have been given instructions to stay within certain payroll parameters and to rebuild the farm and significantly improve player development. He has never had much room to wiggle until this winter. Before we go overboard with any AF (or ownership) criticism in not willing to sign high priced FA, let’s see how they spend this winter. If they stay around $170MM then I will join in on the criticism. This is a new scenario for this organization. But to deny the success AF has had with his imprint on LAD is disingenuous.
Since AF became President of Baseball Operations for LAD, 22 teams have made the playoffs. Only the Dodgers have made it all five years. Houston, NYY, and Cubs have made it 4 years. Nationals, BoSox, and Cleveland has made it 3 years. Milwaukee, St. Louis, Atlanta, Oakland, Minnesota, Colorado, NYM, Toronto, and Texas have made it twice. Tampa, Arizona, SF Giants, Orioles, Royals, and Pirates have made it once. Leaving Philadelphia, San Diego, Cincinnati, Miami, Seattle, ChiSox, Detroit, and LAA having not made the playoffs in the last five years. However, admittedly I am one who favors championships over playoff appearances. I would have been very happy to have missed the 2018 playoffs if the Dodgers had won the 2017 WS as they should have. But that was not a choice any of us had. Does it get harder for 2020? Do they have to sacrifice relevance for multiple years if they sell their soul to the devil? It doesn’t have to.
Of the ten teams that made the playoffs in 2019, here is a snapshot of the various farm systems status. Using MLB Pipeline as the standard:
LAD – 5 Top 100; 13 with a grade of 50 or better
Washington – 2 top 100; 8 with a grade of 50 or better
Atlanta – 5 top 100: 10 with a grade of 50 or better
Cardinals – 2 top 100; 7 with a grade of 50 or better
Milwaukee – 1 top 100; 8 with a grade of 50 or better
Houston – 1 top 100; 2 with a grade of 50 or better
NYY – 3 top 100; 11 with a grade of 50 or better
Rays – 6 top 100; 10 with a grade of 50 or better
Twins – 5 top 100; 13 with a grade of 50 or better
A’s – 3 top 100; 8 with a grade of 50 or better
Two of the last three WS winners that did not make the playoffs in 2019.
Cubs – 2 top 100; 10 grade 50 or better
BoSox – 1 top 100; 10 grade 50 or better
The Dodgers have a superior farm system to every team on the above list, with the exception of maybe the Twins and Rays (with Braves close enough). However, LAD’s financial flexibility puts them in a superior place to succeed in 2020. Organizationally, which team is situated best for 2020? If Forrest Whitley continues to decline, the Astros farm system is worse than bad.
Like it or not, owning a baseball team is not a hobby. There are real budgets and real parameters that must be honored. Maybe the Dodgers can afford $275MM annual payroll, but MLB is an oligopoly consisting of 30 teams, and MLB sets standards for all members to adhere to for the good of all 30 teams. How successful would MLB be with only 16 teams as it once was? Maybe they should select 16 teams and move forward, and throw out all payroll limitations, making Charles Darwin proud. But how tired would you all be playing the same 7 NL teams and a revolving 4 AL teams every other year? Or maybe no AL teams like it was before inter-league play and 16 teams.
I have no direct knowledge as to what the financial constraints the Dodgers have now or have had in the past, internally or directed from MLB. I doubt that anyone other than high level LAD and MLB employees have that knowledge. I do not pretend to have any secret knowledge, nor a thorough understanding as to how the actual “debt compliance rule” is monitored or what (if any) the consequences are. It is not something we can find in any agreement between LAD and MLB. There are guesses and insinuations that I am picking from. I have not spoken directly (or indirectly) to Todd Boehly or Stan Kasten or Mark Walter. I have only researched and read reports. The Dodgers ownership may in fact only care about profits, but I refuse to believe that. I may in fact be naive, but that is what I choose to believe, and I have not found any evidence to contradict those beliefs.
The Dodgers are in a good place to make trades and sign free agents during the winter of 2019-2020 for the 2020 season. They have the player prospect cache and the payroll flexibility to add significant ML players for 2020. IMO, it is not as important to compare with what other teams do this winter. It is only important as to what the Dodgers do with their assets. They can put a WS caliber team on the field, or they can set up the roster to win the Division and hope their players perform during the playoffs, which brings me back to Albert Einstein. We all have our ideas as to what players constitute a significant upgrade. Some do not want to consider final CBT AAV salaries, because it is a meaningless arbitrary number foisted on them. Others will believe that the Dodgers will again have a payroll threshold to work within. And others will believe that the team as it is should be good enough with only minor tweaks. We will all know which faction will be correct once the pitchers and catchers report next spring. I think many will be surprised about player transactions and FA signings this winter. Not everyone will agree with the changes. We have to have some reason to continue to write. Some will complain to complain, and others will complain about the complainers. What we will not know until next October is whether that team can actually end a 32 year drought and bring home a championship. We have waited much too long. Just like when they were in Brooklyn…Wait ‘til next year.
Discussion (39)
Disagree, not disagreeable
Really? 0-3 with two strikeouts and he was gonna get to Kolarek? Crack is bad.
The dodgers rotation has been deep and has had key parts come with health worries. So Buehler, Urias,May, Kershaw as the core is not that unique for the Dodgers.
I want a right bat.
Smith and Barnes for catching.
I like Gleyber Torres and Mookie Betts.
I like Seager and think he will have a good 2020 but leave for free agency.
I would offer Joc 3 years and $30M plus incentives.
I like Stripling.
I like that Jansen is already working out at DS.
I want Lux to be a regular in 2020.
Here is a new thought: Doc might have waited an inning too long to bring in Kershaw.
Everyone needed Doc to execute.
Terrible to see how the Nats are doing.
Could easily have been us.
Dodge fan – my way of thinking also. But I don’t think it’s gonna.. Got to do something with that roster depth.
So now the fact that Washington very possibly can win the World Series and not the Astros, stands for the principle that the Dodgers are doing it the right way?? Proof that the Dodgers did it the right way last year must be that the Red Sox won the title. Whatever happens, proves that the Dodgers’ ownership should not be criticized. It seems endlessly self-perpetuating.
I’ve really never criticized Friedman that much, though maybe he deserves it. I don’t know what he would do with an ownership which had a more open-pockets policy. And none of us knows exactly what the owners’ parameters are, and who actually makes the spending decisions, Walter, Kasten, both? What I can do is look at the behavior. It’s not my money, and of course they are not going to spend a billion dollars just because fans might want it. But they can certainly spend more than they do. The fact that the Dodgers have completely chosen not to pursue top free agents, is a disgrace, I think, given almost 4 million in attendance, and immense profits. Yes, the Dodgers sort of went after Harper, except that he was never going to take four years over ten (SF) or 13 (Phil.), so it was either ridiculous, or just an effort to cover themselves.
Can you win without signing one or two top FAs over a span of say, five years? Theoretically, yes. But Washington has Scherzer, one of the highest paid FAs in baseball. They also have Corbin. They also picked up two key relief pitchers at the trade deadline, whereas the Dodgers got just one guy, who pitches to one lefthander a game, at most. Houston has Verlander and Greienke. Boston had Price and Martinez, and made a big trade for Sale, and I think got Kimbrel via trade. Yes, sometimes those deals do not work long-term, but sometimes they do. Not getting any such players actually is a negative, particularly in playoff time.
Which team in baseball had the most disappointing playoff run this year? The Astros? I don’t think so. The Yankees? No way. I think it was the Dodgers. Now, I realize that these five-game playoff series are unfair. But that is how MLB has set them up. Playoff baseball is simply different than regular season baseball. It really helps to have at least two top starters, a proven closer, and solid bullpen help in front of him. Having one true professional hitter also really helps. The Dodgers do not have two top starters, unless you want to count Ryu, who had a fine year, tailed off in much of the second half, pitched five innings in one playoff game And Ryu is likely to leave, meaning that we will certainly not have two top starters next year–unless we get a major one via trade or free agency. The Dodgers also do not have a proven closer, did not have one going into this season, and will not have one for next season, unless they make a major trade for one. They don’t even have a proven set-up man. To me, this is either unacceptable negligence, or just arrogance and greed. I know that we won 106 games, that was great. But it didn’t help us in the playoffs, because the shortness of the playoffs heightens things, emphasizes the importance of those two top starters, proven closer, and first class hitter in the middle of the lineup.
It is conceivable that if we keep the farm system strong, we might in one year have things fall our way, and win the one title that the ownership will market for the next 30 years, the way that they have marketed 1988 . Winning more than one title seems impossible with this ownership’s self-imposed constraints. With this market, the money behind them, the Dodgers should be winning as many titles as any franchise in any ten year period. But what we have, is none. It is not coincidence, it is not bad luck, it is not Joc Pederson just missing a three-run bloop double with two out in the 8th inning which would have made our deficit 6-4. It is the predictable results from an ownership which almost proudly refuses to sign a top FA, or make a bold trade in which we pick up star players.
I will say this, which I know that virtually everyone will disagree with: I would be happy if Guggenheim Partners would sell the Dodgers. Could we end up with another McCourt? Possibly, but it is unlikely. What we might just end up with is a very rich single owner who cares enough about the Dodgers and their fans to go all-out for championships; not to the extent of spending far more than anyone else, but doing what the Yankees did under George Steinbrenner, and now are doing close to that under his son: identify who the key pieces are that the team needs, and then determine to get them. Brian Cashman says that George used to say, “Get player X,,” and Cashman would say, ‘Well, we will certainly look into that,’ and Steinbrenner would say, “I don’t think you heard me, I said , get player X.” Our ownership seems to sit around during the offseason counting their money, wanting Friedman to nibble around the edges, try to get by with Jansen again, count on rookie pitchers, mostly the same lineup players; and figure that the loyal fans will buy it, and even support it, as somehow purer than going after high-level players from other clubs.
I’ll just close by saying that I always remain hopeful that we will do big things in the winter meetings or at the trade deadline. Friedman is very smart, though he has made some clear mistakes. I just don’t know whether he has the green light to make the major additions that I think we need. And then of course we have the issue that if we do make a bold move, it is likely that this will be all we will do for years, because it is not the owners’ preferred modus operandi. Part of the fun of being a baseball fan is to be legitimately excited about what the ownership and front office will do to make the team better for the next season. I do not have that excitement, because I’ve seen what we have done, which is usually mostly nothing, except maybe acquire one or two second-tier FAs,trade minor league contracts. As always, we will see, because there’s really nothing that we can do to affect it, since the ownership can reasonably count on at least 3.7 million in attendance each year, whether or not they ever win a title, or even try to.
The game is is changing does it mean the lineup has to change from game to game enough of this shuffling players from position to position stick with a set lineup and a set field of players
I have been watching the WS games and have been impressed with the Nats. The have good pitching, hitting and defense. I still think we could have beat them. One major difference I noticed was that their lineup barely changed from game to game. Important?
But Mark, the major reason the Astros made it to the 2017 World Series was Justin Verlander. He was great in the playoffs, owned the Yankees in the AL Championship, earning MVP. He pitched well in 12 innings against the Dodgers in the WS, but lost the one game. It might be reasonable to conclude that without Verlander the Astros don’t make the World Series. If the Dodgers had acquired Verlander, it might be reasonable to conclude that they would have won in 2017, beating the Yankees. If Darvish had the same contract commitments as Verlander, would the Dodgers had made that deal? Considering the push to get under the cap, no need to answer that. Of course, if the New ownership had been able to acquire the Dodgers for something close to what they were valued at, there wouldn’t have been all the debt. Had baseball been able to control the sale, poof, McCourt would have been lucky to pay his debts and kept a few dollars. Then again, Kasten had explored purchasing the Houston Astros at one point. All interesting stuff. Of course none of this means anything. The Dodgers should have won in 2017, if Kenley Jansen closes out game two or if Clayton Kershaw holds two leads in Houston. Teams that win produce, teams that don’t … so, no matter who the Dodgers acquire for ‘20 (big free agent or not), the players will have to produce for the drought to end. They will not be able to pile up endless strikeouts or not put the ball in play with runners in scoring position, which they did against the Nats in game five.
Jayce Tingler agreed to manage San Diego Padres. Former ML Player Development Field Coordinator for the Rangers.
Joe Girardi agreed to manage Phillies
Joe Espada is flying to SF today for 2nd interview for Giants manager.
I did ask my son who he thought would be the better manager between Mark Kotsay and Gabe Kapler. He said it was a hard choice because he is friends with both, but of the two, he thinks Kotsay is the better candidate. I asked him if he thought he was more like AJ Hinch and he said that is exactly who he is like. Giants fans may have to be patient unlike the DBacks were with Hinch who was just learning as well when signed to manage DBacks (2009-2010). I am kind of partial to AJ as his first name is Andrew and middle name Jay, thus AJ. My son is Andrew and his middle name is John, and he was quite often called AJ until his Mom said no more.
Word is Joe Girardi will be managing the Phillies.
Maybe they both need a change of scenery. How about we trade Kershaw for Verlander straight up?
FYI:
Justin Verlander has a 5.90 ERA in the World Series.
Clayton Kershaw has a 5.73 ERA in the World Series.
Just sayin’…
Thank you for the interesting and thought-out article, AC. Your posts always make me think and learn.
I don’t think the Dodgers or their front office is cheap and I don’t see any evidence to back that claim. I don’t think they’re stupid either. Well, bringing back Doc wasn’t the smartest move IMO, but I can see the other side of the coin with respect to Mr. MaGoo.
Like I said last year when we extended him, it helps attract free agents to have continuity vs disarray and constant changes. It also shows that you’re willing to work with the guys you bring in and not cut them off with knee jerk reactions.
It sure seems to me that Manny and Bryce weren’t the best fits last year, so they pivoted and went with plan B. Well we didn’t get the ring, we certainly were in a position to. It’s hard to argue otherwise since the Nats are making quick work of the Astros and we should have beaten the Nats if it wasn’t for Mother Nature getting in the way in Game 4 and Doc getting in the way for game 5.
Now, just as Corey and Cody are entering their prime, and Muncy in his prime years, do people really think they’re going to back off the payroll and keep the money and stuff it into their pockets? That just seems like nonsense to me.
That’s not to say we should be happy to go with plan B all the time either. Sometimes you need to land that big fish.
As far as the debt service rule is concerned, we can make some assumptions that they put themselves into a position to meet the requirements over the last few years by making additional revenue from deep post season runs and by raising ticket / concession / parking prices in addition to adding equity by bringing on new minority owners.
As it stands right now, we have the most CBT space that we’ve ever had under the current ownership group, a stacked minor league system, and few holes to fill. It seems like this is the perfect time to splurge a little in free agency.
Excellent column. Yes, the money was an issue for the Dodgers acquiring Verlander and there was discussion by many MLB writers regarding the Dodgers/MLB debt issue. Is it still an issue? Apparently not, according to MLB officials. Maybe it never was. The Dodgers had a plan and the MLB was aware of the plan.
No one, other than the Dodgers and MLB, actually knows how the Dodgers finances are handled, starting with the original purchase, Guggenheim fronting a whole bunch of money. They’ve added investors beyond the original group and may add more. Then there was the leak of the investor proposal, but that was back then and this is now and the world has apparently changed. Revenues have shot up dramatically, the Dodgers reportedly cleared nearly $100 million in 2018.
It is obvious that staying within the ball park of the cap is a goal, but not set in cement. Kasten has said the Dodgers have flexibility. If Harper had accepted a $40 million offer, that certainly would have changed the picture.
The team is currently around $200 million in payroll and if they do nothing will end up well below that figure in 2020. I think the ownership group wants to win and that Friedman has the flexibility, he referenced it, to add a significant free agent or two, if it makes sense.
The problem for all of us is that we have no idea what that looks like and all we can do is speculate. The funny part is, I’m guessing Friedman and company is in pretty much the same boat. Lots of paths, many options, some thoughts. How it unfolds, no one really knows.
But it is fun to work the puzzle. Again, really good, well thought post.
If I heard right from, last nights game, Verlander is now 0-5 in the WS. Yu Darvish is 0-2.
Good job AC! I don’t think the Dodger front office or the baseball staff are at odds with the fans. I have been around baseball long enough to know the competitive fires that burn within the players, coaches, managers and management. The all want to win it all. That being said, business is business and for a business to survive, it has to be profitable.
Excellent job, AC!
What really kills me is fans who say ” Friedman is too cheap and the Dodgers won’t win because he won’t spend the money.”
They are simply creating a false equation for their small minds. Spending money does not equal championships. Spending money “WISELY” is a better equation.
As I have repeatedly said “Winning the World Series is all about getting there first!” It’s not your W-L record, your free agent signings or your trades as much as it is destiny and who gets hot when.
Witness the Washington Nationals! Many of you who have created this FALSE EQUATION have held up the Astros as being the team to beat and even said that the Dodgers couldn’t. No, but the Nats could. In the NLCS, the 7 main pitchers for the Nats (Hudson, Rainey, Rodney, Sanchez, Scherzer, Strasburg and Doolittle) gave up just 1 run. No matter when or where they were put into the game, they executed. Davey Martinez looked like a genius.
Is AJ Hinch an idiot because Gerrit Cole has a 6.43 ERA, Justin Verlander a 6.00 ERA, James and Devinski have a 9.00 ERA, and Ryan Pressley has a 40.50 ERA? Is Jeff Luhnow somehow incapable of building a team now?
This is what happens in baseball. The last time the Dodgers won, their best player was injured and they were huge underdogs. You can build a juggernaut and spend $300 million on salary only to run into Destiny’s Nationals.
So, my advice is to quit moaning about Doc and AF – I am not going to call you dumb, but when you do, you just show the world you have very bad luck when it comes to thinking.
Like it or not: Face the facts! Jeff Luhnow and Andrew Friedman are two of the best architects on building an organization and a winning team and it looks like both are losers this year (yet to be decided).