Great news for the rest of the NL: Dodgers keep Ned Colletti around

17 Comments

Sure, these new Dodgers may have as much buying power as any three other National League teams combined, but at least fans of other clubs can take heart that Ned Colletti will remain the one doing the spending after inking a mulityear contract extension on Saturday.

Colletti’s Dodgers have the NL’s third-best record since he took over the team in 2006, trailing the Phillies and Cardinals, but they’ve been soundly beaten both times they’ve advanced to the NLCS. They’ve had one 90-win season, that partly fueled by a strong Manny Ramirez campaign in between drug suspensions.

Ignoring the huge 2012 moves for a minute, the Ramirez acquisition is the second biggest the highlight of Colletti’s first six years at the helm. After giving up just Andy LaRoche and Bryan Morris, the Dodgers got 223 games of a 1.012 OPS from Ramirez. They also got the baggage that came with it, and by the time mid-2010 rolled around, they were happy to see him gone.

The biggest highlight was Colletti’s first significant move in the offseason prior to 2006; Colletti landed Andre Ethier in exchange for Milton Bradley and Antonio Perez in a deal with the A’s. The Hiroki Kuroda signing from Japan is also right up there.

The worst moves:

1/14/2006: Traded Edwin Jackson and Chuck Tiffany to Tampa Bay for Danys Baez and Lance Carter

4/24/2006: Traded Cody Ross to Cincinnati for Ben Kozlowski

11/22/2006: Signed Juan Pierre to a five-year, $44 million contract

12/6/2006: Signed Jason Schmidt to a three-year, $47 million contract

12/6/2007: Signed Andruw Jones to a two-year, $36.2 million contract

7/26/2008: Traded Carlos Santana and Jon Meloan to Cleveland for Casey Blake

7/31/2010: Traded James McDonald and Andrew Lambo to Pittsburgh for Octavio Dotel

11/29/2010: Signed Juan Uribe to a three-year, $21 million contract

I suppose the good news there is that most of Colletti’s worst moves came early. However, it likely had something to do with the fact that Frank McCourt’s financial troubles left him with less flexibility in recent offseasons.

Ned hasn’t been all bad, but he has his old boss Brian Sabean’s fondness for veterans without Sabean’s genius in drafting pitchers (though he did get Clayton Kershaw in 2006). I think the Dodgers could do better, but now that they’ve shaped their team for years to come with the additions of Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett and Hanley Ramirez, perhaps the GM job there isn’t attractive as it would have seemed to be a couple of months ago.

Anyway, they’ve made their choice. But after such a huge outlay to upgrade the team, the organization will expect better on-field results next year. Even with an extension, Colletti’s contract is merely a drop in the bucket, and it shouldn’t buy him that much job security.

In  the meantime, fellow NL contenders should feel a bit better about things. Colletti can and will outspend everyone else and the Dodgers seem likely to remain contenders for years, but he’s probably not the guy to assemble any sort of juggernaut or dynasty.

Oh good, it’s “Yasiel Puig is a showboat” season

Getty Images
5 Comments

With the Los Angeles Dodgers punching their ticket to the World Series, Yasiel Puig is now going to be the subject of commentary by people who tend not to care about Yasiel Puig until it’s useful for them to write outraged columns or go on talk radio rants about baseball deportment.

We got a brief teaser of this last night when, after scoring the Dodgers’ ninth run on a Logan Forsythe double, TBS analyst Ron Darling criticized Puig for his “shenanigans” and “rubbing it in.” Never mind that his third base coach was waving him home and that, if he didn’t run hard, he was just as likely to be criticized for dogging it. In other news, baseball teams don’t stop trying in the fourth inning of baseball games, nor should they.

That was just an appetizer, though. The first real course of the “Puig is a problem” feast we’re likely to be served over the next week and a half comes from Phil Mushnick of the New York Post, who wrote it even before the Dodgers won Game 5 last night:

If you were raised to love baseball and to recognize the smart, winning kind from everything less, the Dodgers’ Yasiel Puig is insufferable. As the sport is diminished by professionals who disregard the basic act of running to first base as a matter of style, Puig, an incurable home-plate poser, often makes turning doubles and triples into singles appear effortless . . . In the postseason, Puig continues to behave as if he’s in the Home Run Derby. He even seems to relish his high-risk flamboyant foolishness despite frequent backfires.

This may as well be a fill in the blanks column from 2013 or 2014, when “Puig is a flashy showboater who costs his team more than he gives it” columns were all the rage. It ignores the fact that Puig, commonly dinged for being lazy, worked his butt off in 2017, particularly on defense, to the point where he has a strong case for a Gold Glove this year. It also ignores his .455/.538/.727 line in the NLDS sweep of the Diamondbacks and his .389/.500/.611 line against the Cubs in the NLCS. In the regular season he set career highs for games, homers, RBI, stolen bases and almost set a career high for walks despite having seventy fewer plate appearances than he did back in 2013 when he walked 67 times. He’s not the MVP candidate some thought he might be, but he’s a fantastic player who has been a key part of the Dodgers winning their first pennant in 29 years.

But the dings on Puig from the likes of Mushnick have rarely been about production. They’ve simply been about style and the manner in which he’s carried himself. To the extent those issues were legitimate points of criticism — particularly his tardiness, his relationships with his teammates and his at times questionable dedication — they have primarily been in-house concerns for the Dodgers, not the casual fan like Mushnick. On that score the Dodgers have dealt with Puig and, by all accounts, Puig has responded pretty well. An occasional lapse to be sure, but nothing which makes him a greater burden than a benefit. I mean, if he was, would be be batting cleanup in a pennant-clinching game?

So if the beef with Puig is not really about baseball, what could Phil Mushnick’s issue with him possible be?

I, for one, have no idea whatsoever.