Even Matt Kemp Can’t Save This Mess
June 9, 2011 at 9:15 pm | Posted in Clayton Kershaw, Matt Kemp | 61 Comments
With the Dodgers up 4-0 five innings into the game, I started thinking about what I might want to write about tonight. Initially, this post was going to be titled “Matt Kemp Is A Shiny Golden God”, as he’d homered and tripled to drive in three of the four runs. (He’d later add a double, too.) I didn’t want to shortchange Clayton Kershaw, however, who’d allowed just two singles in five shutout innings.
Good thing I didn’t actually start writing that post, because the wheels fell off in a hurry. Kershaw ran into trouble in the sixth inning, allowing three runs to come in on three hits and a walk, but he helped get them back by leading off the seventh with a hit, one of his two on the day. The Dodgers would get those three back on four hits and some kind Colorado defense, restoring the four run lead headed into the bottom of the seventh.
That frame – bottom seven – ended up being one of the uglier ones we’ve seen in years. I’ve seen some arguments that Kershaw should have been lifted to start the inning after his struggles in the sixth, but I can’t really fault Don Mattingly here. His pitch count was low, he’d retired the last two in the sixth, and he’s Clayton Kershaw with a four-run lead. I get it. But the first two batters singled, the third walked, and Kershaw left with the bases loaded and no outs. Scott Elbert and Mike MacDougal combined to retire one of the next six batters, and after a half-inning that lasted over 40 minutes, the Rockies had put up five runs to take the lead. Poor Elbert; though he didn’t get the job done, he allowed a single and a walk against a strikeout in his three batters, and he gets pinned with the loss.
(I’d like to take this opportunity to once again point out how silly ERA can be. Kershaw left the bases loaded, and while starting that mess is definitely on him, once he left the game he had absolutely no control over whether those runners score. If Elbert wiggles out of that mess, Kershaw allows three earned runs, which doesn’t look so bad. Elbert (and MacDougal) couldn’t, and so Kershaw’s line looks like a disaster. MacDougal, by the way, faced three batters without retiring a single one. He wasn’t charged with any earned runs. Remember that when someone looks at MacDougal’s 2.14 ERA and tries to tell you he’s any good. Hooray, ERA!)
Though the Dodgers were only down by one run with six outs remaining in the Coors Field funhouse, the game was all but over at that point. (It didn’t help that Josh Lindblom allowed another run to cross in the eighth.) The Dodgers went down meekly in the eighth, and Kemp (needing a single for the cycle) and Rod Barajas failed to cash in on Andre Ethier‘s one-out double in the ninth.
Oh, and in what’s becoming a regular feature here… Kemp & Ethier, 6-9. Kershaw, 2-3. Everyone else, 4-26.
61 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a Reply
How Many McCourt Sins?
MSTI on the web
MSTI Library
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
I am going to keep on saying this for the rest of the season, Juan Uribe is Ned’s worst signing. Worse than Slap, worse than Valentin, worse than Anderson. Clown can’t move, is 50 lbs overweight and looks like he spends most of his time eating and striking out. Ned can pick ‘em.
Thing is, combining him with Frank is perfect symmetry. Both don’t get it and both seem to believe that they are doing a good job. I have to think that neither can read.
Comment by grabarkewitz— June 9, 2011 #
Even worse than Schmidt?
Comment by MfA— June 9, 2011 #
And Jones?
Comment by Reno Dakota— June 9, 2011 #
Considering it’s for less years, less money, and for a player with more upside (albeit it limited), I don’t see any way that Uribe can be a worse signing than Pierre. They’re both horrid, but I don’t see Uribe as worse. They’re simply two of the more Colletian signings of his tenure.
Comment by Gregory Zakwin— June 9, 2011 #
What? Pierre scored 96 runs and stole 68 bases last year. He hit very close to .300 with the Dodgers. And, unlike Uribe, Pierre plays everyday. Sure, he was overpaid, but to say he is worse than Uribe is silly.
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
Let’s look at it objectively: Both Juans are career 85 OPS+ below average hitters. Pierre gets on base a little more, Uribe hits for a little more power. Neither is a good hitter. Pierre plays generally terrible defense, Uribe plays generally good defense. Uribe plays every day when healthy, and has averaged 134 games per season over the last 7 years. Pierre for a long time had the longest active games played streak in the majors, and has averaged 153 games per year over the last 7 years. Pierre steals more bases every year than Uribe has in his whole career. To sum up:
Hitting for average: Edge Pierre
Hitting for power: Edge Uribe
Overall hitting: Edge opposing pitcher
Baserunning: Edge Pierre (by a lot)
Defense: Edge Uribe (by a lot)
Conclusion: Fuck you, Ned
Comment by Dave Pomerantz— June 10, 2011 #
Don’t forget that Pierre was paid more than double what Uribe was, too.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— June 10, 2011 #
D’oh. I meant to include “ridiculousness of contract” as one of my summing up points. I also forgot to mention that a middle infielder who can’t hit is much more acceptable than a corner outfielder who can’t hit – unless that middle infielder is in a lineup with a bunch of other dudes who also can’t hit.
Comment by Dave Pomerantz— June 10, 2011 #
Conclusion, ROFL
Pierre is indeed worse, Uribe can play 3 important positions when we have 2 old geezers and himself at them now.
Comment by DodgersKings323— June 10, 2011 #
Aye, it will be a happy day in Mudville when Frank and Ned step down. That will be the moment Dodgers’ fortune turns (unless worse trolls happen to take over). This Fox/McCourt nightmare will end, someday, hopefully soon. In the meantime, keep boycotting the Ravine. Let’s pry these barnacles off!
Comment by Your 2011 McTurnips— June 10, 2011 #
I guess it’s what you prefer. When Pierre was playing CF his defensive WAR was 4th in the league – before he came to Los Angeles it was anyway. Last year it was 2nd in the AL. He gets on base better than Uribe could ever hope to, and puts pressure on opposing pitchers with his speed. Uribe gets on at a .299 rate and is a hammie waiting to happen. Pierre scores runs. Uribe has the runs. Pierre hits for average., a lot of singles stretched to doubles with a steal of second. Uribe takes the blind squirrel approach at the plate and finds a nut every now and then. In his first three years with the Dodgers, PIerre made $7.5, 8 and 10 million. Uribe makes $5, 8 and 7M in his first three years. (Cot’s) Now, my degree is not in math, but, that doesn’t sound like more than double to me.
I’ll take the speed, OBP and avg. and reliability that Pierre brings. But that’s just me.
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
Pierre got $44m, Uribe got $21m. Just because so much of Pierre’s contract was backloaded and deferred doesn’t mean it’s not still getting paid.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— June 10, 2011 #
Sure, Slap made more money over the term of his contract, but he didn’t drag the team like Uribe has. Yes, Slap couldn’t play defense, but the defense I am seeing from Uribe isn’t much better. He has no range, he can’t bend over for the odd ground ball and offensively he is a disaster. Slap, for all of his fault and they were numerous, was in shape, could come up with the odd decent game and his defensive shortcomings were not as prevalent as Uribe’s. You know it is sad when Aaron Miles appears to have more range than Uribe and Miles plays like he is wearing cement shoes.
Comment by grabarkewitz— June 10, 2011 #
I actually have to disagree with you on that one, Torgy. Uribe doesn’t look good doing it, but I have been pleasantly surprised by his defense.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— June 10, 2011 #
Before last night, I might’ve agreed with you, Mike, but there were three balls hit his way in the seventh that he didn’t get near. I know we complained about Jeff Kent’s lack of range, but he could make up for with his stick. Uribe’s lack of range is more agonizing because I don’t think he can hit anymore. He has to be 50 lbs overweight, he is slow and aside from his arm, his defense seems to be downtrending since last season.
Comment by grabarkewitz— June 10, 2011 #
Uribe plays good defense and Pierre had a bad stolen base % which counter acts the whole stolen base. Uribe plays infield so less offense would be required then a lf.
Comment by ramo— June 10, 2011 #
Yes, we could stand less offense from second base, but with the way this team is built we don’t have enough offense on the infield. Loney is a disaster, Blake is not exactly going to make anyone forget ARod or Longoria, Gordon is a singles machine and when we sit Carroll, our offense is pretty weak on the infield. Uribe was supposed to provide some offense, but all I see out of him is weak pop-ups, strikeouts and precious little else. Then again, Ned always signs a guy one year too late.
Comment by grabarkewitz— June 10, 2011 #
Uribe plays several positions but he doesn’t play them that well. Not from what I have seen. Pierre stole 68 last year and was successful 79% of the time. That is not bad. The only year he played full time for us he scored 96, stole 64 and was successful in 81% of his attempts.
I think he gets a bad rap because Ned overpaid him.
“Uribe plays infield so less offense would be required then a lf.”
We didn’t get Uribe and pay him $21 million for his defense at second base.
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
All I can get from these posts is that Ned gas made a lot of ugly signings.
Comment by @BrocNessMonster— June 10, 2011 #
Yeah. Arguing about the relative merits of Uribe and Pierre is fundamentally arguing about degrees of suckitude. Neither should have ever been on the team, which means there should never have been a reason for this discussion.
Comment by SC Dodger— June 10, 2011 #
Andruw Jones was the all time worst. First clue that he was a knucklehead shoulda been that he didn’t know how to spell his own name.
Comment by donald trump— June 10, 2011 #
I was watching, thinking that Kemp hitting for the cycle would make up for this disastrous display of pitching. But he struck out, and I turned on “The Office.”
Comment by Jeff— June 9, 2011 #
Dee Gordon had 2 of the “Others” catagory of hits. It was a real shitty outing by the bullpen, inconsistencies kill.
Comment by @eBleedsBlue— June 9, 2011 #
This season is crazy. Matt Kemp is having the kind of year that should be making all of us Dodger fans go absolutely crazy. Yet there is hardly any excitement around this team, if any at all.
I’m not sure where I was going with this comment, but this is a sad state of affairs. Very sad. I hope things turn around soon.
Comment by Stephen Caver— June 9, 2011 #
Enter Abortmccourt blog………..where is that guy when you need him?
Comment by DodgersKings323— June 10, 2011 #
Suffered through this one in person and while the bullpen imploded, they were unwiling or unable to throw strikes, Kershaw deserves plenty of blame. In the 7th, with a 7-3 lead he helped create, he allowed hits to Blackman and Nelson and then walked EY Jr. He did get a bad break on Nelsons ball that hit him and deflected away from anyone with a glove. Still he’s got to get those punch and judy hitters out.
The key later in the inning was Elbert with a 7-4 lead walking Helton. The veteran never expands the zone and you must throw him strikes. That walk was a killer and the rest was a nightmare courtesy of Mac Dougal. By the way, I couldn’t figure out why Barajas hit for Uribe with two out in 9th. Turns out Barajas was 6-9 vs Street. I don’t care. No way I hit Barajas there. Now he’s 6-10.
I don’t expect anything better tomorrow night. Billingsley has never seemed terribly interested in pitching in Coors Field.
On a positive note, great to see Kemp smash the ball and really fun watching Gordon run. But tonight was an extremely winnable game and now I fear a long, ugly weekend here in Denver.
Comment by Denver Dodger— June 9, 2011 #
I couldn’t believe that the Rockies pitched to Kemp in the 9th. Maybe they thought it would look bad if they deprived him the chance for the cycle, but still, if he ended up changing the game, they would have gotten a soul crushing “told ya so” from Vinny.
-
Kershaw’s night was really weird. Through the first three or four innings, he threw more balls than strikes, and he probably got a first pitch strike on less than a third of the batters, yet he was doing great. Then, in the sixth, he was commanding his slider and throwing strikes, but nothing was working. I thought the sixth was more due to good hitting by the Rockies and bad luck than it was Kershaw’s fault. The second single looked like it could have been a double play ball if it wasn’t deflected by Kershaw. Helton had one of the best at bats I’ve ever seen. He is one of the only batters who seems to consistently be able to lay off Kershaw’s slider, and Kershaw was around the plate the whole time, so he pretty much earned that walk. Tulowitzki then doubled off a pitch in the low inside corner, so it’s not like Kershaw left that one over the plate. The next batter hit a grounder and Loney might have had a play at the plate if he hadn’t dropped it. Like I said, bad luck and good hitting by the Rockies. So, I really wanted him back out in the seventh, because it seemed like he was pitching well, but surely the Rockies wouldn’t put together another set of great/lucky at bats. As it turns out, they didn’t, Kershaw just didn’t pitch well.
-
Is anyone else concerned about how much trouble Kershaw has had in the sixth and seventh innings this season? His pitches per inning and total pitches are way down from last year, yet he’s not going as deep as he should be because of late inning struggles. Does he need to do more conditioning work for endurance? Or is it just the fact that he’s 23?
Comment by Bip— June 10, 2011 #
Kershaw looks like a 6 inning pitcher to me. Maybe when he gets older he will have better command. All he has to do to go 7 is throw strikes. 98 pitches, 54 strikes. Not good.
Last night the guys behind Kemp (not counting Kershaw) were a combined 1 for 16. Why does any team continue to pitch to Kemp? If I am managing against the Dodgers, I walk the gorilla and pitch to the chimps. Even if you walk Kemp four times a game, without his bat, the Dodgers score 1 run per game.
Last place. Or…. tied for 4th?
The best move the Dodgers could make right now is to fire Frank.
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
Could the fact that navarro was catching be part of the problem? I feel with the starters, they’ve grown fairly comfortable with Barajas at this point, which I thought was a major adjustment for guys like Kershaw, Bills and even Broxton because Martin had been there for so long. I really don’t know how much an impact a catcher can have on a starter, but I remember back in the days of the Oakland Bash Brothers, Bob Welch wouldn’t let anyone catch him except for one guy because that’s who he was comfortable with.
All that said, maybe, it’s just pitching in Colorado. The Rocky Mountain High altitude bothers some guys more than others.
Comment by Vegas Blue— June 10, 2011 #
That’s the thing though, they started hitting him when he started throwing strikes. He couldn’t throw strikes for the first 5 shutout innings.
Comment by Bip— June 10, 2011 #
I’m getting sick to my stomach watching these games cuz I’m such a huge fan. kemp is having an MVP year but he can’t carry the load himself. I guess I spoke to soon when I told my friend the game was over when we were up 4-0 with one of the best NL pitchers on the mound. we jus give games away, how many runs scored on bases loaded walks? 2? 3? at this rate it seems like we make a Lil push but still can’t even get to 500. something needs to change… ( oh and I was
sure kemp was getting his cycle but I guess I jinxed that to cuz I had also told my buddy there was no way he wouldn’t ). but it is the 2011 dodgers
Comment by scullyfan24— June 10, 2011 #
Let’s not blame Kershaw here. He scored twice which probably contributed to his early departure, but his much improved bat this year has made him that much more valuable. He’ll get more endurance with time. The bullpen just gave this game away.
And he’s still getting better. His oppOPS has been decreasing every year since he entered the majors.
Comment by Tony M. Fernández— June 10, 2011 #
Running the bases twice on a 60 degree evening should not take anything away from a 23 year old’s stamina.
Comment by SamAdams— June 10, 2011 #
It should when you’re already dealing with the thin air.
Comment by Tony M. Fernández— June 10, 2011 #
I’ve been there in the thin air, and yeah it does wear you out waayyy quicker than you think, interesting thought.
Comment by Jon#7#22— June 10, 2011 #
Let’s not make it like they were playing baseball on top of Everest………
Comment by DodgersKings323— June 10, 2011 #
Might he have been helped coming in the day before (as is usual for the starter in the upcoming series)? This might be the city where it’s most important to get acclimated. I realize one day might not be truly enough but it seems it would be better than none.
Comment by PJ— June 10, 2011 #
I wonder why Kershaw didn’t leave the day before, as is customary in MLB for the next game’s starting pitcher. Maybe the Frank can’t afford the extra flight.
Comment by The Dude Abides— June 10, 2011 #
I’m in the camp that thought Kershaw should’ve been gone after the 6th. He threw a ton of pitches that inning, and I was very surprised to see him leading off the top of the 7th, with only a 1 run lead. Of course, he’s probably a better hitter than any of the bench options, so maybe that part was OK. But then the Dodgers rallied, and Kershaw had to run the bases and then sit for quite a while, getting cold. I understand that his pitch count was low and he’s Clayton freakin Kershaw with a 4 run lead, but I thought it was… I don’t want to say a bad decision, just not the decision I would’ve made if I was manager.
Comment by Dave Pomerantz— June 10, 2011 #
Can’t fault Mattingly for leaving Kershaw in. His pitch count was low and he is our “ace”. What killed us in that fateful seventh inning was four frigging walks. (Officially, three but the hit batsman was on ball four.) Coors Field never even came into play. It was just lousy pitching. I love MacDougal’s and Elbert’s stuff, if they could just throw strikes.
Comment by SamAdams— June 10, 2011 #
Pitch counts are fine for managing a pitcher workload but they shouldn’t be used to leave an ineffective pitcher in the game. I fault Mattingly for leaving Kershaw in to start the seventh. Just like he did in Cincinnati when Kershaw was left in to start an inning after struggling, the move backfired as Kershaw immediately loaded the basese with no one out. Forget the pitch counts. Take the pitcher out when he is becoming ineffective.
Comment by Dave K.— June 10, 2011 #
Boycott continues…………Caught glimpse of a game on TV the other day only because it was on ESPN. Can someone provide me with an e-mail of McCourt, Ned or the MLB guy just so I can complain. Thanks.
Comment by Mark— June 10, 2011 #
Mike, not to beat it into the ground, but, Pierre’s contract was $44 million over 5 years – 8.8 per year. Uribe’s contract is $21 million over 3 years – 7 per year. That just isn’t twice as much. Both are overpaid. Dave’s conclusion sums it up nicely.
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
???? $44 Million…..$21 Million…..sounds like more than double to me.
Comment by tripp— June 10, 2011 #
Really tripp? 8.8 is double 7. Man, where did you go to school?
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
The overall $ figure, not the yearly amount. Pierre’s deal doesn’t look better just because we got stuck with him for 2 extra years.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— June 10, 2011 #
C’mon MIke. You and tripp sound like you belong in Congress.
George Bush spent over 3 trillion dollars on national defense. Last year Obama spent 685 billion. According to the trippian transitive law of equality, Bush spent 3000 times (I think) more on National Defense than did Obama.
Let’s be fair here. Pierre’s contract is 8.8M per year. Uribe’s contract is 7M per year.
I said both were overpaid. I don’t like the fact that we are paying the White Sox starting LFer more than they are any more than you do. That’s why f Ned sounded good to me. But, Pierre does not make twice what Uribe does. The Giants paid $3.25 (what he is worth by the way) so Uribe made 27.5 over the a 5 year period – still not less than half of 44.
And for the record, I would take Pierre in left field and IDJ at second base starting today. We are already paying Pierre, Ely and Link are not helping a bit so what difference would it make other than saving Frankie NoNickles a few bucks.? No matter how you stack it, this team is in trouble.
The best move we could make now is to DFA Frank McCourt.
OK, I’m done.
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
Rory, do you agree that 44 is more than double 21? Answer the question don’t change it. So is it double or not???
Per season, yes they are similiar and both are looking like pretty bad contracts right now for at best average players.
Comment by Jon#7#22— June 10, 2011 #
I was done Jon.
But since you asked, yes, I will agree that 44 is more than double 21. Happy?
Now answer me this, 5 is more than 3 – right? And, 27.5 is more than half of 44 – right?
I hope we can all agree that the Dodgers should be able to do better than both Pierre and Uribe.
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
Rory, I think the truth is somewhere between Mike and you… No, Pierre didn’t get twice the annual salary Uribe did, but he DID get 2 more bad years, and more than double the total money… You gotta take that into account. But again, the conclusion is FUCK YOU, NED.
Comment by Dave Pomerantz— June 10, 2011 #
OK. Agreed. Especially the last part.
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
You’re taking “making more” literally, as a year to year thing. He made more money than Juan Uribe will make on his current deal. Albeit over two more years, but the net is still more. I see your point tho. But yeah, fuck Ned, fuck Frank and fuck Juan Pierre.
Comment by Tripp— June 10, 2011 #
I’ll go along with Frank and Ned. Juan Pierre didn’t do anything. He gets paid more money than he is worth, but that isn’t his fault. Frank and Ned f’d up the Dodgers and it IS their fault.
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
I liked the last sentiment the best. It is truly sad that Frank is now begging churches to cover his back. I don’t doubt he made a deal with them to give them free tickets or some such to have them send a missive to Bud to give Frank a second chance. My query is, how many chances does this clown get? He didn’t have the money to buy the team in the first place and Fox finagled the deal to their liking and Bud let Frank go into the deal with zero money. That looks like two chances, already.
This guy is a pariah and he is reason one that this team is going from promising to the bottom of heap in record time. I pray that Judge Gordon stays the course because the TV deal is a steal for Fox and lessens the value of this team. If it goes to 50/50, Bud has all the ammunition to quash the TV deal and make Frank bankrupt in less than thirty days. The only sad part is that Jamie McCourt could be our savior. That just isn’t right because she is an equal partner in the lowered value of our team.
Comment by grabarkewitz— June 10, 2011 #
What an awful season if it causes people to turn on each other over what “double” means and Pierre/Uribe……….
Comment by DodgersKings323— June 10, 2011 #
WHAT THE FUCK!?!?!?! Has Mattingly lost his mind?!?! MATT KEMP NOT IN THE STARTING LINEUP??? HOW FUCKING STUPID!
Comment by tripp— June 10, 2011 #
Ok….tightness in left hamstring….I take back what I said about Mattingly…Mostly
Comment by tripp— June 10, 2011 #
“tightness in left hamstring”
Must be from carrying the team.
Comment by Rory— June 10, 2011 #
But the team is so full of lightweights, it’s hard to imagine that could cause an injury.
Comment by Bip— June 11, 2011 #
Good one Bip.
Comment by Rory— June 11, 2011 #
[...] of a running joke, as you can see by the large gap between his ERA and his FIP. Just as an example, here’s part of a recap of a randomly selected game from June, though know that this could (and did) apply to a whole lot of MacDougal appearances: I’d like to [...]
Pingback by MSTI’s 2011 in Review: Relievers, Part 3 « Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— November 13, 2011 #