Molly Knight rings in
I was actually going to write something in response to Bill Plaschke's column this morning about Matt Kemp and the prospects that he might end up moving in a deal. Good thing Molly Knight, a friend of ours from ESPN and a native and proud Angelino, was sufficiently outraged to do it first, freeing up the rest of my morning (ha ha). BK
Earlier today this newspaper ran a column from Bill Plaschke that all but blamed Matt Kemp for the Dodgers' free-fall into fourth place, and suggested that club officials will consider trading him for a veteran in the offseason. Why? Because the amiable Jeff Kent told some reporters that during this, the sunset of his career, some of the young players don't understand how to be professional or how to manufacture runs, and alluded to his belief that they don't know how to respect veterans like him.
By defending themselves in the media after Kent's barbed comments, rookies James Loney and Kemp unwittingly cast themselves as targets in the media's assault on youth. For reasons unknown to Dodger fans everywhere, certain veteran newspaper reporters snuggled up to the curmudgeonly Kent with boxes of Kleenex and abandoned puppies, and sharpened their pens to eviscerate the very young players whose performances have kept the team out of last place.
The Dodger youth movement hasn't gotten old; Luis Gonzalez (40), Nomar Garciaparra (34, brittle) and Kent (39) have.
At press time, Kemp was hitting .331 with 10 home runs, 40 runs batted in and 10 stolen bases in just 275 at-bats. Loney was hitting .335 with 14 HR, 63 RBI and a slugging percentage of .538 in 325 AB.
Despite having 137 more at-bats than Loney this year, Gonzalez has only hit one more home run and collected three more RBI. His batting average is 60 points lower, and his slugging percentage 107 points lower. Garciaparra has 106 more at-bats than Loney, and has seven fewer home runs, four fewer RBI and is slugging a paltry .371 percent.
Kemp and Loney earned a combined $770,000 this year, whereas the Dodgers pay Garciaparra and Gonzalez a combined $14.85 million.
While Kent's production on the field has remained above par, his attitude and mentoring skills have dipped further below it, insiders say. Some call it interesting that Kent would bemoan rookie ambivalence given the grief he gave his veteran teammates as a young player. In a New York Times article from 1992 that Riverside Press Enterprise writer Diamond Leung recently posted on his blog, we are reminded of Kent's halcyon days:
"Kent, the second baseman acquired in the trade for David Cone last month, effectively squared off with the rest of the Mets on Sunday night, refusing to submit to a clubhouse prank and wear the ridiculous outfit the players had substituted for his street clothes in his locker....
"It appeared today that it was going to be difficult for Kent to extricate himself from his isolated clubhouse position, and, in fact, the 24-year-old, who doesn't bother to disguise his temper or arrogance, appeared determined not to soften his stance....
"He was quoted in a Toronto Globe and Mail article last weekend as saying New York was worse than he had imagined, and was reported to have taken verbal swipes at Toronto third baseman Kelly Gruber, the man he had filled in for in 1992....
" 'He was not well liked in his own clubhouse,' a former official with the Blue Jays said of Kent's experience with Toronto's Class AA club. 'He's totally oblivious to what it takes to fit in with a team. And he had problems with the umpires within the first month of the season last year.' "
That Kent — who is widely known to be the last player to enter the clubhouse before each game and then sit at his corner locker reading car magazines — is given a platform to point fingers at those not promoting team chemistry is a dangerous situation when writers like Plaschke, who have more influence over personnel decisions than we realize, decide to take his word and run with it. Why should one of the most notoriously prickly teammates in modern baseball be given a chance to throw stones at glass rookies?
If the Dodgers field a lineup next year with Kent and not Kemp, the organization may be headed for another 20 years with nary a playoff series victory. A wise Dodger fan recently said the organization seems poised to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I'm all for it, so long as the baby is Kent.
-- Molly Knight, ESPN The Magazine
Subscribe to this Blog | What is RSS?
Package,
I wished I had listened to the show today. You were likely polite and respectful and not sucking up like Plasckhe.. Giving the KBros respect for having this forum for us Dodger fans and for taking some of our grief which sometimes gets misdirected at them. I know the KBros have heard this before, buy Props to both of you... and thanks again for the best blog ever...only one I spend my time on.... off to the game w/ my son. I'll finally get to enjoy a baseball game w/o having to question any moves or be frustrated that they lost, etc. Just going to watch and enjoy some tremendous talent do their thing.
Rob
Posted by: Rob | September 26, 2007 at 03:01 PM
I agreed with Plaschke's article when I read it, but I switched to Molly after her wonderful piece.
Posted by: Steve M. | September 26, 2007 at 03:02 PM
BlueLongerThanYou,
In a previous thread, you seemed to write as if you had some kind of insight into the clubhouse dynamic. Are you just speculating, or are you in a position to have some special access?
In either case, I have to disagree with the fact that the players have done a 'great' job in keeping a lid on the situation. They obviously have not, because we know about it. There is at least one player (probably more) on that club who is spilling his guts to outsiders, and he/they are perfectly aware of what they are doing.
Ultimately, though, it falls on the manager to be able to deflect media attention away from the players when it comes to bad press.
Posted by: Makoto Ueno | September 26, 2007 at 03:31 PM
Albert, I think you need to stop going by anecdotal evidence and take a look at the stats:
Kemp w/runners on - .365/.390/.540
Kemp w/RISP - .347/.366/.520
and don't get my started about RBI, especially when the kid only has 275 at-bats with which to accumulate such a stat.
Kemp is young - he just turned 23 a few days ago - and young hitters take a little longer to adjust to the breaking stuff. He has already improved dramatically from last year and will only get better in the future. If pitchers could just get him out anytime they wanted by throwing a curve he wouldn't have such gaudy stats.
Posted by: Nick | September 26, 2007 at 03:52 PM
Nick,
You make a great point. Of course Minnesota wants to move Santana and get some prospects for him. He's on the verge of free agency and Minnesota won't be able to afford him. So along come the Dodgers, who will give up 2 great prospects (incl. the highest rated lefty in the country) for an excellent pitcher. Santana comes to LA, pitches well for one season and then walks. What if then can't sign him? You don't think the rest of MLB won't be snickering?
The whole point of having a minor league system is to develop players for your team. We will need to fill holes here and there, but let's not get into a situation where we become the AAA affiliate of the rest of the MLB.
Posted by: Dodgers '81 | September 26, 2007 at 03:54 PM
Albert,
I am afraid to inform you that a HEALTHY NOMAR is NOMOHHHHHH......the guy is DOG GONE OLD AND far as the other two rookies, that will certainly be KEMP and LAROCHE along with ABREAU.....NOW, that's what you call an exciting line up my friend.
You want KEMP gone?? are U insane ???? That's ludicrous.... I can definitely see PLASCHKE has influenced YOU.
Posted by: JC Blue | September 26, 2007 at 04:08 PM
thank you so much molly for going to bat for Dodger Nation in your article. Plaschke, and Simers don't know what they're talking about and in no way whatsoever do they represent what the fans want. How can an ignoramus such as Plaschke turn a blind eye to the FACTS of Kemp's production and Loney's numbers. As soon as i saw Plaschke's article i knew it was garbage. It was evident at the trade deadline that Coletti was opting for the future instead of the NOW and this past week made that a reality. Somebody out there please start a petition to run Plaschke out of town because he has his own political agendas within the organization.
As for the rumor about Santana for Kemp and kershaw... if they trade one for the other as the centerpiece to a multi-player trade, let's do it!!! But both??!!! No way, Kemp still has to mature out there but he will eventually be a perennial all-star capable of hitting 40 homers a year. Kershaw on the other hand is one of the most heralded prospects in baseball and coming from other baseball minds... they said this kid's gonna be great, who knows maybe the next Sandy Koufax. Santana is t he best lefty in the game and will be for the next few years but the dodgers haven't had good luck in putting a lot of stock in one pitcher. i.e Kevin Brown, Jason Shcmidt, huge contract to Darren Dreifort.....
Posted by: jdo | September 26, 2007 at 04:17 PM
"Until Kemp learns to hit a decent curve, he will not be a clutch hitter. Kemp's potential brings back memories of Mike Marshall and Greg Brock."
Albert, Kemp hits curveballs fine -- witness his torrid streak after he got recalled from the minors. In fact, aside from Loney, he's the Dodgers' most dangerous hitter at the moment. Can he improve his plate discipline? Sure... but he's only 23 and doesn't even have a full MLB season under his belt. Even at 23, he's already out-performing Marshall and Brock. In fact, he's projecting to be more of a Dave Winfield/Raul Mondesi/Dave Parker type.... a big man with tremendous speed and power with a gun of an arm who can also hit for a decent average. Plus, for the next several years he's dirt-cheap, salary-wise. I'll take that any day over Kent, Gonzales, Nomar, Pierre, or anyone not named Vlad, A-Rod, or Miggy Cabrera.
20 years without a world series? Embarrassing, but that's what happens when you continually trade away young talent (Konerko, Pedro Martinez, etc) for old expensive washed up players.
Posted by: Telemachos | September 26, 2007 at 04:25 PM
What really worries me is that Plaschke has been Lasorda's lap dog for years and now that Lasorda is happy again--he thinks the Dodgers actually listen to him when he flaps his mouth--Plaschke is happy to roll over and play dead for Colletti. So I wonder whether Ned, who seems to prize getting along well even with media prostitutes like Plaschke, was floating a trial ballooon.
Well, Ned, if you were, here's the skinny: you may be thinking of trading Matt Kemp because he managed to upset some veterans upset that they no longer have the talent they once had and a racist redneck like Jeff Kent, whom you may not remember lying during your Giant years about how he broke his wrist and may not have noticed has been voted worst teammate by a Sports Illustrated poll. Which means that, if you trade him, you are an even bigger moron than butt boy Plaschke. Got it?
Posted by: Michael Green | September 26, 2007 at 04:26 PM
Albert,
Before you go trading Matt Kemp anyone, look further into his stats. He's had 275 ABs this year, and as many of us have written, they were rarely in consecutive games, so consistency was a problem. But, if you double those ABs to 550, that's 80 RBIs--not bad for a 23-year old who is obviously got some adjusting to do. He only figures to improve.
Please, no more Pedro for DeShields or Konerko for Jeff Shaw deals.
Posted by: Chunkdog32 | September 26, 2007 at 04:51 PM
Rob
Hope you and your son have a great time. That's what its all about you know.
Posted by: Package | September 26, 2007 at 05:05 PM
Is Albert Plaschke?
Martin leading off? Nomar still in the everyday lineup? We know not to consider his opinions with those suggestions. Hey Albert, have you considered how many at bats Kemp has had? He does struggle with the curve ball, but his strikeout rate has gradually decreased with every at bat. And when he doesn't hit the curve solidly, it's a slow, soft ground ball, which Kemp, with his speed, runs out for a single. And I don't quite understand Kent when he says the younger guys don't have urgency. EVERY single ground ball I have seen Kemp hit, he has ran his a** off to try to beat out the throw.
How could anyone even consider Plaschke's columns sensible anymore? He defended Grady Little in his previous article!
The only players that I would consider trading Kemp for are players who are signed for at least 2 years and is a legit SUPERSTAR. Miguel Cabrera, Chase Utley, Hanely Rameriz are some names that come to mind.
Posted by: TOM | September 26, 2007 at 05:41 PM
Way to go Molly. Nuff said.
On the touted Kemp trade, I wrote this in a prior thread....
"I really worry about the touted trade of Kemp and Kershaw for Santana. Colletti appears to favor pitching, and this was the idea behind signing Schmidt-Wolf last offseason. It went wrong because of injuries, perhaps forseeable, but if we go there again and Santana goes down (and/or any of Schmidt, Penny Lowe or Wolf, if resigned) we'll be where we were again this season, and possibly watching Kemp develop the maturity and poise he's lacking playing for the Twins."
... and that was before I saw the good people here point out that Santana's only signed one more year. That makes it a *much* worse deal than even before.
I think we should only be even thinking about trading these 'prospects' (and I still have an issue with calling them that, all but LaRoche, Kershaw, Hu and Young, perhaps Abreu too, can be arguably considered beyond that now) for proven players who will sign for 3+ years.
I also think that if people stay healthy we already have a good enough rotation, and that if we were to end up trading one or two of the youth movement, then it should be for a proven bat (for several years) rather than for pitching.
Pitchers are notoriously risky health-wise (Dreifort, Brown (?my memory is hazy?), Gagne, Brazaban, even Penny went down for the rest of the season, right after the Lo Duca trade). With position players I think you likely know more about their health because they play more often (or don't, Drew, Nomar) though freak accidents can always happen.
Posted by: CleoMG | September 26, 2007 at 05:48 PM
Albert,
I won't argue that Greg Brock was a bust, but you're completely off base concerning Mike Marshall. Marshall's failure to reach his potential was due to one thing and one thing only, a BACK INJURY. I'm not sure I have the year correct, but I believe that he hurt his back in 1986. But what I do remember clearly, is that he was leading the league in homeruns and RBI when he got hurt in July. I also remember that when he returned later in the season, he went 3 for 50, and lost any semblance of the power he once had. He was never the same player after that injury, and completely lost his power. But in the season prior to the injury, he finished very strongly, and as I noted, picked it up the following season before the injury. In Marshall's case, any comparision with Kemp is simply not apt. Injuries are simply unpredictable, and can happen to anyone.
So Kemp only has 40 RBI. Well what do you expect from a guy that's only had 275 AB's?
As for Matt Kemp being fooled by breaking balls. Yes, it happens. But if you were a little more observant, you would notice that it happens with less frequency than in the past. And as Kemp gains more playing time and experience, it's likely to happen even less often. And let me add the following: Even Albert Pujols and other star hitters are occasionally made to look silly.
Matt Kemp is far from being a polished player, but keep in mind, prior to last year, the highest classification he played in was class A. You're watching a player who's refining his game at the MLB level in front of innumerable fans watching both on TV and live at the ballpark, rather than doing so with lots less scrutiny at the minor league level.
Finally, exactly what makes you think there will ever be a "healthy Nomar". Martin leading off? I can see him batting second, but leadoff? And by the way, what happens as time moves on, and catching everyday takes its toll on his speed?
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | September 26, 2007 at 05:49 PM
Having gone to last night's game, I vowed not to attend another game this season. I have the tickets but would probably find chinese water torture less frustrating. Don't get me wrong, Delwyn Young, Hu + Loney's home runs, chanting "HU," and booing Grady offered some entertainment.
Pierre allowing a runner to tag up from 1st base
The emergence of Hernandez from the bullpen down by 1 run
Donnelly sending Kent home on a popup in shallow center w/ 0 outs
As for cocky and arrogant athletes, i'm sure AK+BK could tell you it's 1000% more prevalent in the NBA. The same goes for the NFL. As long as it's not affecting their play/effort on the field , I could care less. Anyone who thinks success doesn't affect these guys egos needs to get real. It's a part of professional sports. Humility is rare.
Posted by: bt1 | September 26, 2007 at 06:18 PM
Molly needs to get her facts straight.
Kent goes straight to his locker to read motorcycle magazines, not car mags.
Shame on you, Molly. :)
Posted by: Suffering Bruin | September 26, 2007 at 06:24 PM
Well said, bt1!!!!!!! If Plaschke and Simers want more humility, tell 'em to start covering the NHL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In Alberta!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: DodgerBlueBalls | September 26, 2007 at 06:55 PM
Regarding the Kemp/Kershaw for Santana rumor. Let's hope that's all it is, a rumor.
No way I would make that deal. No doubt the Dodgers could use some more pitching (what team doesn't?). But what the Dodgers need most is power and a consistent and relentless offense that applies pressure to the opposition, and supports its own pitching. So why would I trade a prime pitching prospect AND a legitimate power source for a very good pitcher (regardless of whether or not he walks after a year)? I'm willing to take my chances with Kemp and Kershaw, and get my pitching from within (McDonald, Elbert, Miller, etc.).
The Dodgers need to bite the bullet, and make a commitment, once and for all, to what appears to be a wealth of solid young talent. They play in a division where the Rockies and Diamondbacks have already made that commitment, and it now appears that the Giants are also leaning in that direction. If the Dodgers don't make that commitment, they may find themselves aptly referred to as the AARP Dodgers.
I've seen enough of the Dodgers kids to be willing to gamble with an infield of Loney, Abreu, Furcal, and LaRoche, and an outfield of Young, Kemp and Ethier. As regards Hu, I would like to see him gain experience next year as the replacement for Martinez, and ultimately replace Furcal no later than 2009. Also, as I've mentioned before, if Furcal could be traded in the final year of his contract for significant value, I would not be averse to seeing Hu at short in 2008.
Again, all of the above would constitute a gamble. But maybe, that's what's necessary to establish a long term, championship caliber team.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | September 26, 2007 at 07:02 PM
I can't believe the garbage that's coming out of the L.A. Times, both Bill Plashcke who's an idiot and TJ Simers have neglected to point out who's really at fault for the Dodgers demise this season GRADY LITTLE. And there's Ned Colleti saying that he had it tough this season. Are you kidding???? Last night for example why would bring in Roberto Hernandez, and Mark Hendrickson to blow the game? What faith do you have in these two knuckle heads that have nothing left? I just don't understand the logic in this thinking and he has done this all season long. Why not write about the incompetent coach that the Dodgers have. How can you possibly bring this coach next season? Ned is saying he feels our frustration, no you don't Ned (ex-giant), Bad signings after bad signings and the continous support of deadbeat manager is not feeling our frustration. Can someone please tell Bill Plaschke to get his head out of Ned Colleti's a** and write something worth reading. Oh and Ned let me give you some advice
FIRE CHICKEN LITTLE!!!!!!!
FIRE CHICKEN LITTLE!!!!!!!
FIRE CHICKEN LITTLE!!!!!!!
FIRE CHICKEN LITTLE!!!!!!!
FIRE CHICKEN LITTLE!!!!!!!
FIRE CHICKEN LITTLE!!!!!!!
FIRE CHICKEN LITTLE!!!!!!!
Posted by: dcerros | September 26, 2007 at 07:13 PM
BK and AK
Hope you guys end up the primary writers for LA TIMES and they get rid of the veteran writers TJ and BP
Thanks putting team in there place Molly
Posted by: PK-IN-THE-MESA | September 26, 2007 at 10:30 PM
Brooklyn Dodger,
Well said. Couldn't have said it better myself.
Now if we could get PLAY THE KIDS tattooed backwards on Ned Colletti's and Frank McCourt's fore-heads so they'd have to see it every morning while they shaved we might have a chance the message will sink in.
Posted by: Dodgers '81 | September 26, 2007 at 11:18 PM
I've been a Dodger fan for more years than I care to admit to being old and, as I see it, the problems they're having go far beyond what Kent said or didn't say or what Little did or didn't do - that's third grade stuff. The teams that have been fielded wearing Dodger blue since the 1988 team have no spirit, no fight, no spunk. They know how to play their respective positions but they don't know how to cover their teammates, they don't work together to manufacture runs, nobody seems willing to sacrifice an at bat to advance a runner or drive in a run. Everybody (with a few exceptions) is out for himself and not for the team. Until these guys (or any guy wearing the uniform) can put the team first and themselves second, they don't stand a snowball's chance in he-- of ever winning the World Series much less a division title. And until management can see beyond AAA stats and see potential and desire to be part of a team, we won't ever have any player above the caliber of another Mike Marshall or Greg Brock.
Posted by: Barb Grissom | September 27, 2007 at 07:22 AM
Superbly written and needed to be said. I hope the proper people take note and make the RIGHT moves in the offseason. Thanks Molly!
Posted by: Reed | September 27, 2007 at 08:58 AM
What the Dodgers need to do is jettison all of the over the hill veteran curmudgeons they have (Garciaparra, Kent, Gonzalez), and replace them with either players in their prime or kids with a future. Matt Kemp is a great talent who will only get better. Jeff Kent is over the hill, and will only get worse next year. Keeping Kent and trading Kemp is foolish and stupid (much like the average article from Simers and Plaschke).
If the desire is to put a team on the field with a chance to win next year, and for the long term, then the promising kids on the Dodgers need veteran leadership who they can respect, and who respects them. All Matt Kemp needs is some mentorship, time, and respect which he will not get from the grumpy old men on the current Dodgers team. The Dodgers should get rid of Kent, Garciaparra, and Gonzalez and make a strong play at signing A-Rod if he opts out. Kemp, Loney, Ethier, Martin, Bills, and Brox should be kept for the long-term.
Posted by: Santa Rosa Dodger | September 27, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Makoto:
The honest answer to your question is yes. I am surprised that the media missed certain "clubhouse" incidents -- good and bad -- and that is why I commended the players for keeping a lid on things. It's like "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas." Folks can say what they want about Kent; even he did not give specifics. If the players aren't talking, it's not my place to do so (please don't ask). My hope is that more facts will surface in the offseason to give us all a clearer picture of what went wrong this season.
Posted by: BlueLongerThanYou | September 27, 2007 at 11:53 AM