Kuzul

Replacing the legendary Joe Torre was going to be an arduous task for the leaders of the Yankees organization before they chose to interview one of the most famous and beloved players in their franchise’s history.

By selecting Joe Girardi over Don Mattingly (along with the unheralded Tony Pena), the Yankees made a decision that would have ramifications across the entire landscape of the sport.

With Don Mattingly making his first appearance in the Bronx since being passed over for the job prior to the 2008 season, his Los Angeles Dodgers, although continuing to scuffle in the NL West, will take center stage for the next two nights in New York.

Considering New York’s success under Girardi, the current state of the Dodgers and how each former Yankee player has grown in their respective jobs, the Yankees, led by the recommendation of general manager Brian Cashman, made the right decision when choosing Girardi.

While Girardi‘s experience as the manager of the 2006 Florida Marlins ultimately gave him the leg up in the managerial competition, it’s not hard to imagine more going into the decision, including the analytical and prepared nature Girardi brings to the managerial seat, something that was probably quite evident during his interview with the Yankee brass.

In the five-plus seasons since taking the helm, Girardi has guided the Yankees to the postseason four times, including three trips to the American League Championship Series and a World Series title in 2009.

Out west, Mattingly hasn’t had close to the same success, but has also been saddled with a flawed roster.

For years, baseball writers and analysts have tried to quantify the differences between good, great and average skippers, but it’s a very, very hard task. Obviously, Tony La Russa and Bobby Cox were great managers, but separating the good from average is difficult.

Factoring in the roster, managing in New York, expectations from the jump and his cultural icon status with the Yankees fan base, New York’s path would have likely been far less successful under Mattingly than it has been under Girardi.

Outside of the analytical perception that Girardi brings to the table, his willingness to adjust after a rigid and difficult opening season made him the manager he is today.

The 2008 Yankees weren’t a very talented team, especially in the pitching department. Mattingly, Girardi or Torre would have likely missed the postseason, but it was Girardi who actually sat in the dugout for the distinction.

While many realized the pitching issues at the time, Girardi‘s rigid and stern nature seemed to wear on the clubhouse, including the young, enigmatic Robinson Cano.

After the season, Girardi adapted, becoming more open with the media and his players. When mixed with his advanced knowledge of the game, it turned him into an excellent manager.

Mattingly‘s personality is different, but an adjustment would have been expected during the early part of his tenure. It’s hard to imagine Donnie Baseball excelling in the same fashion.

Aside from baseball acumen, experience and the willingness to adjust, the biggest reason the Girardi Era is more successful than the Mattingly experience would have been circles back to the support of Brian Cashman.

Although the Yankees general manager has been in the organization since taking an internship two decades ago, he had never hired a manager prior to the Torre aftermath. When Cashman was promoted to the general manager seat prior to the 1998 season, Torre was entrenched as a star in the dugout.

From the jump of the interview process, Cashman seemed to favor Girardi. If ownership overruled him to select Mattingly, job security could have become a real issue when struggles arose. Instead, Girardi has been virtually bulletproof due to the partnership he and Cashman have forged.

As the years go on, Mattingly may grow into the job, or, if things in Los Angeles deteriorate further, his next job. Perhaps he’ll turn into a really good and successful manager down the line.

Right now, Girardi has already achieved those accolades.

The decision was correct in 2007. If Mattingly was the selection, the state of the Yankees would have a far different look today.

Comment below, follow me on Twitter or “like” my Facebook page to talk all things baseball!

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

Just blame it on the manager.

In Major League Baseball, when a team that appears dominant on paper but underperforms on the field, managers tend to take the brunt of the fault. Often times, they’ll lose their jobs because of it even though they aren’t the ones playing.

Through the early stages of the 2013 season there have been three teams that haven’t played like many expected to: the Toronto Blue Jays (15-24, 9.5 GB), Los Angeles Angels (14-24, 10 GB) and Los Angeles Dodgers (15-22, 7.5 GB).

But should fans be blaming John Gibbons, Mike Scioscia and Don Mattingly for their respective teams’ woes? And if so, who deserves the most criticism?

Is It John Gibbons’ Fault?

The Toronto Blue Jays made a slew of offseason moves in order to attempt to make the postseason for the first time since 1993. Toronto acquired several Cy Young-worthy starting pitchers and a couple of impact bats as well.

Toronto also hired John Gibbons, who hadn’t managed in the big leagues since 2008 when he was fired after a 35-39 start in his fifth season with the Blue Jays. It’s safe to say that Gibbons hasn’t been able to capitalize on his second opportunity just yet.

“We’re kind of just sputtering,” Gibbons told Evan Peaslee of MLB.com back in mid-April. “We haven’t been able to get anything going. We’ve had some well-pitched outings and haven’t gotten a whole lot of offense with it. Nothing has come together yet. I think it will, it’s just a batter of time, but you know what, it’s time to start playing some better baseball, there’s no question about it.”

Toronto was 7-10 when Gibbons made those comments. The Blue Jays are 8-14 since.

The starting rotation looked like one of the best in baseball before the start of the season, but R.A. Dickey (2-5, 5.06 ERA) has been a disaster, Mark Buerhle (1-2, 6.19 ERA) has been the worst pitchers on the team in terms of WAR and Josh Johnson (0-1, 6.86 ERA) is currently on the disabled list with inflammation in his triceps.

Jose Reyes, the top offensive player acquired by Toronto this winter, suffered a severe ankle sprain after just 10 games. While Jose Bautista and Edwin Encarnacion have been their normal selves, Toronto still has the third worst offense in baseball, according to FanGraphs.

But is it really that Gibbons isn’t playing the right players or making the right decisions as to who goes on the mound?

That’s not the case here. Gibbons, who hasn’t managed in the big leagues in five years mind you, is coaching a bunch of stars that haven’t lived up to expectations yet. Injuries are out of his control. The Blue Jays would still be last in the division at this point in the season no matter who was hired over the offseason.

Is It Mike Scioscia’s Fault?

The Los Angeles Angels have spent tons of money the last two offseasons and still have nothing to show for it. Los Angeles signed Albert Pujols after the 2011 season and still finished third in the AL West.

This past winter, Los Angeles emptied its pockets in order to sign Josh Hamilton. So far, that move hasn’t paid off either.

Hamilton is hitting .212/.261/.344 with four home runs and 11 RBI through 38 games. Pujols hasn’t been much better and has a slash line of .234/.315/.393 with five long balls and 21 RBI. The offense hasn’t come through for the pitching staff yet, which hasn’t been great either.

T.J. Simers of the Los Angeles Times recently wrote how Scioscia isn’t the problem, but could get the axe regardless. Simers writes that it isn’t his fault that general manager Jerry Dipoto has left him with “a bunch of journeymen pitchers.”

Sure, Joe Blanton (0-7, 6.46 ERA) probably isn’t the best guy to have in the rotation these days. Other than that, the rest of the starters should be good when healthy. Unfortunately, Jered Weaver is out with a fractured elbow and Tommy Hanson was recently placed on the restricted list.

What’s Scioscia really supposed to be able to do when two of his top hitters are experiencing the worst stretches of their careers and his ace is sidelined for an extended period of time? Well, there’s not much he can do except for playing the guys that are available and hoping they have what it takes to win.

Maybe Hamilton and Pujols could use a bit of a pep talk considering it appears that if they continue to slump, Scioscia is going to be out of a job. Whether he gets another is regardless; he has to get the Angels moving forward quickly.

Los Angeles is 10 games under .500 through 38 games, which is completely unacceptable. The poor start hasn’t been the skipper’s entire fault, but I do think that he’ll ultimately pay the price for it.

Is It Don Mattingly’s Fault?

In several ways, Don Mattingly is in the same position as his crosstown rival, Scioscia. Mattingly is managing a team of underperforming stars that haven’t clicked yet. The Los Angeles Dodgers are also without one of their top starting pitchers, Zack Greinke.

Mattingly has been the manager in Los Angeles the last two seasons and hasn’t had much success. The Dodgers finished three games over .500 his first year with the club and 10 games over .500 last season. Through 37 games, finishing over .500 for a third straight time seems highly unlikely.

Despite having the likes of Adrian Gonzalez, Matt Kemp, Carl Crawford, Andre Ethier, Hanley Ramirez (injured for most of the season so for) and Clayton Kershaw, among others, the Dodgers have been very average this season. But he hasn’t had much to do with it.

Tim Brown of Yahoo! Sports puts it perfectly when he says:

…the Dodgers have had a player problem, not a Don Mattingly problem, and that will continue for as long as they hit like they hit, and pitch like they pitch and rehab as often as they rehab.

This is on Kemp, League and Andre Ethier, and it’s on Josh Beckett and Ronald Belisario. It’s on Hanley Ramirez’s thumb/hamstring, and Zack Greinke’s collarbone, and Adrian Gonzalez’s neck and Mark Ellis’ quad.

A handful of injuries and poor offense and pitching has brought the Dodgers to where they currently are: last place in the NL West. There’s nothing that Mattingly could’ve done to avoid this from happening. He’s playing the best players he can and it just isn’t working out.

Kemp is arguably the top offensive weapon the Dodgers have and he puts their season in a nutshell. Through 37 games, he’s hitting .277/.327/.348 with one home run and 15 RBI. Mattingly could move him down in the lineup, but it’s Kemp who needs to starting hitting like an MVP candidate instead of a below average outfielder.

Could Mattingly take Josh Beckett, who’s 0-5 with a 5.19 ERA in eight starts this season, out of the starting rotation? Sure he could, but there aren’t many other options that Mattingly has to flirt with.

The Dodgers have to start winning sooner rather than later unless they like last place. But it’s not up to Mattingly; it’s up to his players.

Final Thoughts

It’s easy to see why John Gibbons, Mike Scioscia and/or Don Mattingly could lose their jobs during or after the 2013 season comes to a close. Poor play usually results in the man at the top getting fired because that’s the easiest course of action at times.

But none of the trio deserves to have the brunt of the blame put on them or be fired for their teams’ awful starts to the season.

The Toronto Blue Jays, Los Angeles Angels and Los Angeles Dodgers are playing poorly because of the players on the roster and not because of the guy that decides who starts and who sits. Injuries have taken a toll on each of the three teams, which has made it difficult to turn things around.

But there isn’t much and Gibbons, Scioscia or Mattingly can do at this point except to keep motivating their players to play well. Making minor changes in the lineup, rotation or bullpen could potentially win a game here or there, but overall, it isn’t going to do much.

Ownership, front offices and fans need to wake up and smell the coffee. It’s not the managers that take the field, strike out each time and blow leads in the eighth and ninth innings; it’s the players.

The players deserve 100 percent of the blame for the way the Blue Jays, Angels and Dodgers are currently playing. It’s not the managers’ fault.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

The Los Angeles Dodgers lost to the San Francisco Giants on Friday night, courtesy of a Buster Posey walk-off home run. But more importantly, they may have lost their starting shortstop for a significant period of time.

Hanley Ramirez was helped off the field after he unsuccessfully attempted to go from first to third on a single by catcher A.J. Ellis. AT&T Park is not the field of dreams for Ramirez—he fractured his thumb in his last game there in March in the finals of the World Baseball Classic.

Clutching his hamstring on the way into the dugout certainly wasn’t a good sign, nor was the pained expression on his face. Manager Don Mattingly wasn’t too thrilled about it either. In fact, in comments made to reporters after the game, it was clear he’s downright shaken by it.

“We can’t keep losing guys at this rate,” Mattingly said. “This is going to end. Right now it doesn‘t look very good. … I’m not confident about anything at this moment.”

One Twitter joker suggested that Mattingly practice empathy instead of sympathy for his injured roster mates:

Who can blame Mattingly for feeling the way he does right now? He’s had to use nine starting pitchers already and the season is barely 30 games old. He was forced to use an infield on Friday night that had Jerry Hairston at first, Nick Punto at second, Justin Sellers at short and the slumping Luis Cruz at third.

My confidence would be pretty shaken just seeing an infield that looked like that too.

Adrian Gonzalez is nursing a sore neck, Carl Crawford is battling through his own hamstring issues, Mark Ellis could go on the DL with a strained quad and slugger Matt Kemp is still nowhere near 100 percent after offseason shoulder surgery.

Now, Ramirez, back for just his fourth game after returning from his thumb injury, could be lost for a substantial amount of time once again.

Mattingly likened Ramirez’s injury to that of Kemp’s hamstring strain last year. Kemp missed 51 games overall after two DL stints. Losing Ramirez for the same amount of time will absolutely force Mattingly and general manager Ned Colletti to reassess the left side of their infield.

Their third baseman—Cruz—is hitting .098 and clearly looks lost at the plate. There could be a Triple-A stint in his near future. Backup Juan Uribe is hitting .200 with two homers in 17 games—he’s not a choice for a long-term gig. Sellers is hitting just .194, so he’s not a replacement that makes the Dodgers breathe easier right now, either.

Dee Gordon is currently toiling away at Triple-A Albuquerque, attempting to hone his skills and work on a more consistent hitting approach. He’s hitting .314 with 14 stolen bases, but the Dodgers had wanted to keep Gordon there—that may no longer be an option.

The Dodgers’ anemic offense produced 11 hits on Friday against the Giants, but only one of them went for extra-bases, and that was provided by starting pitcher Clayton Kershaw.  They stranded 13 runners, further adding to their offensive woes.

What Do the Dodgers Do at This Point?

That’s a question that has no clear answers. Their inability to produce in key situations is indeed troublesome. Kemp is hitting .267 with just one home run and 11 RBI. He’s hitting just .161 with runners in scoring position.

Andre Ethier is hitting just .250, including a .148 average with RISP. That’s two players with a combined value of $33.5 million hitting .155 in crucial situations.

Skip Schumaker, acquired from the St. Louis Cardinals during the offseason, is hitting just .119 with one RBI, while Cruz is hitting .098 with two RBI.

If general manager Ned Colletti is looking for answers from within, he’s simply not going to find them.

Gonzalez’s neck injury is likely short-term, a Mattingly did say that he was available to pinch-hit if needed on Friday. So there’s that at least.

Aside from Gordon, Colletti doesn’t have many infield options internally. His best hitters at the Triple-A level include Scott Van Slyke and Alex Castellanos, both of whom man the outfield. Very few options are available on the open market as well, not to mention the fact that teams are generally unwilling to part with any pieces this early in the season unless they’re completely blown away by an offer.

And then there’s Mattingly himself. He was called into question for not playing small-ball on Friday night. In the top of the fourth inning of a scoreless game, catcher A.J. Ellis drew a walk, followed by a single by Ethier, putting runners on first and second with no outs. Cruz promptly followed up with a double-play grounder, ending the threat.

Fans on Twitter immediately questioned Mattingly’s failure to consider an important option:

Another fan was just a bit more to the point about his feelings:

You can find any number of experts who point to the sacrifice bunt as a useless offensive tool. Dave Cameron of FanGraphs is one of them:

Bunting for a base hit, putting on a well-timed squeeze, beating an overshifted defense, having a pitcher move a runner into scoring position… there’s room for bunting in baseball. The frequency of sacrificing bunting that is prevalent now, though, is simply incorrect strategy, and the sooner it is removed from the sport, the better off Major League teams will be.

Cameron and others may be right about that, but considering the Dodgers’ current state of affairs, couldn’t it at least have been considered? Especially with the struggling Cruz coming up?

Coming up with different ways to score—especially on the road in a pitcher-friendly park—has to be considered. Stranding 13 runners and the complete inability to produce in key situations warrants a change of thinking.

Mattingly isn’t helping his own cause by failing to consider these options with his team struggling mightily at the plate. Injuries aside, he needs to adjust his way of thinking when run-scoring opportunities are presented.

Answers aren’t going to come for the Dodgers via the trade market at this point. They’re going to have to ride out the injuries and hope that key offensive contributors like Kemp and Ethier can break out of their funks are start doing what they’re paid very handsomely to do: produce.

There are no quick fixes at this point in the season. Colletti isn’t in a position that gives him an advantage. Even if he were to reach out to other teams to find a fix, opposing general managers have the upper hand in knowing that the Dodgers are desperate for help. They will be looking for a return package in any deal that would be much more advantageous for them then it would be for Los Angeles.

If Colletti wants to deal, it will cost him dearly. And the Dodgers have already paid dearly for the roster currently assembled.

Fixing the offense is not going to happen overnight. Kemp isn’t suddenly going to have a shoulder that’s 100 percent healthy. There’s no magical cure that can put Ramirez back on the field any quicker.

The onus is on the roster to collectively pick itself up, dust itself off and start delivering. The onus in on Mattingly to be more creative with run-scoring opportunities. The onus is on the bullpen to keep the team in the game.

Ramirez will return at some point. Kemp will be completely healthy at some point as well. Players like Zack Greinke, Chris Capuano, Ted Lilly and others will return as well. It’s up to Mattingly and the roster to stay afloat and ride out the storm.

Doug Mead is a featured columnist with Bleacher Report. His work has been featured in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, SF Gate, CBS Sports, the Los Angeles Times and the Houston Chronicle.

Feel free to talk baseball with Doug anytime on Twitter.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

With MLB‘s 2013 Hall of Fame voting discussions dominated by whether Roger Clemens or Barry Bonds are deserving candidates, another candidate with little hope of garnering the required 75 percent vote enters his 13th year of eligibility. His name is Don Mattingly, aka “Donnie Baseball”, who played first base for the New York Yankees.

By the tender age of 26, Don Mattingly had won a batting title and an MVP award. During his first four full seasons, Mattingly amassed an astounding 842 hits, blasted 119 homers and had 483 runs batted in. His batting average stood at a sparkling .331. Mattingly was one of the toughest batters in all of baseball to strike out (a rarity for a power hitter). For his career, Don struck out once every 15.7 at-bats.

In the field, Mattingly was equally brilliant. With cat-like reflexes, and sure hands, Don won nine Golden Glove awards. Entering the 1990 season, Don Mattingly was recognized as one of the best players in the game—a near-certain future Hall of Fame member. The sky was the limit for Donnie Baseball.

Unfortunately, from there, Don’s story heads south. A back injury, suffered when his spike got caught in a seam of artificial surface, robbed him of the lightning bat speed that once had balls rocketing off of his bat with regularity. 

The hours Mattingly usually spent in the batting cage were suddenly shared with those spent on the trainer’s table for his injured back. Don Mattingly‘s back would trouble him for the remainder of his career—a career cut short by the injury, playing his final game at the age of only 34.

Despite his career hampered and shortened due to his back, Don Mattingly still produced exceptional numbers.  His lifetime batting average stands at .307, with 2,153 hits, 222 homers and 1,099 runs batted in. Mattingly was also bestowed the honor of being named the captain of the New York Yankees.

Some questions are: Will the voters eventually reward Don Mattingly for the dominant player he was during most of the 1980’s?  If he were to be voted into Baseball’s Hall of Fame, would there be any complaints by those already enshrined? 

Was Don Mattingly a baseball Superstar, or was he just a nice player who does not belong with the best? Lastly, would it be good for the game of baseball if Don Mattingly gets voted in?

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

It isn’t mentioned much because the New York Yankees didn’t make the playoff series, but the 1985 season produced an unanswerable question. So has almost every season in baseball history.

Which type of player has greater value to his team—the one who gets on base and sets the table to start a rally or the player who drives in the table-setter?

The 1985 Yankees finished two games behind the Toronto Blue Jays. They won 97 games, which was six games more than the Western Division Kansas Royals won.

Don Mattingly had a tremendous season. He hit .324/.371/.567 with 35 home runs and 145 RBIs. 

Rickey Henderson had a tremendous season. He hit .314/.419/.516 with 99 walks and 146 runs scored. Henderson stole 80 bases and hit 24 home runs, but batted in only 72 runs. 

Many believed that Mattingly was the MVP. Others supported Henderson.

When Yankees manager Billy Martin was asked if the table-setter or the RBI man was more important,  Martin demonstrated why he was one of the great managers ever.

”They’re both very important,” he said. ”You have to have both—the guy to get on and the guy to drive them in.” 

”Everybody can’t drive in runs,” Don Bayor said. ”But a lot depends on where you put a guy in the lineup. Tommy Herr never drove in a lot of runs before this year, but now he’s in a spot where he can drive them in.”In 1985, Tommy Herr hit eight home runs  He drove in 110 runs. The reason? Herr batted third, behind Vince Coleman and Willie McGee.

”You get the first guy or two on and it generates so much on the bench,” Baylor said. ”It filters down to everyone else. The guy who gets on is a more valuable asset. You get that guy on and it starts the flow of everything else.”

Future New York Mets manager Willie Randolph agreed with Baylor. Of course, Randolph usually batted lead off.

”Without a doubt, the catalyst sets the tempo,” Randolph said. ”Without him, the big men can go up there and swing all they want and nothing happens. You have to have somebody to drive him in, but you can create a run with a leadoff man who’s aggressive.”

Reggie Jackson didn’t say it directly, but he thinks there is more pressure on the player who must drive in the runs.

”I’d rather be a guy where all I had to do was get on base,” Jackson said. ”It’s different driving in that guy.”

The “experts” don’t have any problems with the question. Mattingly received 367 votes, including 23 for first place, and easily won the MVP.

Henderson received 174 votes to finish third, behind George Brett. Henderson did not receive a single first-place vote.

Baseball-Reference lists each players WAR (Wins Above Replacement).

Henderson’s WAR was 10.0, Brett’s was 8.0 and MVP Mattingly’s was 6.4. 

Would Henderson have won if the vote were taken today?

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

A victim of circumstance, or bad luck? That’s what you have to ask yourself when reading the story of Don Mattingly. Throughout the history of sports, we’ve seen several players and coaches have tough luck in their respective sports. However, in my opinion, there is no figure in sports that has had worse luck than Don Mattingly. It seems his bad luck follows him wherever he goes.

I looked at the standings today and noticed the Dodgers are only one game under .500 and in third place. Although they’re out of the race for a playoff spot already, they haven’t had too bad of a season considering their situation as a franchise.

Since Mattingly has taken over as skipper, the Dodgers have run into all sorts of financial issues.  Sure the tragic events of the Dodgers had already been set in motion before Mattingly arrived, but it became uglier after Mattingly took the job with the Dodgers.

Owner Frank McCourt is going through a brutal and expensive divorce and financially, the entire organization is struggling to make payroll. Not to pile on top, but the team isn’t very good on the field as well. Coincidence that Mattingly is there while this organization nosedives? Maybe, but this isn’t the only case of bad luck following Mattingly.

Don Mattingly was a loyal, lifelong Yankee until the day he became a bench coach for former Dodger manager Joe Torre. Mattingly played for the Yankees for 14 seasons, none of which resulted in a championship.

Mattingly played for the Bombers in the 80s and early 90s, some of the worst years in the entire history of the Yankees. Playing on abysmal teams, Mattingly still managed to win an MVP, multiple gold gloves, batting titles and All-Star selections. Mattingly even said he would’ve traded all that for a World Series ring, something he has yet to achieve.

In 1994, the Yankees were easily the best team in the American League, and were certainly competing with the Montreal Expos for the best team in the majors. It looked as though Mattingly would have his first chance at a playoff berth and a trip to the World Series.  But with Mattingly’s luck, it never happened. A players’ strike cut the MLB season short, and the great Yankee season was abruptly ended.

It wasn’t until 1995 that Mattingly and the Yankees made it to the playoffs, Mattingly’s last year. With a bad back, it was bittersweet for Donnie baseball because he had no choice but to retire at the end of the year. After taking a 2-0 lead over the Mariners in the Division Series, the Yankees went on to lose the last three, further padding the bad luck history that plagued Mattingly and the Yankees.

After Mattingly retired following the 1995 season, the Yankees made another trip to the playoffs for the second year in a row. This time there was no choking, no blowing leads and the Yankees went all the way. After falling behind 2-0 to the Braves in the World Series, the Yankees went on to win the next four games en route to winning the ’96 series, their first championship in almost two decades.

Had Mattingly played one more year, he would’ve had the World Series ring that had eluded him his entire career. After his playing days were over, Mattingly served as a special instructor for Yankees spring training from 1997-2003, a job Mattingly held in the midst of a Yankee dynasty.

It wasn’t until 2004 that Mattingly would rejoin the big league club, this time taking the Yankees hitting coach position. The same year Mattingly rejoined the Yankees, the Bombers were one out away from taking a trip to the World Series with Mattingly on the bench. Mariano Rivera would blow the game in the ninth, allowing the Red Sox breathing room to come back. The Yankees then proceeded to complete the biggest collapse in sports playoff history, ultimately surrendering a 3-0 series lead and becoming the first team in MLB history to blow a 3-0 lead. Mattingly was on the bench for all of this.

Mattingly remained as a coach until the end of 2007, which was Joe Torre’s last year. It was thought, upon Joe Torre’s departure, that Mattingly would almost certainly be the manager of the Yankees. After interviews with Mattingly, Tony Pena and Joe Girardi, Mattingly was passed up for Girardi and didn’t get the job as Yankees manager.

Mattingly then followed Joe Torre to the Dodgers where ultimately, he would become manager when Torre retired. Before he became manager, he had to leave the team during the 2008 season to help his wife who was suffering from mental health issues. Mattingly would later return to the team after. 

The multiple times Don Mattingly has been in the presence of tragic and devastating sports events is too much to ignore. Is he bad luck like many Yankees fans believe, or just a victim of circumstance?

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

With spring training now at its peak and Cactus League play in full gear, the Los Angeles Dodgers find themselves in the national spotlight of the sports media in regards to a number of popular storylines.

Team ownership is obviously at the forefront, as Frank McCourt was anticipating a $200 million cash advance from Fox until the transaction was blocked by MLB commissioner Bud Selig late last week. It’s unclear exactly where the overall finances of the club lie, but the fact that McCourt was involved in plotting such a deal doesn’t sound encouraging.

In the meantime, the divorce ordeal between Frank and Jamie continues to trudge along. Frank’s gun is loaded with the intention of new trials and appeals, while Jamie continues to express interest in gaining some type of control of the organization. However, the team, the fans and Major League Baseball itself would love nothing more than to see this tedious affliction become resolved.

As for player news, the absence of reliever Ronald Belisario from his third consecutive spring training start also captured its fair share of headlines. While Belisario continues to offer excuses about being separated from the team, he still remains in his native Venezuela. Most analysts around the league seem to agree that he’s already seen his last days wearing Dodger Blue.

Vicente Padilla, re-signed by general manager Ned Colletti to bolster the bullpen and provide insurance to the starting rotation, has already been under the knife to fix a recurring wrist injury that has been bothering him for more than a year. According to various opinions, Padilla may begin throwing again in as little as three-to-four weeks.

The passing of Dodger legend Duke Snider, who could arguably be known as the greatest player the franchise has ever seen, brought a somber moment of sadness to Dodgers fans far and wide. Without a doubt, for his contributions to the Dodger legacy, the Duke will be remembered for eternity.

As all the aforementioned news made headlines nationwide, a number of storylines which are critical to the club’s success continue to fly under the radar. The following slides highlight 10 such stories, as well as offer a brief commentary about each topic shown.

Begin Slideshow

With Spring Training rapidly approaching, the 2011 Los Angeles Dodgers‘ roster is nearly finalized. First-year manager, Don Mattingly, hopes to improve the team from the 2010 edition that was two games under .500.

Expectations were high going into last season after the 2009 club won a National League-high 95 games in 2009. A combination of bullpen injuries, a fading Manny Ramirez, and the messy owner situation resulted in a fourth-place finish in the NL West and frustrated fans.

“The question I have this year, that I didn’t have last year ago, is really rebounding from last season—’08 and ’09 were two really good years,” said GM Ned Colletti.

“We gained a lot, players matured a lot, got more understanding of the dynamics of competing at this level and playing in October.

Heading into the 2010 season, many thought that the Dodgers biggest issue would be their starting pitching. This was simply not the case as the Dodgers received productive seasons from starting pitchers Clayton Kershaw, Hiroki Kuroda, and Vicente Padilla, as well as a bounce-back second half from Chad Billingsley.

The Dodgers’ biggest problem in 2010 was their lack of offensive fire power, with the Dodgers hitting just 120 home runs, second fewest in the NL, and consistently struggled to score from months June through September.

Despite having the second highest attendance of any NL team in 2010, and the highest in 2009, the Dodgers will likely head into 2011 with just the fifth highest payroll at $95 million.

However, this total does not include the near $35 million that the Dodgers still have to pay to several ex-Dodgers, in particular Manny Ramirez, Juan Pierre, Andrew Jones, and Jason Schmidt.

We have seen teams go deep into the playoffs without top payrolls before, most recently the 2010 AL Champion Texas Rangers, who had the 26th lowest payroll out of the 30 MLB teams.

Here is a comparison of the 2010 Dodgers starting lineup with the projected 2011 edition:

2010:

Rafael Furcal, SS
Andre Ethier, RF
Matt Kemp, CF
Manny Ramirez, LF
Casey Blake, 3B
James Loney, 1B
Ronnie Belliard, 2B
Russell Martin, C

2011:

Rafael Furcal, SS
Andre Ethier, RF
Matt Kemp, CF
Casey Blake, 3B
Juan Uribe, 2B
James Loney, 1B
Rod Barajas, C
Xavier Paul, OF

Offense

At first glance, the 2010 Dodgers lineup looks better on paper than the 2011 version, after the departures of Manny Ramirez, Russell Martin, and Ronnie Belliard. However, Ramirez, Martin and Belliard all had disappointing seasons, so Juan Uribe, Rod Barajas, and Xavier Paul should not be any worse than those three.

Above all else, among the 2010 starting Dodger position players that will return in 2011, it seemed like every one of them had a slightly worse season than expected, leading to a collective struggle on offense for much of the season.

With guys like Ethier, Kemp, and Loney hitting their prime years, as well as Blake and Furcal attempting to recover from disappointing 2010 seasons, the Dodgers might very well get more out of their 2010 starters in 2011.

Bench

Whereas Los Angeles should get solid production out of their veteran starters, the Dodgers do not quite know what to expect from their bench.

Newly-acquired outfielder, former Yankee Marcus Thames, should provide much needed power off of the bench. Thames, 33, had an OPS of .841 in 237 plate appearances last season, and hit at least 25 home runs in two of the last four seasons.

The starting lineup is not set in stone so, for example, impressive spring training results from Dioner Navarro, Jamey Carrol, or Marcus Thames could very well result in a 2011 starting lineup without second baseman Juan Uribe, catcher Rod Barajas, or outfielder Xavier Paul.

Outfielder Tony Gwynn Jr. will be one of the team’s primary pinch runners and can also play centerfield.

Starting Rotation

The 2011 Dodgers’ starting rotation consist of five proven guys, each of whom had an ERA of less than 4.00 in 2010. Not many teams can say that.

The opening day starter figures to be 22-year-old southpaw Clayton Kershaw, fresh off his first All-Star game appearance, as well as his second straight season with an ERA under 3.00 and one of the best BAA (batting average against) in the league.

Next in the rotation will be 26-year-old Chad Billingsley, who has had a very good career in five seasons with the Dodgers, aside from a slump that lasted from mid-2009 until the All-Star break of 2010.

The Dodgers’ third starter is Hiroki Kuroda, who was now pitched three full season in the MLB, keeping his ERA under 4.00 all three seasons.

Old, but reliable veteran Ted Lilly will be the No. 4 starter. Lilly, 35, has had double-digit win totals in eight consecutive seasons and was a 2009 All-Star.

Always-consistent Jon Garland will be the fifth starter, carrying an even more impressive streak of nine straight 10-win seasons.

Vicente Padilla, 33, figures to be the Dodgers’ No. 1 option in a long-relief situation, as well as someone that can start if one of the starting five fails to stay healthy. Overall, the rotation is certainly stronger than it was last season, when the Dodgers struggled to find their fifth starter all year long.

Bullpen

One of the biggest concerns for the Dodgers going into 2011 is their bullpen, which did a nice job in 2010, but currently has many unproven guys aside from Hong-Chih-Kuo, Jonathan Broxton, and Vicente Padilla.

Relief pitchers Ramon Troncoso, Ronald Belisario, and Blake Hawksworth each had sub-par 2010 seasons after great 2009 campaigns, so it is tough to know what to expect from them. Aside from those six relievers, the Dodgers will most likely use the inexperienced Kenley Jansen and Scott Elbert, as well as second-year Dodgers John Ely and Carlos Monasterios.

The biggest concern might be the lack of left-handed throwers out of the pen, considering that Kuo and Elbert are the only two on their projected 25-man roster.

Fielding

On the defensive side, the Dodgers should be solid. Their starting infield has the experience of Juan Uribe, Casey Blake and Rafael Furcal to go along with above-average defenders James Loney and Rod Barajas.

With Manny out of left field, and Xavier Paul expected to take his spot, the Dodgers should be better defensively in the outfield as well.

——–

The Dodgers appear to have truly found their core guys, most of whom came out of the Dodger farm system in 2006. This includes starters James Loney, Andre Ethier, and Matt Kemp, as well as pitchers Chad Billingsley and Jonathan Broxton.

Every one of them has already been to the postseason with the Dodgers three times, and they are all hungry to finally make it past the second round. The one exception is Kershaw, who came up in 2008.

Presumably, the Dodgers success will hinge on whether they can produce sufficient power and timely hitting—two aspects of the game that the Dodgers never got right in 2010.

The Dodgers could really use big years out of outfielders Matt Kemp, 26, and 28 year-old Andre Ethier, each of whom declined in 2010 after career years in 2009. When at their best, we have seen both guys play as well as any outfielders in the National League.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

On Wednesday afternoon, Major League Baseball’s Hall of Fame class for 2011 was announced and, as anticipated, Bert Blyleven and Roberto Alomar amassed the number of votes necessary for their enshrinement in Cooperstown this summer. A Hall of Fame candidate must receive 75 percent of the vote from eligible Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) members to garner induction.

Considered by many to be the best second baseman in baseball history, Alomar fell short of induction by only eight votes in 2010, which was his first year on the ballot. But after garnering 73.7 percent of the vote last year, the Puerto Rican native was named on 90 percent of the ballots to become one of only two players to comprise this year’s Hall of Fame class.

Meanwhile, Blyleven, who was in his 14th year of eligibility, received 79.7 percent of the vote to warrant election in what has widely been considered one of the greatest oversights by the BBWAA.

Despite ranking fifth all-time in strikeouts, ninth in shutouts and 27th in wins, Blyleven received only 17.55 percent of the vote in his first year of eligibility (1998). Astonishingly, his vote total dropped to 14.1 percent the following year.

In the past 40 years, no player who debuted on the ballot had a vote total that low and won election into the Hall of Fame.

However, the sabermetrics boom resulted in a closer inspection of Blyleven’s candidacy, which caused his vote totals to steadily rise to a high of 74.2 percent in 2010, leaving him only five votes short of induction.

But in his penultimate year of eligibility, Blyleven received the call that finally put the exclamation point on his distinguished career.

Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for former New York Yankees on this year’s ballot, whose respective Hall of Fame bids don’t look too promising for the most part.

Out of the eight former Yankees on the ballot, five fell short of the 5 percent required to remain on the ballot next year, including beloved first baseman Tino Martinez, who received just six votes (1 percent) from the BBWAA.

Joining Martinez in unsuccessful Hall of Fame bids were Al Leiter (0.7 percent), Kevin Brown (2.1 percent), John Olerud (0.7 percent) and Raul Mondesi (0 votes).

On the flip side of the coin, there were former Yankees who weren’t invited to join this year’s class but will remain on the ballot for future consideration, with the most prominent name being Don Mattingly.

In his 11th year of eligibility, Mattingly saw his appearance on the ballots drop from 16.1 percent last year to 13.6 percent this year, a clear indication that the Hall’s doors will remain shut to a man viewed as one of the greatest Yankee players in franchise history.

But the former six-time All-Star and nine-time Gold Glove Award-winning first baseman has been extremely candid about his Hall of Fame credentials.

“I don’t think I’m a Hall of Famer,” Mattingly was quoted as saying. “I don’t think I have the numbers. Part of it is longevity, and I wasn’t able to do that and do the things that I did early in my career.”

Many Yankees fans would disagree with Donnie Baseball’s assessment, which speaks volumes to how popular Mattingly still is in the Big Apple and how memorable his tenure was with the bronx bombers.

In addition to Mattingly, Lee Smith (45.3 percent) and Tim Raines (37.5 percent), who both had brief stints with the Yankees in the ’90s, will also see their names on next year’s ballot.

Raines, a two-time World Series Champion with the Yankees (1996, 1998), has been gaining a groundswell of support for induction, evidenced by the dramatic rise in his vote totals from 22.6 percent in 2009 to 30.4 percent in 2010 to 37.5 percent this year.

Smith, who appeared in eight games for the Yankees in 1993, ranks third in MLB history with 478 saves. 

Click here to read the original article on Examiner.com.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

On Wednesday afternoon, the Baseball Hall of Fame announced the induction of Bert Blyleven (among others) after a 14-year wait.  Blyleven’s election comes on the heels of the elections of Jim Rice (class of ’09) and Andre “Hawk” Dawson (’10) after comparably long waits.  With these three men all in, we can now turn our sights to other players who have spent many years (five or more for the sake of this article) on the ballot and are still waiting for the all-important call from Cooperstown.  I took each player who will be on their fifth ballot or late in 2012.  Players are ordered not by merit, but by time on the ballot to avoid any claims of favoritism.

Dale Murphy: 1977-1993 (14th Ballot in 2012): .265 BA, 398 HR, 1,266 RBIs, 1982 and ’83 NL MVP, 7-time All-Star, 5 Gold Gloves, 4 Silver Sluggers (12.6 percent in 2011)

With the exception of his batting average, Dale Murphy’s numbers compare quite favorably to Hall of Famer Jim Rice.  Even if they don’t put him in the Hall, they certainly should garner better than 12.6 percent over the ballots cast.  Two MVPs for Murphy against one for Rice, seven All-Stars vs eight, four Silver Sluggers vs two, five Gold Gloves vs none.  Murphy hit 16 more home runs and drove in 200 less RBIs in two more seasons.  When comparing Murphy to Jim Rice, one must ask, are too few people voting for Murphy, or did too many vote for Rice?

Murphy dominated from 1982 through ’87, hitting .289 and averaging 36 HR and 105 RBIs.  He made the All-Star game each year and won both of his MVPs along with all of his Gold Gloves and Silver Sluggers in that period.  After 1987, Murphy was unable to match that type of success again.  He hit over .250 only once (1991 with the Phillies) and never again drove in over 90 runners.

The .265 career BA and short window of dominance are the biggest marks against Murphy. 

Jack Morris: 1977-1994 (13th Ballot in 2012): 254 W, 3.90 ERA, 2,478 K, 5-time All-Star (53.5 percent in 2011)

Morris was the winningest pitcher of the 1980s with 162 victories.  The pitchers that led every previous decade in wins have all reached the hallowed hall of Cooperstown.  The 1990s’ leader Greg Maddux is a sure-fire first ballot Hall of Famer as well.  Morris won four World Series rings with the Tigers (1984), Twins (’91) and Blue Jays (’92 and ’93).  His gutty ten-inning performance in game seven of the ’91 World Series is the accomplishment that is most closely associated with Morris.  Now that Bert Byleven (a player with significantly better stats across the board) has been inducted, the debate can begin in earnest over Morris.

The two biggest marks against Morris are his 3.90 career ERA and lack of a Cy Young Award.  Will that be enough to hold him out?  Only time will tell.  It is worth noting that of the players on this list, Morris was the only one to receive better than 50-percent of the vote in 2011.

Don Mattingly: 1982-1995 (12th Ballot in 2012): .307 BA, 222 HR, 1,099 RBI, 1985 MVP, 6-time All-Star, 9 Gold Gloves, 3 Silver Sluggers (13.6 percent in 2011)

“Donnie Baseball” had one of the most dominant six-year periods of any player in that era.  From 1982-1989, Mattingly hit .327 and averaged 27 HR and 114 RBIs per season.  In that period, Mattingly won his MVP, made all six of his all-star appearances, and collected five Gold Gloves and three Silver Sluggers.

Unfortunately for Mattingly and his supporters, back problems severely shortened the prime of his career.  After the ’89 season, Mattingly would never again reach 20 HR or 90 RBIs in a season.  Only once (’94) did he manage to hit over .300.  I fear that his lack of longevity will be enough to keep him out of Cooperstown.

Allen Trammell: 1977-1996 (11th Ballot in 2012): .285 BA, 185 HR, 1,003 RBIs, 1,231 R, 236 SB, 6-time All-Star, 4 Gold Gloves, 3 Silver Sluggers (24.3 percent in 2011)

Allen Trammell was one of the key contributors to the Tigers during their run in the 1980s.  Playing shortstop in an era dominated by Hall of Famer Ozzie Smith and future Hall of Famer (in my book at least) Barry Larkin led many to overlook the accomplishments of Trammell in Detroit.  Trammell was a sure-handed defender playing the toughest position on the field.

However, Trammell was a streaky hitter.  There were a handful of seasons when he would hit well over .300 before suddenly slipping back to an average in the .270s or worse the next year.  For his career, Trammell struck out more than he walked.  Though a solid fielder, he lacked the flashy defensive abilities that defined the careers of Smith and (potential HOFer) Omar Vizquel.

Lee Smith: 1980-1997 (10th Ballot in 2012): 71 W, 3.03 ERA, 478 S, 1,251 K, 7-time All-Star (45.3% in 2011)

For many years, relievers had a difficult time getting votes for the Hall.  Recently, this trend has begun to shift.  Goose Gossage and Bruce Sutter were both elected after long waits and current closers Trevor Hoffman and Mariano Rivera are looking like first-ballot HOFers.  At the time of his retirement, Lee Smith had the career lead in saves by over 100 on Dennis Eckersley.  Smith was the first pitcher to collect saves in such a large quantity.

Working against Smith is his 3.03 ERA (high for a Hall of Fame-caliber reliever) and low strikeout totals compared to his competition.  Many have made the argument that Smith was nothing more than a “compiler” of statistics over his 18-year career.

Mark McGwire: 1986-2001 (6th Ballot in 2012): .263 BA, 583 HR, 1,414 RBIs, 1987 AL ROY, 12-time All-Star, 1 Gold Glove, 3 Silver Sluggers (19.8 percent in 2011)

Mark McGwire was one of the most prolific homerun hitters in the history of the game.  “Big Mac” averaged 36 HR per season (that number jumps to 39 if you don’t include the 18 games he played in 1986) including injury-riddled 1993 and ’94 when he combined for 18 HR.

Given recent revelations, much of McGwire’s power numbers have come in to question.  Without his HRs, McGwire doesn’t have much to stand on.  He was a below-average defender at the position widely considered to be the easiest position on the field.  He hit .263 for his career and his RBI totals are quite low when you consider how many homeruns he hit (for the sake of comparison, Dave Winfield drove in 400 more runs while hitting 100 less homers).

Tim Raines: 1979-2002 (5th Ballot): .294 BA, 170 HR, 980 RBIs, 2,605 H, 808 SB, 7-time All-Star, 1 Silver Slugger (37.5% in 2011)

The supporters of Tim Raines often refer to him as the Rickey Henderson of the National League.  On the surface, that makes a lot of sense.  Both were leadoff men who hit for a similar average, stole a bunch of bases, and played LF instead of CF.

However, there is only one stat in which Henderson doesn’t blow Raines away.  Raines hit 15 points better than Henderson.  Other than that, Henderson has over 500 more steals, over 400 more hits, over 100 more homers, and 135 more RBIs.

Now that you have some information on the seven player who will be on the ballot for the fifth time or more in 2012, which ones do you think deserve to be elected?  Which ones will be elected?  I look forward to reading and responding to your comments on this subject.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com