How Did That Dodger Bullpen Get So Bad?
In Game 1 of the NLDS, Don Mattingly left in Clayton Kershaw to absorb a beating in part because he didn’t trust his bullpen. In Game 2, he lifted Zack Greinke, only to watch veteran J.P. Howell give a lead away. In Game 3, he rode Hyun-jin Ryu as far as he felt was realistic (given that Ryu had missed weeks with a shoulder injury), then saw Scott Elbert kick it away. In Game 4, a short-rest Kershaw was outstanding up until the moment he wasn’t, with Mattingly trying to push Kershaw through that seventh inning in order to turn it over to Kenley Jansen.
Each of these decisions were defensible in some way. And each one blew up in Mattingly’s face. The manager is getting pummeled for that, because that’s how sports work, and there’s a non-zero chance he doesn’t survive the winter, fairly or not. But the focus on Mattingly’s choices perhaps overlooks a more crucial problem: Man, how bad was that bullpen? How does this even happen?
Before the season, the Dodger bullpen was expected to be outstanding. Here’s a spring article that says the bullpen was “strong, stacked and ready for high expectations.” This one asks if the bullpen was “too stacked.” Another says it was a “position of strength.” At ESPN, it was judged to be a top-five collection. I point those out not to shame them — at least one is written by a friend — but to show how universal the belief was. We weren’t quite so high in our own projections, ranking them No. 12 and noting some concerns, though generally being positive, and the difference between top-five and top-12 wasn’t much.
It’s not hard to see why, anyway, because in theory, this was a bullpen overflowing with talent. Jansen had been one of baseball’s most dominant relievers for years. No one doubted Brian Wilson had been overpaid, but he’d also been outstanding in a small sample down the stretch in 2013 after recovering from Tommy John surgery (0.66 ERA / 2.02 FIP). The disappointing Brandon League and low-cost newcomer Chris Perez had few fans, but at least both had had success in the not-too-distant past.
Howell had been a reliable lefty for the team in 2013. Flame-throwing Chris Withrow had struck out hitters at Jansen-esque levels in his rookie season the year before. Paco Rodriguez‘ rookie season had ended poorly, but he’d been very productive all year before September. Youngsters Jose Dominguez, Yimi Garcia, Onelki Garcia and Pedro Baez were in the mix, as well, along with ageless veteran Jamey Wright, who had actually seemed to get better as he’d gotten older. Elbert was working his way back from injury. So was Chad Billingsley, who potentially would have fit in here if all five starters were healthy when he was ready. Paul Maholm was, too, I suppose, though more as a swingman — and he did end up making eight starts before blowing out his knee.
Here’s how that bullpen, which seemed like it would have more talent than places to put them, actually ended up: No. 26, in one of the rare times where FIP-WAR and RA9-WAR see eye-to-eye. In one or the other, they variously beat out the Tigers, Astros, Diamondbacks and Rockies, also known as “three awful teams and another well-known relief disaster.”
Perhaps most amazingly, this all happened despite the presence of Jansen, who was one of the best closers in baseball. Despite some atrocious batted-ball luck, Jansen was essentially Craig Kimbrel, walking fewer and striking out nearly as many as the celebrated Atlanta closer, and actually posting a better K%-BB%. Jansen was also the only Dodger reliever who wasn’t seen as replacement-level or worse, by FIP-WAR. (RA9-WAR at least likes Howell a bit more.)
Other than Jansen, though? Just about every other notable piece under-performed. Some of that’s to be expected, because we know how volatile relievers are, and some of it was due to injury. Withrow showed early wildness, then blew out his elbow in May. Billingsley never made it back. Onelki Garcia’s reportedly minor off-season elbow surgery ate his entire year.
Still, just compare actual performance to Dan Szymborski’s 2014 ZiPS projections run in late December. The table below shows every Dodger reliever with at least 10 innings pitched, which really only eliminates Dominguez, who spent most of the season in Triple-A and missed time with a shoulder injury; Elbert, who pulled the rare “DFA’d in July, playoff roster in October” pairing; and expanded roster call-up Daniel Coulombe. (It also doesn’t include swingman Kevin Correia, who was acquired in an August waiver deal from Minnesota and was an absolute disaster, allowing seven homers in 24.2 innings.)
| Name | IP | K% | BB% | K-BB% | BABIP | ERA | FIP | WAR | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jamey Wright | 2014 | 68.1 | 17.2% | 8.4% | 8.8% | 0.308 | 4.35 | 3.48 | 0.1 |
| ZIPS | 58.7 | 20.0% | 8.8% | 11.2% | 0.293 | 3.53 | 3.33 | 0.4 | |
| Kenley Jansen | 2014 | 65.1 | 37.7% | 7.1% | 30.6% | 0.350 | 2.76 | 1.91 | 2.0 |
| ZIPS | 70.2 | 39.0% | 7.7% | 31.3% | 0.281 | 1.91 | 1.96 | 1.7 | |
| Brandon League | 2014 | 63 | 13.9% | 9.9% | 4.0% | 0.319 | 2.57 | 3.40 | 0.1 |
| ZIPS | 60.1 | 15.5% | 7.2% | 8.3% | 0.286 | 4.03 | 3.72 | -0.1 | |
| J.P. Howell | 2014 | 49 | 24.1% | 12.6% | 11.6% | 0.236 | 2.39 | 3.30 | 0.3 |
| ZIPS | 50.2 | 21.2% | 9.6% | 11.6% | 0.276 | 3.37 | 3.56 | 0.3 | |
| Brian Wilson | 2014 | 48.1 | 24.2% | 13.0% | 11.2% | 0.336 | 4.66 | 4.29 | -0.4 |
| ZIPS | 38.3 | 24.3% | 8.9% | 15.4% | 0.285 | 3.05 | 3.02 | 0.4 | |
| Chris Perez | 2014 | 46.1 | 19.5% | 12.5% | 7.0% | 0.256 | 4.27 | 5.07 | -0.8 |
| ZIPS | 58.1 | 22.5% | 8.3% | 14.2% | 0.295 | 4.47 | 4.53 | -0.3 | |
| Paul Maholm | 2014 | 27 | 14.4% | 8.5% | 5.9% | 0.348 | 5.00 | 3.21 | 0.1 |
| ZIPS | 147.3 | 15.9% | 6.7% | 9.2% | 0.285 | 3.91 | 3.94 | 2.0 | |
| Carlos Frias | 2014 | 25.2 | 24.0% | 5.8% | 18.3% | 0.243 | 4.91 | 3.4 | 0.0 |
| ZIPS | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Pedro Baez | 2014 | 24 | 19.6% | 5.4% | 14.1% | 0.197 | 2.63 | 3.88 | 0.0 |
| ZIPS | 61.1 | 14.6% | 10.2% | 4.4% | 0.287 | 5.14 | 5.11 | -0.9 | |
| Chris Withrow | 2014 | 21.1 | 31.1% | 20.0% | 11.1% | 0.214 | 2.95 | 3.79 | -0.1 |
| ZIPS | 54.1 | 23.6% | 11.2% | 12.4% | 0.249 | 3.48 | 3.77 | 0.3 | |
| Paco Rodriguez | 2014 | 14 | 26.4% | 7.6% | 18.9% | 0.324 | 3.86 | 2.92 | 0.1 |
| ZIPS | 41.2 | 27.2% | 9.0% | 18.2% | 0.306 | 3.02 | 2.93 | 0.4 | |
| Yimi Garcia | 2014 | 10 | 25.0% | 2.8% | 22.2% | 0.167 | 1.80 | 4.23 | -0.1 |
| ZIPS | 57.1 | 24.6% | 9.2% | 15.4% | 0.288 | 4.24 | 4.11 | -0.3 | |
(Wright, Maholm and Perez’ projections were run with other teams, as they were not Dodgers yet, though it’s not likely much would have changed. Frias came from so far off the radar that he didn’t even have a projection.)
There are a lot of numbers there, probably too many, so let me sum it up for you: Jansen was just as outstanding as he was expected to be. Howell was mostly fine until an inexplicable late-season slump that continued into the playoffs. League actually turned around 2013’s disaster to become one of the National League’s preeminent ground ball machines, though an inability to miss bats or contain walks limited his utility.
Wilson, however, was a mess from the start. He landed on the disabled list in April with a sore right elbow, and he struggled with his velocity and command all season. Wright was essentially replacement-level. Perez wasn’t expected to be good, then under-performed that. Baez, a converted third baseman, showed some value, but also lost velocity down the stretch as he was put into more important situations. Rodriguez spent most of his year struggling in Triple-A. Maholm added little.
As the season went on, it became clear this was an issue and it was not getting better. But the deadline came and went without any moves. Ned Colletti was crushed for that, perhaps not unfairly, though only two valuable relievers — Joakim Soria and Andrew Miller — were actually moved, and neither came cheaply. (Soria also didn’t help Detroit much around being injured.) In retrospect, that looks like a huge mistake; however, we don’t know the deals on the table, and if it had been something like “Joc Pederson for Hector Rondon,” or whatever was actually on the table, perhaps it’s better undone. We’ll never know, and as we saw anyway, teams making big trades didn’t automatically get anywhere in October.
Ultimately, it was such an issue that in the playoffs, Elbert, who had pitched only 4.1 MLB innings in September after missing more than two seasons with elbow injuries, made the cut. So did Frias, who’d had one of the worst games in the history of baseball only a few weeks earlier when pressed into the rotation, and so did Baez, who had pitched one inning apiece in brief May and July recalls before sticking in August. Perez did not.
So: Should Mattingly have trusted this group more in October? Elbert, Baez and Howell all gave up game-changing homers, and Kershaw might have been out of both of his games before disaster struck had the options been better. We all know how dangerous the effects of a recency bias can be — just look at the seemingly bizarre decision to sit Yasiel Puig in Game 4, then use him only as a pinch-runner — but it’s also not hard to see, with Howell’s rough few weeks, why Mattingly thought he had only a single viable bullpen option.
Maybe, as Jonah Keri noted during Game 4, Jansen would have been a bold choice in the seventh inning with Kershaw in trouble. But that’s a move no manager would have made, and with this group, it’s hard to shake the feeling that it would have only delayed the inevitable disaster. Right or wrong — there’s clearly room for either interpretation — Mattingly just didn’t have a lot of choices here. There was probably never a “right button to push.”
As for next year? Well, back in January, Colin Zarzycki noted that the Dodger bullpen cost more than the entire Astros roster. I can’t say I know what Houston’s spending will be this winter, but we do know that the Dodgers will again have an expensive bullpen. Wilson (with a $10 million player option that will surely be picked up), League ($8.5 million) and Howell ($5.5 million) are all under contract, as is the arbitration-eligible Jansen, who should get a bump from his $4.3 million 2014 salary. Right there, that’s nearly $30 million, and if Ned Colletti keeps his job, that’s sure to increase when he throws money at Miller or Sergio Romo or David Robertson.
Mattingly probably did the best he could with this group. Wildly expensive finances aside, it just wasn’t enough. It’s not the only reason they’re already home — the offense didn’t exactly step up against the Cardinals — but it’s the most visible, and it’s terribly disappointing for Dodger fans.
Mike Petriello used to write here, and now he does not. Find him at @mike_petriello or MLB.com.
But if they were going to pitch Kershaw on three days’ rest, why didn’t any starters move to the pen?
They don’t have a fifth starter. Dan Haren was available as a long man if Ryu blew up early, but he’s not a late inning reliever, or any good.
Yeah there’s not much there. If only the Phils had gotten them to take Papelbon…
Bye, Bye Dodgers and Nats. All the second guessing in the world won’t change the fact that they lost and are eliminated.
Strong take
But correct.
Deep Thoughts
I want to die in my sleep peacefully like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers.
I think you took a wrong turn on your way to the Yahoo! message boards.
I was thinking YouTube, but yeah.
Not enough profanity or racial slurs for a Youtube commenter. Definitely Yahoo or ESPN.
I thought I left all the bad news with the turn of the calendar, but Sergio Romo will be available this offseason? If Ned survives, he would be the Neddest of all Ned moves.
“…if Ned Colletti keeps his job…”
Keeping his job is the only thing that Ned Colletti is good at.
Click the name
I used to be, too.
Sigh, I guess i keep going back to the “no risk” signing of Maholm and Perez. if we’ve learned anything from Ned over the years it’s that he has a penchant for holding onto veterans while keeping (potentially) better talent in the minors for the sake of “depth.” Guess that should be considered when signing these guys who clearly won’t be jettisoned until absolutely necessary.
What better talent in the minors?
“though only two valuable relievers — Joakim Soria and Andrew Miller — were actually moved”
Huston Street?
Broxton too.
I think he meant middle relievers, as a closer wasn’t necessary.
But Soria, IIRC, took over the closer job from Nathan for a brief time (then got injured).
Plus when you have Jansen, you can bump Street and whatnot down to help out your other guys.
Grilli
..and i should point out, as a goat who has regularly and vocally hated on don, you’re right on with pointing out that these things were not his fault.
benching puig on the other hand…
I was one of those fans who got onto Mattingly for it, but after further examination of the bullpen (and this article in particular) it is pretty clear Donny B had no “good” option, except to bring in Jansen for a high leverage inning and hope for the best. :/
It took two independent decisions for Scott Elbert to get into the game.
Ned had to put him on the roster even though there is no cognizable argument that he is better than Paco Rodriguez.
Mattingly had to allow him to pitch in what was by far the highest leverage Cardinals PA of the game.
Both of these decisions are fireable offenses.
So would you have put in the lefty who gave up a HR the game before, your closer, or one of your ineffective righties?
The lefty who has a 2.25ish ERA and a 3.0ish FIP over the last 2 years instead of the one who was literally DFA’d 8 weeks ago.
Who cares what happened in Howell’s last PA?
well, it wasn’t JUST his “last PA,” because Howell was pretty bad in September, too. I do agree with you, though.
Exactly, no way should you allow Elbert to lose a game for you in that situation. What he pitch , 4 innings in the regular season? He certainly should have been on a short leash if he was going to be used.
Bad bullpens, band managers, are both death to any playoff team.
Elbert and Wilson should have been absolute last resorts. Probably the two worst relievers on a post-season roster.
I’m standing right here!
It appears DODGER DIGEST has faded just like LA. Whassup?
What?
Last update at DodgersDigest was Oct.03 according to what appears on my screen.
This happens to me too, just refresh the page whenever you travel there. IDK maybe it only happens when I use a bookmark
Ctrl-F5 should do the trick.
This would.make.a.nice.mini series – How did that team x bullben get so bad. Id love to see a similar article on the jays, dbacks, and rockies who were all ranked in the top 10 pre season here…
Sergio Santos kept getting hurt and being terrible (because he’s hurt? Who knows), Steve Delabar let the lightning out of his bottle, and Casey Janssen started the season on the DL with back pain, then got food poisoning during the ASB and really wasn’t the same afterwards. That’s 2.5 seasons worth of late inning relief lost in one season.
Zhuzh that up to a few hundred words and press Publish.
Or the reverse. How did Baltimore/KC’s bullpen get so good?
In 20-20 hindsight, the other decision that Mattingly could have made was to bring on Haren before Kershaw got into trouble. Kershaw has never started on 3 days rest during the regular season in his career. He did it once last year in the playoffs. He was throwing brilliantly as usual through 6 innings and 91 pitches (3 hits, 6 strikeouts, 2 unearned runs), but was taken out for Bellisario to start the 7th.
Kershaw had thrown 94 pitches entering the 7th and Mattingly had no good options other than Jansen. I don’t see why you wouldn’t bring on Haren to start the 7th except for some bizarre idea about not taking out a pitcher who is throwing a shutout.
Also, that Haren isn’t very good and doesn’t have much relief experience. You don’t want him against Adams, either.
I had absolutely no problem with Kershaw starting the 7th. I would have had a lefty warming (Frias/Baez, RHP, were) for Adams, though. I suppose that means Mattingly never intended to have anyone but Kershaw there.
Also, Kershaw was mowing down hitters befoe the 7th. So Mattingly would have to be able to foresee the future, according to you. Also, yes, Haren isn’t exactly good any more.
Also, it’s easy to second guess, but were you saying the same thing before the 7th began last night? Proof?
I absolutely did say the same thing. Proof: https://twitter.com/mike_petriello/status/519625777017397248
Mike: Note who I was responding too, please.
Love the twitter background.
Rick Honeycutt’s publicist for 40?
It was mentioned in the last paragraph, but for all the talk about Kershaw and the bullpen, allowing 8 runs over the last three games of the series really seems like it should’ve been good enough for the pitching staff. The offense managing 6 runs in those games was a killer.
The Dodgers had an offense?
You know the other thing that stands out to me about that table? Quite a few pitchers had actual BABIPs that were noticeably higher than those projected for them. While I imagine most pitchers are prone to considerable variations in their BABIP year-to-year and throughout a single year (thanks, Voros), might we say that the Dodgers also suffered a certain amount of batted ball bad luck for their pen? Or should we just say that the projected BABIP was a pretty poor projection? Or are the higher than projected BABIP numbers indicative of the relievers being genuinely worse talent-wise than they were thought to be?
I guess I am mostly just surprised that I noticed this trend in the BABIP column and it wasn’t addressed in the article. Is there anything to be said about it?
FIP neutralizes BABIP. So, no, it wasn’t luck. The bullpen was not very good all season.
Ah, true. Certainly what you are saying does not address Jansen, who had the second most IP and a FIP that beat the projection ever so slightly. Right? He does appear to have suffered from bad luck, wouldn’t we say? Isn’t that the conclusion we ought to draw when we see that his BABIP is significantly higher than the projection, as is his ERA, while his FIP is just under what was projected?
Or am I misreading the situation here?
They didn’t spend enough…
I know you’re being facetious, but had they spent more, in the terms of prospects, they could have gotten Andy Miller and would still be playing. He cost Bal’mer an elite pitching prospect, but he’s why they’re here today. Elite prospects mean less to a team with LA’s payroll than they do to one with Baltimore’s. They knew they had a terrible bullpen at the trade deadline. They should have paid for Miller.
It seemed clear to me in the 6th inning, that Kershaw was done. He was expending a ton of effort on every pitch, as shown by him grunting a couple of times. Also, his command had started to slip, as he left some pitches in bad spots that he got away with. He also threw a couple of fastballs in the 89-91 range. I’m sorry, but knowing that he is on 3 days rest, and knowing the previous workload on him over the last couple of years, I have to have Haren come in for the 7th if I dont trust my bad bullpen (by the way, where was Paco Rodriguez in this series?). Also, why wasnt Jansen for 2 innings an option earlier in the series? Knowing Mattingly, would he have been smart enough to go to Jansen for 2 innings had Kershaw actually got through the 7th?
The very fact that you’re suggesting that Haren should’ve been used shows how bad the bullpen is. Haren is not a reliever and had been extremely mediocre as a starter this year. That’s not really someone you would want on the mound late in a game with your season on the line. There should’ve been better options for Mattingly.
obviously, and I would say injuries earlier in the year played a part in that for the Dodgers. I’m just saying there were things that could have been done, despite the bullpen being as bad as it was. Are we saying that a major league bullpen cant get through 1 inning of a postseason game?
Have you seen the Tigers play?
fair point, but we could also argue that Brad Ausmus didnt do the best job he could have done with the bullpen in that Game 2. At least he had guys he could have used, but didnt.
As to the “Jansen Before the 9th?” question, I posted on DD after Game 1 that I thought Jansen should have been brought in during inning #7 when the Cardinals had gone up 7-6. The Dodgers were being blitzkrieged and needed a nuke, something to turn the tide, or at least to neutralize the onslaught. Watching the game, I felt the likelihood of a higher leverage potential use for Jansen in that game was remote. Given the overwhelming importance of Game #1 in a 5 game series overcomes any argument that it is too early in the series to take that kind of risk. Yes, you risk criticism for burning your closer early but the alternative, as we saw, is Jansen’s contribution value to Game #1 being zero.
” Given the overwhelming importance of Game #1 in a 5 game series…”
Says who?
The first two games are meaningless.
They had a couple of BP guys who had a bad outing, it happens. The key to a manager in the playoffs is not overreacting. That’s what Mattingly did, you have to keep going with those that brought you there.
Also, if Mattingly lost faith in his pen over a ridiculously small sample, then starting Kershaw on short rest made no sense, since he was unlikely to go deep as he can when he is on with full rest.
So says Brad Ausmus!
Here’s what Donny could have done, if he were thinking outside the box:
Before Game 3, tell Haren and Kershaw that Haren will start Game 4, and be announced as the starter. Keep it secret that he will only go two or three innings, then bring in Kershaw in the 3rd or 4th inning, and let Clayton pitch through the 8th inning. Have Kershaw prepare the game just like he’s starting, only he enters in the 3rd or 4th.
Sounds clever, Dude, but Haren’s worst inning by far is the first; there’s too much risk for a win or done game.
sOPS+ of 154 next highest the 5th at 134 then the 3rd at 102 then 88 in the 4th. 8 HR, 26 runs, 11 doubles in 144 PA.