Skip to content

UPDATE: Dodgers GM Ned Colletti says Don Mattingly is “doing fine”

May 20, 2013, 8:00 PM EDT

Los Angeles Dodgers v Atlanta Braves Getty Images

UPDATE: Just a quick follow-up from this morning, Dodgers general maanger Ned Colletti told the Associated Press earlier this evening that manager Don Mattingly is “doing fine.”

Asked if it was false to say Mattingly would be fired this week, Colletti simply said: “My perspective hasn’t changed. I’m done talking about it.”

8:52 AM ET: I mean, yes, it’s totally reasonable to think his job is in jeopardy given how poorly the Dodgers have played amid high expectations. But Ken Rosenthal’s latest column is pretty bold in speculating that Mattingly’s days are numbered. Rather than just analyze the team’s struggles, Rosenthal talks about his gut feeling that Mattingly could be fired at any moment. And quotes an anonymous scout who feels the same way:

Watching Sunday’s meltdown on television, I thought, “Mattingly might be gone tomorrow.” And then I got a text from a rival scout, one who has no particular insight into the Dodgers, but is attuned — like so many in the sport — to the game’s day-to-day rhythms.

“Making the call — Donnie Ballgame will get the axe tomorrow,” the scout said.

When I asked the scout why he thought that, he replied, “Gut feeling. The way they’ve been losing.”

Rosenthal is kinda like Buster Olney in that rarely do either of them make predictions or speculate about things without a pretty solid basis for doing so and rarely do either of them tease something that is unlikely to happen. While I don’t have too big a problem with people who handle their beat differently, there’s a conservatism about Rosenthal and Olney that is admirable in the scoop business.

So I can’t help but wonder — and it is just a wonder — if maybe Rosenthal has some inside info on Mattingly’s future that, while not quite solid enough to be actionable in a proper news report, gives him some comfort to say stuff like this.

Either way: I look forward to the “Trey Hillman-as-interim-manager, transitioning to Mike Scioscia as permanent manager” era for the Dodgers with great eagerness.

  1. unclemosesgreen - May 20, 2013 at 9:11 AM

    Scioscia is the obvious name, I’ll give you that. But I have an outside the box exacta candidate for you – what about hiring the Maddux brothers? Mike as Manager, Greg as Pitching Coach.

    • Kevin S. - May 20, 2013 at 9:23 AM

      I think Dodger management is in “throw tons of money at established names” mode. It’ll be Scioscia unless he somehow survives this season.

      • hep3 - May 20, 2013 at 12:31 PM

        If Mattingly goes, Tommy Lasorda will campaign to have his favorite, Bobby Valentine, front and center. With a quiet guy like Mattingly, they will probably want a holler guy like Valentine.

        Hopefully, the Dodgers will realize that neither Lasorda or Valentine are relevant. But then again, since I am not a Dodgers fan, maybe they will hire Valentine.

        Mr. Applegate could make it happen.

      • radiopirate - May 20, 2013 at 4:00 PM

        hep3, speaking for Giants fans everywhere, we can only pray the Dodgers hire Bobby Valentine.

      • quintjs - May 20, 2013 at 10:26 PM

        radiopirate, speaking for Red Sox fans everywhere (especially the ones dissatisfied with Crawford and Beckett), please let the Dodgers hire Bobby Valentine.

  2. xpensivewinos - May 20, 2013 at 9:19 AM

    I’m not the biggest Mattingly fan, but the Dodgers fiasco falls on Colletti, much the way the Angels situation is more DiPoto than Scioscia.

    The ridiculously expensive team he put together with no rhyme or reason is a pathetic joke. Granted, some of the injuries have not helped (but everyone has to deal with those), but Gonazalez, Crawford, Beckett & Hanley are all shells of what they were and virtually every contract they gave out is ridiculous from Ethier on down…….

    Quite a collection of GMs in Los Angeles with Colletti & DiPoto.

    • heyblueyoustink - May 20, 2013 at 9:30 AM

      Throw in the Laker and Clipper management and you have one hell of an entertaining sports town.

    • koufaxmitzvah - May 20, 2013 at 9:41 AM

      You’re not watching the Dodgers. Crawford has been effective as a lead-off man, and Gonzalez is the only guy knocking guys in. Punto, of all people, has been one of the few bats in the lineup doing something positive. And nobody expected anything out of Beckett; his gifts were to always going to be gravy.

      The Boston trade is not the reason this team isn’t getting it together, and neither is Mattingly, but when a high profile team eager to make big moves starts to struggle, everybody else is the genius.

      • stlouis1baseball - May 21, 2013 at 9:16 AM

        On point Sandy. Watching from afar…I don’t think it’s got anything to do with Mattingly.
        But admittedly…I am biased as he’s a fellow Hoosier. One thing I know for sure…you gotta’ be pulling your hair out. I feel for ya. With that roster…not what I expected.

      • koufaxmitzvah - May 21, 2013 at 10:57 AM

        If I had hair to pull out, I’d be a lot younger man than I am right now. As it is, I just hope that this all balances out. That a crazy 20 wins in 25 games streak is attainable with my team.

        Hope you’re doing good, Lou.

      • stlouis1baseball - May 21, 2013 at 9:20 AM

        “Good teams have good chemistry. And good chemistry lacks personal ego.”
        This is essentially what David West said about the Indiana Pacers.
        I know…not baseball. But I love a team that rebounds and plays defense.

    • Kevin S. - May 20, 2013 at 9:46 AM

      I’d blame the Angels’ situation more on Moreno than DiPito, especially if Arte’s splash moves have cut into the rest of DiPito’s budget.

    • gibbyfan - May 20, 2013 at 10:18 AM

      I think you and Kevin hit the nail on the head —Hopefully the takeaway will be that you have to have something more than tons of money to put together a winnning team –the contest is not soley about inflated bank accounts and egos–somebody has to know something about the game —I love the fact that both LA teamss sat home last october and are at the bottom of the heap this year. If this happens more and the super egos of the super rich begin to look foolish maybe some kind of sanity will be restored —but unfortunately, good managers like DM will have to take the first hits

      • koufaxmitzvah - May 20, 2013 at 10:45 AM

        Sounds like your baseball knowledge is more based on your dislike for SoCal than the actual reality. The Dodgers owners have deep pockets, but the players who have received most of the attention cost the Dodgers 5 minor leaguers and James Loney. Do you honestly believe the Dodgers would be contending if they had only kept Webster, Eovaldi, and dela Rosa on their 40 man roster? Yeah, they’re all in the minor leagues right now, so no dice for you.

      • ryanrockzzz - May 20, 2013 at 11:26 AM

        Agreed, the ownership groups for both of these teams made the cardinal sin, which was trying to build through free agency/large contract players.

        Granted, not a lot in the way of prospects has been given up in the Dodgers case, but now they are stuck with untradeable contracts and declining players. It’s a shame owners never learn, but it’s a truth of the world they come from. Their money usually can buy them the right people, however in baseball we all know you have to have the right mix of young/old to be a contender.

      • gibbyfan - May 20, 2013 at 11:33 AM

        Didnt say they would be contending had they not made the trades and spent the big $$ –I’m saying just spending the big $$ doesnt necessarily get it done. There is a difference. SO now they are not contending with two of the highest payrolls in baseball which is making a bda situation worse.
        Not anti LA at all —just a old time fan of the game and rooting against it being all about the dollars

      • koufaxmitzvah - May 20, 2013 at 12:19 PM

        Then be fair about it, Gibby. The Red Sox signed all of those former Boston-player deals and the Marlins signed Hanley, while the Dodgers spent minor leaguers on contracts that new owners can afford, done so that they can revamp a ballclub that had been decimated by FMC and Wifey so that they could buy an addition 7 mansions in the SoCal area.

        The past 2 ownerships have had diametrically opposite approaches to building a ballclub. FMC sees Adrian Beltre’s amazing 2004 and doesn’t even offer him a contract until Beltre rejects the first contract offered (and then the Dodgers low ball Beltre). Compare that with the new owners finding some awful contracts and investing in them so as to replace a very futile infield. I’m not happy with the results, but I’m still watching my ballclub knowing that the new owners aren’t trying to pull wool over the fans’ eyes.

      • gibbyfan - May 20, 2013 at 1:23 PM

        Point taken Koufax……..as pertains to the Dodgers one could look at it that way –their fans deserve a break. My feelings on this most certainly apply to the Bosox and most of all the first and foremost offenders–the Yanks. I don’t presume to have the answer, but I love the game and every instinct tells me the imbalance of dollars where some have seemingly no limit has to be bad for the game.
        Maybe as a cardinal fan, it’s simply a matter of envy because of what happened with Albert………but I so support the decisions made by Cardinal management to impose some kind of realistic limit –only to see the Angles swoop in with a money is no object approach and sign him to an absurd contract—do I hope the Angels get burned–absolutely —Do I think contracts like this will change the landscape and competive balance? Hopefully.
        BTW–like any real fan of the game, I was a huge fan of Sandy Koufax–used to love to awatch him pitch—In my opinion –the best ever. The matchups between him and Gibson were what it was all about.

      • koufaxmitzvah - May 20, 2013 at 3:09 PM

        I’m such a Dodger that I think of your Gibby as being my Gibby. (Or to put it differently, I saw your handle and thought Diamondback.) I hear what you’re saying about my team, and as a whole I agree that high salaries prove to be more futile than an guarantee of glory. Kevin Brown, anyone?

        Good teams have good chemistry. And good chemistry lacks personal ego. More money generally leads to a heavy handed ego, yet the good news about this batch of Dodgers is that I really don’t see any overt self-importance harming team play.

        Anyway, if it matters, no hard feelings on this end. I see the point you’re making, and you make sense.

  3. StottsEra - May 20, 2013 at 9:37 AM

    That scout is wrong – It’s “Donnie Baseball” not “Donnie Ballgame”

    • mybrunoblog - May 20, 2013 at 10:08 AM

      Traditionally, it is “Donnie Baseball” but in fairness I’ve heard “Donnie Ballgame” tossed around for years. Either way it doesn’t look good for old number 23.
      I’ve heard Donnie does not interview well. Unfortunately I think he’d have a tough time landing another managers job. He was by all accounts a terrific hitting coach so he always has that to fall back on.

      • vallewho - May 20, 2013 at 10:24 AM

        Everyone knows it’s Donnie Baseball and Teddy Ballgame.

    • stlouis1baseball - May 21, 2013 at 9:17 AM

      Yep…Donnie Baseball.

  4. unclemosesgreen - May 20, 2013 at 9:38 AM

    This headline is just begging for an OG Soylent Green reference.

  5. koufaxmitzvah - May 20, 2013 at 9:44 AM

    Honeycutt is the bigger bother to this Dodgers fan. The bullpen has no identity except Floodgates.

  6. genericcommenter - May 20, 2013 at 10:04 AM

    Scioscia is not a good manager- but he’ll keep getting hired. Is there some place for Donnie to fail to?

  7. yahmule - May 20, 2013 at 10:21 AM

    If I owned the Dodgers – my bid of $8000 was seemingly ignored – I would be disappointed that I could only fire Colletti and Mattingly once each.

    • Kevin S. - May 20, 2013 at 10:25 AM

      You clearly paid no attention to the Billy Martin/George Steinbrenner relationship.

  8. tycobbfromfangraphs - May 20, 2013 at 11:13 AM

    Matt Kemp has no character, got paid and checked out. (or got clean) Shouldn’t surprise anyone considering him dating that trash bag hoe a few years ago.

    • ryanrockzzz - May 20, 2013 at 11:27 AM

      Angry much?

      • tycobbfromfangraphs - May 20, 2013 at 11:31 AM

        Why would I be angry? I’m not a Dodger fan, and I’m not about to lose my job because Kemp took the money and ran.

        I think you’re angry at me telling the truth. Kemp IS a singles hitter now and Rhianna IS a hoe.

      • tycobbfromfangraphs - May 20, 2013 at 11:46 AM

        To the thumbs down
        .074 ISO says hello, it’s traveling with it’s equally unimpressive friend .340 SLG

      • koufaxmitzvah - May 20, 2013 at 12:24 PM

        You’re getting thumbed down because

        1. Of an empty and lame accusation that Kemp was only productive because he was juicing;
        2. Of a lame and empty assessment that a woman Kemp dated as a “Trash Bag Hoe”;
        3. 1+2 = 3 inch Prick

        But at least you chose the right former ballplayer to emulate. I wouldn’t count spiking a kneecap or trying to start a race riot as too low a blow by you.

      • tycobbfromfangraphs - May 20, 2013 at 2:37 PM

        Oh if you don’t think Rhinna doesn’t qualify as a trash bag hoe, you haven’t followed her in the past 2 years…especially the past 2 weeks. She’s confirmed trash, a drama case and nut. Anyone who could tolerate the type of trash that she most certainly 100% without a doubt is, well they are not much better.

      • koufaxmitzvah - May 20, 2013 at 3:14 PM

        Maybe you didn’t understand what I was writing. Your anonymous message board blabber means very little to me, especially your need to bring up Rhianna and some bullshit drug accusation as if you’ve solidified some point.

        For a fearless poster such as yourself, maybe you ought to stop wondering aloud about your down-dings and just accept them. We don’t always win out there. In fact, all you’re showing me is how much of a loser you really are.

    • shandbi - May 20, 2013 at 2:25 PM

      Um…Rhianna has NOTHING to do with this, you dips—. Really, get your mind out of the gutter..oh wait, the dodgers ARE in the gutter… Oh, and please learn the proper usage of the word hoe… HOE = garden tool, HO = a verse of Santa’s laugh. If you wish to call a woman who can sleep with whomever she chooses a dirty name, please include the men she sleeps with in the discription.

      • tycobbfromfangraphs - May 20, 2013 at 2:31 PM

        http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/hoe

        hoe

        noun

        a general insult, usually applied to females.
        She is such a hoe.
        Shut up, hoe!
        I hit that hoe already.
        You dah hoe!
        Your daddy is a hoe.

        a promiscuous female. Diminutive form of “whore.” Also ho, hoebag, hoecake..

        a prostitute. Diminutive form of “whore.” Also spelled ho.

        Dating (not just banging) Rhianna and anyone like her is something stupid people do. Sorry, just stating facts.
        Just like the fact that Kemp isn’t a true professional, his inconsistency is a testament to that fact.

    • shandbi - May 20, 2013 at 2:52 PM

      OMG, I cannot stop laughing at you! I so sincerely hope you have a real girl date very soon…

      • tycobbfromfangraphs - May 20, 2013 at 2:59 PM

        I had trouble stopping myself from laughing when some trashy commenter ran to whine about the proper spelling of slang. Only to be proven wrong. I mean only some sorta low-life actually rushes to type “it’s ho not hoe, L2S”
        Which isn’t surprising considering this same peon also gets bent outta shape at the suggestion that Rhianna is trash.

        This is why I never make conversation with those shinning my shoes.

      • tommyshih - May 20, 2013 at 6:34 PM

        “Now go home and get your shinebox.”

    • shandbi - May 20, 2013 at 3:52 PM

      STILL LAUGHING!! ‘shining’ not ‘shinning’… You are freakin’ hilarious dude! This is a BASEBALL board NOT a blog where you can take out your frustrations about women. Maybe you can try for Rhianna!

  9. psousa1 - May 20, 2013 at 11:22 AM

    Now Carl Crawford, Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Beckett can say they helped drag down a top of the division team in each league!

  10. xpensivewinos - May 20, 2013 at 11:58 AM

    Sounds like your baseball knowledge is more based on your dislike for SoCal than the actual reality. The Dodgers owners have deep pockets, but the players who have received most of the attention cost the Dodgers 5 minor leaguers and James Loney. Do you honestly believe the Dodgers would be contending if they had only kept Webster, Eovaldi, and dela Rosa on their 40 man roster? Yeah, they’re all in the minor leagues right now, so no dice for you.

    ———————————————————————————————————————————————
    What kind of argument is that and what does geography have to do with it? I live in SoCal.

    What they gave up is irrelevant. They acquired player after player, all of whom are overpaid either by them or gladly inheriting someone else’s ridiculous mistake and look where they are. They’ve built their team poorly based on a strategy that has blown up in their face and spent too much to do it. How can you not see that? You now have the benefit of hindsight to guide you.

    Fret not though, Adrian Gonzalez says this is all “God’s Will,” so at least you have that going for you.

    • koufaxmitzvah - May 20, 2013 at 3:23 PM

      The response you quoted was in relation this line: ” —I love the fact that both LA teamss sat home last october and are at the bottom of the heap this year.” Not written by you; response not made to you.

      Maybe you just think the whole world revolves around you. That’s okay, Punim. You’re special to somebody someplace, I am sure. You should tell that person you’re a cherry picker, though, and so that anything which you disagree with that they say will forever remain a harbinger of their character to you. Because fair is fair, and I would sure hate for you to not be aware of a major character flaw.

  11. bigharold - May 20, 2013 at 1:22 PM

    “.. why he thought that, he replied, “Gut feeling.”

    Sounds like the logic used in Moneyball by the old time scouts about a guy being able to hit because he had a good looking girlfriend.

  12. jwbiii - May 20, 2013 at 1:40 PM

    “So I can’t help but wonder — and it is just a wonder — if maybe Rosenthal has some inside info on Mattingly’s future that, while not quite solid enough to be actionable in a proper news report”

    There’s a poster on another board who works in production at ESPN. He says that Rosenthal (and Gammons) are working the phones whenever they’re not on camera. I find your explanation plausible.

  13. rohlo - May 20, 2013 at 1:55 PM

    maybe the dodger should stop tryng to be the yankess west and just be the Dodgers.. (torre,mattingly,spending boat loads of cash..) just be the dodgers and it should all come around…recent trends show spending alot of money and acquiring big name players hasnt worked so well as of late.. just ask the marlins and redsox from last year, the bluejays & dodgers & angels this year…the landscape is changing !too many ego’s with alot of money,pressure,and expectations put on them..

  14. kingjulian1955 - May 20, 2013 at 1:56 PM

    Maybe money can not save this club …could it be those who select the talent on the field that may be the problem.

  15. rickdobrydney - May 20, 2013 at 2:00 PM

    Its Donnie Baseball, not Donnie Ballgame…….

  16. shandbi - May 20, 2013 at 2:18 PM

    Problem? What problem? I love the dodgers just as they are…! GO GIANTS!

  17. nwh2787 - May 20, 2013 at 10:25 PM

    I think Trey Hillman will be fired before he even manages the Dodgers. I could say the same for Tim Wallach but I can actually see him managing the Dodgers over Mike Scioscia. But then again you never know what will happen.

  18. db105 - May 21, 2013 at 10:24 AM

    Donnie Clueless and his strange strategic decisions, such as the needless double switches, are always putting his team in a disadvantageous position.

  19. beachnbaseball - May 21, 2013 at 4:21 PM

    If Ned Colletti is giving Mattingly a vote of confidence, then Mattingly is a dead man walking. Sad because Mattingly should have never been put into a managerial position; especially with such a high profile team with 1st place expectations.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Red Sox shopping Lester and Lackey
Top 10 MLB Player Searches