Is there more to Mattingly leaving Dodgers than meets the eye?

It was one of those off-the-wall rumors that pop up from time to to – talk of another team being interested in a manager who is still under contract with his current team; this in spite of the fact that such a thing is illegal under MLB’s ‘tampering’ rule. So when the rumor broke that the Miami Marlins were showing an interest in Dodgers manager Don Mattingly back on September 2 while the Dodgers were closing in on their third consecutive National League West Division title and with the Dodgers manager still under contract through the 2016 season, the rumor was, of course, denied by Mattingly.

“It’s not going to be a disruption, promise me,” said Mattingly prior to the September 2 game against the Giants at Dodger Stadium. “Preston called me today, he’s the one that keeps me informed about anything that’s going on. I have no idea where that comes from. I’m happy [here in L.A.], I’m not worried about anything as far as that goes. Again, I’m happy where I’m at, I like being here, I feel like I’m a Dodger and that being said, pretty much is all we need to talk about as far as me. I think we talk about winning games, moving forward and that’s really all I care about and that’s really what these guys care about.”

One has to wonder if Mattingly would have been so willing to walk away from the Dodgers if he didn't have even some suspicion that the Marlins were courting him. (Photo credit - Ron Cervenka)

One has to wonder if Mattingly would have been so willing to walk away from the Dodgers if he didn’t have even some suspicion that the Marlins were courting him. (Photo credit – Ron Cervenka)

When asked if this was a form of tampering, Mattingly continued to back away from the topic.

“I don’t have… you know… again, there’s nothing to talk about for me. I don’t know what happened… I don’t really… I didn’t read or what it’s saying or whatever, just… we need to win a game tonight.”

With that, one reporter said kiddingly “Are you a Miami kind of guy, Don?” The humor, however, was apparently lost on Mattingly.

“Would that be in the line of not talking about it?” he replied.

It would certainly come as no surprise to anyone if Marlins owner Jeffrey Loria (or someone on his behalf) had, in fact, spoken with the Dodgers skipper – illegal or otherwise. Loria, as you may recall, bilked Miami voters out of more than $600 million to build brand new Marlins Park after promising them he would invest heavily in the team. He appeared to keep his word by going out and acquiring free agent shortstop Jose Reyes (and then moving him to third base without telling him in order to appease current Marlins shortstop Hanley Ramirez), left-hander Mark Buehrle and closer Heath Bell during the 2011-2012 off-season.

But Loria got the last laugh on Florida voters when he traded Reyes, Buehrle, right-hander Josh Johnson, catcher John Buck and outfielder Emilio Bonifacio to the Toronto Blue Jays at the July 31 trade deadline that same season in what was clearly a salary dump. He also traded Ramirez to the Dodgers the following month for the exact same reason. In other words, the oft-criticized Marlins owner has issues with integrity and keeping his word when it comes to running his baseball team.

Sure enough, Mattingly leaves the Dodgers in what was described as “a mutual decision” between he, Dodgers President of Baseball Operations Andrew Friedman and General Manager Farhan Zaidi with one year still remaining on his multi-million dollar contract – and why wouldn’t he if he knew that he was (probably) going to be picked up by the Marlins less than a week later? I mean, heck, he’ll still receive guaranteed money from the Dodgers while, in all likelihood, signing a multi-year deal with Jeffrey Loria. Granted, the Mattingly-Marlins thing isn’t a done deal yet, but by every indication it soon will be.

One has to wonder if Farhan Zaidi and Andrew Friedman would have been so willing to cut ties with Dodgers manager Don Mattingly if they were still operating under the financial constraints of Oakland and Tampa Bay. (Photo credit - Jon SooHoo)

One has to also wonder if Zaidi and Friedman would have been so willing to cut ties with Mattingly if they were still operating under the financial constraints that they were in Oakland and Tampa Bay respectively. (Photo credit – Jon SooHoo)

The irony behind it all is that the Guggenheim Dodgers paid the full salaries of All-Star second baseman Dee Gordon and right-hander Dan Haren to play in Miami this past season and will more than likely pay Mattingly’s full salary in 2016.

Once again it looks as though Jeffrey Loria will get the last laugh.

 

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

3 Responses to “Is there more to Mattingly leaving Dodgers than meets the eye?”

  1. you’ve piqued my curiosity.

  2. OldBrooklynFan says:

    I hope someday, maybe through a book, I’ll find out what actually happened in the conversations between Mattingly and the Dodger front office that led to this breakup. The most interesting part is how they became further apart the more they talked.

    • Ron Cervenka says:

      “The most interesting part is how they became further apart the more they talked.”

      That is very true, Joe, and exactly why I believe that Mattingly “knew” that he already had a guaranteed job waiting for him in Miami if the Dodgers let him go (in spite of the obvious tampering violation). Of course, nobody is ever going to admit to this, most certainly not Jeffrey Loria.

      My guess is that Mattingly wanted a guaranteed multi-year contract extension from the Dodgers (to avoid what happened two years ago), which they weren’t about to do after three failed playoff attempts in three seasons.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress