December 6th, 2013 at 6:00 am 
by Ron Cervenka When we saw Matt Kemp roll his ankle on July 21, there isn’t anyone who didn’t say words to the effect of “That was dumb.” It was a completely avoidable injury that Matt Kemp himself said was a result of his laziness and an injury that when added to his chronic hamstring and shoulder injuries resulted in Kemp playing in a grand total of 73 games during the 2013 season – this on the heels of missing 56 games in 2012.
The instant that Kemp injured his ankle on July 21 on his first day back from the DL for a strained hamstring, it was clear that he would be returning to the DL for an extended period of time. (Photo credit – Nick Wass)
On the flip side, Kemp played in 161, 162, 159 and 155 games in 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008 respectively, so it’s unfair to suggest that he is fragile or injury-prone, as many Dodger fans, beat writers and bloggers have done.
Or is it?
With trade rumors running rampant about Kemp this off-season, there has been considerable discussion about his last two injury-ridden seasons and the fact that the Dodgers did quite well without him in the line-up. Even his manager pointed this out.
“Without saying it in a bad way, we played all year long without Matt. We went 42-8 without Matt,” said Don Mattingly. “We’re capable of winning (without him).”
No one can argue that a healthy Matt Kemp would make an already great Dodger offense line-up even better. The question is – can he stay healthy?
(Ron Cervenka – ThinkBlueLA.com)
Even if Mattingly had never said this, there isn’t a single Dodger fan who at least didn’t think this at some point in time. That being said, there also isn’t a Dodger fan out there who doesn’t know what a healthy Matt Kemp can mean for the NL West Champions.
“If you don’t have Andre (Ethier) and don’t have Matt (Kemp), you’re not as good as you could be,” added Mattingly. “But we’re still good enough to win.”
It is this last little tidbit by Mattingly that has Matt Kemp fans feeling a little uncomfortable of late – especially with the Dodgers in need of a third baseman (and to a lesser extent a second baseman) and with reports that the Mariners, Red Sox and even the Rangers are reportedly looking at Kemp as a possible trade piece. And with the Mariners having third baseman Kyle Seager, the Red Sox having third baseman Xander Bogaerts and the Rangers having infielder Elvis Andrus in their respective folds (not to mention Yankees second baseman Robinson Cano), a trade involving Kemp is certainly not out of the question.
To compound matters for Kemp (and Kemp fans), the Dodgers have top outfield prospects Joc Pederson and Scott Schebler Down on the Farm, with Pederson being very close to being MLB ready. (Note: I anticipate that Joc will receive an invitation to big league camp this spring – if he himself isn’t traded before then).
Another huge factor to take into consideration is that Kemp has six years remaining on his massive franchise-record eight-year/$160 million contract and is still owed $128 million by the Dodgers, of which they would have to eat a huge portion of to move Kemp. That alone may force the Guggenheim Baseball Management group to think twice about trading Kemp – at least for now, that is.
And while we will not know if Kemp’s last two seasons have been the exception as opposed to the rule until we see how he does in 2014, it is difficult not to wonder about his future as a Dodger – especially with reports that he might not be ready on opening day 2014 because of his recent ‘clean-up’ surgeries on his ankle and his shoulder.
As one would expect, Kemp is angry and frustrated with his past two seasons and he has been outspoken about his commitment to Dodger fans to get back to the old Matt Kemp – the one that should have won the 2011 NL MVP Award.
“I promise the fans of L.A. I’ll get back to form,” said Kemp.
Then again, what else is he going to say? But it’s what he hasn’t said that Kemp fans should feel pretty good about – he hasn’t said one single word about wanting to play anywhere other than in Los Angeles; nor has Dodger management given any indication that they are actively shopping him.
So, do the Dodgers gamble on keeping Matt Kemp hoping for his potential return to greatness, or do they trade him hoping to get something really good in return for his potential return to greatness?
I’ll let you be the judge of that.
Posted in 
I, for one, want him back. Of course I want him healthy. He has been LA’s biggest cheerleader even on the sidelines. He needs a chance to prove he can do 30/30 or 40/40 (as he predicted) and prove once again he can be MVP.
I totally agree with you that Kemp deserves a chance to prove whether or not he can get back to form, but to keep him solely as a cheerleader is a complete waste of money – and a lot of it for a very long time. Additionally, having a long-term injured Matt Kemp on the bench makes him a roadblock for Joc Pederson and/or other potential very good Dodger outfield prospects. (By the way, Linda, you will absolutely love Joc when you come to know him).
Because of his (now) history of hamstring and ankle issues, I would be surprised if Matt ever steals even 30 bases again. Although still quick (when not on the DL), Matt is now more of a four-tool player than a five-tool player, having lost his explosive speed.
As crazy as it sounds, I honestly believe that it is the insane amount of money owed to Kemp that will ultimately determine if he stays or goes (in addition to what the Dodgers can get for him, of course), because they have clearly proven that they can win without him.
All of this said, I too want Matt Kemp to remain a Dodger – but I want a healthy 150+ game Matt Kemp, not an injury-prone Grady Sizemore-type Matt Kemp.
It looks like one of three outfielders, Ethier, Kemp or Crawford, will be traded. Most likely Kemp or Ethier. While still in their prime, none look like they would fit in as someones fourth outfielder. Not at the present time anyway.
I think it will depend on some team’s needs and what they’ll be willing to give up to determine who will go.
Regardless, It looks like we’ll be saying goodbye to one of them.
I suspect it will be Ethier because his contract is smaller. I don’t care how much money the Dodgers have I just don’t want to pay guys to play elsewhere. That is just poor business practice, as bad as deferred money which strangles.
My choice would be Crawford but I don’t think he is tradeable. His production has declined, base stealing is basically gone and he has a big contract for four more years (age 32 through 35) It also seems he is the weakest fielder among the four. I think he has the possibility of Grady Sizemore syndrome. If so, then Joc might get a shot. Not sure where SVS fits but he has more power off the bench than bench players the Dodgers had last year.
I think Matt will remain a Dodger and has much to prove which I am counting on him to do so.
I disagree, Harold. I believe that Carl Crawford is an excellent player. You say that he is on the decline, yet (in my opinion) his only weakness is his throwing arm (which is obviously a big deal for an outfielder). However, in 116 games, he stole 15 bases. Granted, 15 SB’s isn’t all that great, but it was the most on the team and he seemed to be getting better at it towards the end of the season as his ailing back and hammy healed.
I agree that Crawford is no Matt Kemp, but he’s a hell of a lot better than a frequently DL’d Matt Kemp. That said, if Crawford can stay healthy, I see him as a huge asset to the team (except for his arm – although it should be better this coming season as he gets farther removed from his surgery).
The Dodgers were incredibly lucky to have had Puig as OF depth in 2013 or they never would have made it into the postseason.
I don’t want to be redundant, but Kemp was of little use to the Dodgers in 2013 (and much of 2012); and unless he comes back with a vengeance in 2014 (which I believe that he can and will do), he is nothing more than a roadblock and an over-priced cheerleader if he is unable to remain healthy – which is the very point of this article.
As I have said countless times – “It’s not our money” and I still stand by that. The problem is that the amount of the money makes it difficult to move guys because other teams are not (or cannot) take on those monster contracts. But here again, if the Dodgers are willing to eat most if not all of the money to move players, I’m ok with that because… it’s not our money.
It’s not my money. I just don’t like poor business practices being exercised by the team I love. Class means being classy with spending too – best bang for buck is not paying guys to play elsewhere. Because it’s not my money doesn’t mean I shouldn’t have an opinion regarding business practices, just as I have an opinion on player acquisitions and trades. Those poor business practices do strangle a team and influence overall team building regardless of how much money the team has.
I hope Carl is a dominant player. I said from the beginning he was the key to that trade for the Dodgers. Adrian is a given and Josh is gone in a year. His production is down. Now maybe it’s the result of injury. If so at age 32 it should get back towards his exceptional norm of 2010 and earlier just as a healthy Matt Kemp should approach his former exceptional performance. Health is a concern with both players.
As I say, among all the outfielders I think Crawford is the least tradeable.
I don’t like selling low on someone like Kemp. There were brief moments last year when we saw the MVP Kemp, giving me hope that he can come back. I think he will return to form if his ankle heals and there are no other hidden issues. The only reason I think the Dodgers would trade Kemp is if there is something we don’t know about the ankle. After the various problems with brittle outfielders in 2013 and a potential delay on the part of Kemp in spring training and the other outfielders are necessary and essential. While the Dodgers should always listen to offers, I just don’t see this as being anything serious at the moment. When all 4 are healthy and playing well this is an issue but not when so many had health problems last year.
I think what ever is going to happen will take place by next week at the owners meeting.