Would Craig Counsell have been a managerial upgrade over Dave Roberts for the Los Angeles Dodgers? That's up for debate. Roberts is one of the most successful skippers in Dodgers history and has played a similar role to Counsell in Milwaukee as a dugout mouthpiece for the front office ... or so many have speculated.
Did the Dodgers "miss out" by not making a serious play for Counsell, instead watching the Chicago Cubs poach him from the Brewers for an MLB-record five-year, $40 million contract? Again, up for debate. They could've done it. They didn't necessarily need to.
Really, the resounding issue here is the Dodgers' overall lack of urgency. When's the last time it felt like the Dodgers dropped everything they were doing and went out and got their guy? We'd say the Mookie Betts trade, but that was more so dragged out and hardly happened abruptly. We'd say the Freddie Freeman signing, but that took time, and the Dodgers were the obvious top suitor after the Braves gave the first baseman the cold shoulder.
The Cubs felt as if Counsell was one of the few missing pieces for them to get back into contention. They ditched David Ross and the final year of his contract, potentially affected the chemistry in the clubhouse, and spent an historic amount of money to make it happen. Does that always work? Not at all. But they think it might, and it shows a unique kind of initiative.
The Dodgers? Since 2020? They've let countless stars leave in free agency. They've avoided even more via free agency and on the trade market. They've been content with being a very good regular season team and have hardly done the necessary work to really diagnose what's gone wrong for them in October.
Dodgers fans should be angry with Cubs hiring Craig Counsell for one reason only
Again, we don't know if Roberts is the problem ... but we'll never truly know, either, if he's here every single year the Dodgers fall flat. He's the longest tenured manager in the National League now, something that will be viewed negatively rather than positively when you look at the postseason success (or lack thereof).
Dodgers fans can point to a few deals where the team has "gone for it" seemingly on a dime and without worrying about the consequences. The Trea Turner-Max Scherzer deal is one. The Manny Machado trade. Yu Darvish. Unfortunately, on top of those deals minimizing as much risk as possible, none panned out.
The Dodgers are lacking aggression, it would seem, despite being one of the few teams best equipped to take advantage that trait. The Dodgers have featured minimal "shakeups" under Andrew Friedman, unless you want to count the front office allowing so many accomplished players to leave the organization.
In the Dodgers' defense, not many momentous decisions have resulted in success for various NL teams. The Phillies are still waiting for that ring after falling short the last two years. The Mets have had to hit the restart button. The Padres are doing just that in a different sense. The Cardinals have somehow fallen apart.
While the Dodgers have done an incredible job at maintaining consistency, it's still tough for fans to watch so many other teams be proactive and assertive while LA acts a bit more reactive (and perhaps complacent with their situation). By no means is anybody asking the Dodgers to tear it all down, but how about a move that sends some shockwaves through the clubhouse? How about a move that puts others on notice -- one that isn't semi-distracting like Turner coming in to potentially disrupt Seager? Ones that aren't as detrimental as letting team legends leave without an explanation?
And how about it comes within the next few weeks?