Playoff Kershaw

For all the regular season brilliance during his Hall of Fame career, Clayton Kershaw has developed a bit of a reputation as a postseason "choker."  And it's true that he hasn't been anything close to his regular, dominant self in October.  His career postseason ERA is two points higher than his regular season ERA, and the Dodgers are under .500 in his starts. 

Since the Dodgers are in the playoffs every year, that gets magnified with each season LA doesn't win the World Series.  And that will be the only way to change the narrative.  But it's disingenuous to blame Kershaw's playoff struggles entirely on him.  It's also incredibly unfair to completely ignore those postseason performances where he was his usual dominant self, games like last night's World Series opener, where he was brilliant over six innings and easily could've gone another.

I get it.  Mariano Rivera has five World Series rings and a record 42 postseason saves, but is remembered just as much for three blown saves in the postseason that cost the Yankees the series (1997 ALDS Game 5, 2001 World Series Game 7, 2004 ALCS Game 4).

Just like Rivera, Kershaw has had a decent sample size of postseason outings.  Unlike Rivera, he doesn't have the championships to balance out the failures.  And, I'd argue, Kershaw's struggles have only been magnified simply because the Dodgers are yet to win.  The fact that a lot of them have come in series-clinching losses doesn't help his case.  But, if you look closer, can you really blame him for all of it?

Last year against the Nationals, Kershaw started Game 2 and gave up three runs in six innings but lost to Stephen Strasburg.  Sometimes you end up on the wrong end of a pitcher's duel.  That happens.  Then in Game 5, he came out of the bullpen and got a strikeout to end the top of the seventh.  Dave Roberts left him in to start the eighth, and he gave up solo home runs to Anthony Rendon and Howie Kendrick that tied the game at 3-3.  The Dodgers eventually lost on a Kendrick grand slam in the 10th (that wasn't given up by Kershaw).

In 2014, this run was just beginning and Kershaw was really the only starter the Dodgers had.  He started (and lost) Game 1 of the Division Series against the Cardinals, then came back on short rest in Game 4 in an attempt to stave off elimination.  The Dodgers had 2-0 lead through six and Kershaw had allowed just one hit while striking out nine.  Then St. Louis started the seventh with two singles before Matt Adams hit a monster three-run homer.  Game and series, Cardinals.

The third big one was that crazy Game 5 of the 2017 World Series.  We, of course, know now the reason why the Astros had Kershaw's number when they couldn't hit him at all in game 1 at Dodger Stadium.  And that game was so nuts that you can almost write off his performance as a product of that.  Still, the Dodgers had a 4-0 lead when he gave up a four-spot in the bottom of the fourth, then, after LA scored three in the fifth, he got yanked after walking two batters in the bottom half of the inning.  The first batter the reliever faced was Jose Altuve, who promptly hit a three-run bomb (on a pitch he knew was coming).

That was the first of three straight Kershaw World Series starts that the Dodgers lost.  He went 0-2 against the Red Sox in 2018, a series in which the Dodgers were thoroughly outplayed.  In Game 1, Kershaw wasn't great.  He gave up two runs in the first and five over four innings.  Kershaw gave up another two-spot in the first inning of Game 5, a game in which the Dodgers were held to one run on three hits.

So, while Kershaw would be the first to admit he wasn't at his best in those performances, there are reasons beyond just his pitching that cost LA those games.  Sometimes he was coming out of the bullpen.  Sometimes he was pitching on short rest.  That's not an excuse.  That's what you pay your ace for.  But you also need to consider that he might not be as sharp.  And, if he's pitching in relief, it's probably a high-pressure situation with little to no margin for error.

Likewise, putting it all on Kershaw's shoulders is a pretty heavy burden.  For years, Dave Roberts and Don Mattingly before him didn't trust anybody in the Dodgers' bullpen other than Kenley Jansen.  As a result, Kershaw was sometimes left in too long or called on in relief because he was considered the best option.  Same thing with using him on short rest.  They wouldn't have had to do it if they had any other starters they trusted with the ball (which they now do with Walker Buehler).

You can't really blame him for the offense, either.  Ask Mets fans about your star pitcher not getting any run support.  And even in the games where Kershaw blew a lead, the Dodgers, in most cases, were down only a run or two and the hitters didn't hold up their end of the bargain.  Every mistake is already magnified in the playoffs, even more so when the margin for error is so slim.  Simply put, Clayton Kershaw is NOT the reason the Dodgers haven't won the World Series during this run of regular season dominance and postseason disappointment.

What people don't remember is Game 1 in 2017.  In his first career World Series start, Kershaw was outstanding.  The only run he allowed over seven innings was an Alex Bregman homer.  Kershaw struck out 11 in that game while not walking anyone.  Then there's last night's brilliant start: 6 innings, 1 run (again on a solo homer), 2 hits, 8 strikeouts, 1 walk.

Compare that to another future Hall of Famer--Justin Verlander.  Verlander has pitched in four World Series (2006, 2012, 2017, 2019).  His career record? 0-6 in seven starts (the Tigers and Astros are a combined 1-6 in those games).  Yet, after Houston's 2017 championship (and Verlander's ALCS MVP performance), no one talks about Verlander's postseason struggles anymore.

Justin Verlander's postseason narrative changed because of 2017, and Clayton Kershaw's postseason narrative will almost certainly change once the Dodgers finally win the championship.  And, make no mistake, if the Dodgers do win the series, it'll be because of Clayton Kershaw, not in spite of him.