Dodgers mailbag, Part 1: Edwin Díaz's surprise signing, Teoscar Hernández and more

The Edwin Díaz deal came together quickly for the Dodgers. Dale Zanine / Imagn Images

The sound of trumpets did not signal the end of business for the Los Angeles Dodgers, whose acquisition of premier closer Edwin Díaz -- and his memorable entrance music -- signaled another splash and simplified their to-do list the rest of this winter.

The Dodgers would like to add a position player, as president of baseball operations Andrew Friedman expressed once Díaz's deal was official. There are multiple paths to acquiring that player, in part because they are not restricted to acquiring a corner outfielder (their obvious hole on the roster on paper). There are other considerations as well for a position player group that was the oldest in the majors a year ago, with a loaded farm system and players looking to create an opportunity for themselves.

It remains an interesting time for baseball's reigning juggernaut. Time for some questions. Thank you to all for submitting them; some were edited for length and clarity.

The Edwin Díaz signing seemed to catch the media off guard. Was this a case of the Dodgers running a tight ship, or was this another instance of the front office moving decisively when the market came to them? -- Jay O.

Not just the media, but Dodgers people as well. As The Athletic reported at the time, the Edwin Díaz signing came together quite quickly. The reporting and messaging at the time were consistent with what we had -- that the Dodgers were ideally seeking a short-term deal with the likes of Raisel Iglesias, Ryan Helsley and even Devin Williams. As Friedman himself said after Díaz signed, the fact that Williams got three years shifted their calculus and prompted them to reengage with Díaz.

While certainly the best closer available, Díaz wasn't an immediate Dodgers target outside of cursory interest. The qualifying offer was a deterrent, as was Díaz's desire to get a five-year deal. Circumstances clearly changed, and the fact that they were able to get Díaz on a three-year term made the loss of draft picks (their second and fifth selection next year) and bonus pool money ($1 million) easier to swallow. That, along with the Mets' hesitancy, opened the door for the Dodgers to make something happen quickly.

How would you explain the FO's pivot from a reclamation-based approach to the bullpen to throwing money at what generally has not been a problem too hard to solve with lower-risk deals? -- Joseph R.

This is a good and fair question, and not just because I asked essentially the same question to Friedman after signing Díaz (before it became official). It resulted in a pointed and direct answer that fueled my ensuing story and laid out where the Dodgers are these days.

"We are in a really strong position right now, financially, and our ownership group has been incredibly supportive of pouring that back into our team and that partnership with our fans," Friedman said. "As we look at things, if we were on a really tight budget, we probably wouldn't allocate in the same way. But having more resources, it allows us to be a little bit more aggressive on that point. In a world where there are major constraints, that wouldn't be an area where I personally would allocate versus other areas."

To put it simply, the Dodgers are making so much money right now -- off of Shohei Ohtani, off of consecutive World Series, off of their TV deal, off of everything -- that their usual rulebook has gone out the window. They have the resources to pay players at the top of the market, so they will. They won't burn money for the sake of it, but when a clear-cut solution to their problem exists, their risk threshold changes.

That doesn't mean they won't still pursue reclamation projects. It turned out that their deal of Joe Jacques for Will Klein in June helped the Dodgers win a World Series.

How might the Dodgers get more contact throughout their lineup? Seems like there are too many swing-and-miss guys on the roster. -- Who R.

Bat-to-ball appears to be something the Dodgers are hoping to get as they scroll through their potential position player options. The phrase "cost certainty" has been a buzzword as they're looking to secure a floor for a player who can supplement this core. That, in theory, was what Michael Conforto was supposed to be last year before the floor seemingly fell out from under him.

As to the second point, the Dodgers are not last year's Toronto Blue Jays, who had the lowest strikeout rate in the sport last year (17.8 percent). But the Dodgers were in the upper half in the sport in that metric (12th, 21.9 percent). Their organizational offensive identity has usually been to trade off some strikeouts for some walks and slug, but last year's inconsistency included some groans from people seeking to put at least a little more contact into their approach. Los Angeles' targets probably will line up with that. Brendan Donovan, for example, has a career strikeout rate of just 13.5 percent.

To the casual fan, moving Teoscar Hernández back to left field appeared to be a no-brainer, but clearly, the Dodgers front office and coaching staff disagreed. Can you explain why and whether there's a chance that could happen this year if he's still with the team? -- Shutupdonny H.

The question was certainly raised last season and this winter, and the organization has pointed to Hernández's comfort in right field -- particularly in his ability to see balls off the bat and get good reads. There also wasn't a conversation had with Hernández last year about playing left field -- something manager Dave Roberts said at the Winter Meetings is certainly on the table.

There's a chance it happens. Andy Pages' glove (and arm) would certainly be maximized in right field, as good as he was in center field last year. Hernández's gaffes -- particularly on balls down the line -- wouldn't be as impactful, as the balls that turned into triples in right likely would be doubles in left.

That is still contingent on what the Dodgers do the rest of this winter, along with how Tommy Edman's ankle responds after surgery. If he can play center field more regularly, that can allow the Dodgers to move their outfield around.

"There's some options," Roberts said. "But right now, he's our right fielder."

How serious are the Teo rumors? -- Thai T.

As Katie Woo and I reported last week, the Dodgers continue to "kick the tires" on trading Teoscar Hernández. That means they're certainly listening to offers, though it's unclear whether a deal will come to fruition. The Kansas City Royals are among the clubs that have expressed interest in Hernández. The Philadelphia Phillies' outfield now appears set after signing Adolis García -- a cheaper alternative to Hernández -- this week. These markets are fluid and can change quickly, but the top bats are largely still available, save for Kyle Schwarber and Pete Alonso. I'd imagine if the Dodgers do wind up moving Hernández, it would be around the time that the likes of Kyle Tucker, Cody Bellinger and others start to come off the board. Teams that miss out on those stars could pivot to Hernández.

The Dodgers' willingness to listen is largely a byproduct of seeing the potential demand for a hitter like Hernández. There aren't a whole lot of right-handed-hitting outfielders out there who can produce as he has. That's also a reason to keep him, particularly as the Dodgers themselves are still looking to add a position player.