User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 1.0147 seconds
40 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
$18 million per is a lot of money, even with the current market - but it gets him locked up for sure - rather than have another team jump in later in the offseason with more dollars or years - and it is a short contract, for a player coming off of one bad season, but who was a major star prior to that. It's unlikely to make the list of most efficient contracts per win above replacement added - but the Dodgers have the money to spend, so why shouldn't they get the biggest bang they can find in a weak free agent market?
Yes, Pierre's value is "reduced". Who the #### cares? He is a bad player. Not signing Jones because you have Pierre is the mistake.
We'll see this offseason if someone makes a similar mistake in regards to Coco Crisp's defense. A team won't have to pay Pierre money to him as his salry is reasonable, but they might regret giving up talent for him if they trade something like the best pitcher in baseball.
i love the braves and schuerholz, and i don't know why they're so foolish about arbitration, but they are. they are fools. they didn't offer arb to jd drew after he had an MVP-caliber season, for chrissakes!
Yea, it peeves me too. But for the Braves, it is mildly defensible with their ability to find talent in lower rounds and the now abolished DFE.
I wasn't in favour of offering Andruw arb unless you have an agreement that he will refuse. The Braves payroll is already up close to 95 mil, and despite all the promises of pushing the payroll up ( which they have ), I am not sure Liberty wants a 110 mil payroll already. And if he goes to arb, and Andruw demands 18 mil, he gets it.
So while Andruw at 1 yr/18 mil is an asset in isolation, it doesn't fit in with the bigger team picture as currently constituted.
Pierre's greatest value to the Dodgers is on the bench or, even better, dragging down some other team. Colletti made a mistake giving him $45 million, but there is no reason to compound this mistake by continuing to run him out there 162 games a year for the next 4 years.
Well, its easy to say that while posting from your mom's basement rather than dealing with the realities of the free agent market.
I always thought Schuerholz and co didn't like how the Maddux deal surprised them, and it totally screwed up their offseason plans. Ok, they offer arb to Andruw. He accepts. Unfortunately, the Braves have already made 3 moves in order to get Chris Duffy as their CF. Now they have Andruw back, Duffy a 4th OFer, and they've given up some other valuable parts to get Duffy.
Its all about certainty. Its such a short, dynamic market offseason, I can't understand why they do what they do.
If the Dodgers eat 12 million...I would justify it as they are paying Ethier and Kemp 6.4 mil each instead of 50/2 for Jones.
Signing Pierre was a blunder. Signing Andruw Jones to this contract is like cutting off your leg to remedy the pain caused by your broken ankle.
So, "who the **** cares?" Anyone who has a dislike for strikingly wasteful stupidity, I guess...
The money spent on Pierre is gone. The Dodgers can either accept that, and do what they feel will most improve the team, or they can have Pierre dragging down the team for four more years. I vote for the former.
I suspect they trade Pierre this offseason, eating some of the money. The leaks about moving Pierre to left I suspect are as much to keep some value in Pierre for when they find a sucker - er, a willing team to trade something for him and take on part of his contract.
Hmm... Ethier in left, Kemp in right. I don't get your logic.
Kemp full time in right - that's actually comparable to the splitting of time between him and Ethier in right last season.
Jones in center. He's overrated defensively - but he's still going to be a vast improvement over Pierre 2007.
Ethier full time in left - huge improvement over the splitting of time between him and Gonzo in 2007.
I'm pleased.
Martin
Kemp
Loney
Kent
Jones
Ethier
Laroche
works for me.
You will be revising that statement in a few months
By then, he'll be so overrated that he's underrated!
Martin
Kemp
Loney
Kent
Jones
Ethier
Laroche
works for me.
There is no doubt that is a very good lineup, and if healthy, will be one of the best if not THE best in the west. Of course who knows what will happen with Pierre. For all we know, they ship Kemp out, keep Pierre in CF, and move Jones to Left.
I don't think that will really happen, but really, would anything surprise you?
Every quote from any Dodger official these past 3 weeks have implied that they are adamant about keeping their young players and not doing any 3/4/5 for 1 player deals.
Also, Jones' deal is only for 2 years. In two years, Matt Kemp will be 25 and Jones will most likely be gone. I fail to see how signing Jones short term means Kemp is trade bait.
From Dodgers official blog
This could pay out handsomely if Colletti doesn't screw it up. He is so close. Just sign Kuroda, explore a pierre trade and call it an offseason.
You think Andruw wanted to play for the Royals??
If Kemp gets traded, it's as the key player to bring back an ace - so not as good a lineup, but a rotation of ace, Billingsley, Penny, Lowe, with Schmidt and Loaiza competing for the fifth spot. And still a solid lineup.
And no way Jones moves to left.
I figure sign Kuroda and get a quality back up catcher, so Martin can get more rest next season. Maybe eat some Pierre money and trade him for a good backup catcher?
Give Kuroda 4 years, $44 million - even if he's a fourth starter in a year or two that will be a reasonable contract - and if he's a #3 that's a bargain.
That way the Dodgers would have filled their two biggest holes without trading any players or giving up a draft pick.
This reasoning is completely backwards. It is true that if the Dodgers reduce Pierre's playing time to zero they will have reduced his value to zero. However if the Dodgers reduce Pierre's playing time to zero by replacing it with a better player then reducing Pierre's value to zero is a good thing because it will mean that they will win more games.
The concept of VORP is a bad concept when it becomes a justification for playing bad players in order to preserver their value. I'll go farther. The whole idea of replacement level has a negative VORP because it gives the impression that below average players are making positive contributions to winning teams. So if the Dodgers have hurt Pierre's value in this move that is a good thing. Every team should be striving to reduce the value of their below average players to nothing.
Why would we do that. Stolen bases have very very minimal value.
In additional to his useless plate discipline and power he actually cost the team 35 outs with his base stealing and sac bunts. And the guy can't play defense. He is unbelievably bad.
you mean:
Every team should be striving to INCREASE the value of their below average players to nothing.
Below average players have value. Only below replacement level players have negative value.
Reducing Pierre's playing time to zero INCREASES his value to zero.
Some replacement level that is 20 runs below average works in the abstract, but once you've assembled a 25 man roster you need to be more specific about it. Unless people are hurt, every start they give to Pierre hurts the team.
Indeed. I read someone describe Ned Colletti as a "riddle, wrapped in an enigma, wrapped in a mustache".
There is zero chance that Jones plays anywhere other than CF though. That just isn't going to happen.
But not in regards to baseball as a whole. There is a $ amount the Dodgers can eat to make Pierre a positive to some team. So, they shouldn't just make Pierre the 5th OF and pay his salary. At $3M per year he could play for someone.
Anything that gets Pierre out of the line-up actually increases his value. Especially if his place is being taken by a player of Andruw's ability.
I agree. If it happens like that, the Dodgers have had an excellent offseason.
Pierre does not have a negative value to the Dodgers if he stays in CF. Not in actual dollars, anyway.
Only if you want to win more games in a given term utterly regardless of the cost. By your logic if the last marginal win costs you $100m, heck, go for it. It's not your money. I can see the reasoning, sort of, though it would make the MFY an admirably run ballclub. It just seems so wasteful and, well... inelegant.
Indeed it was. But destroying what remains of his value, and in so doing effectlively paying Andruw Jones an absurd amount of money for what improvement he's likely to bring, makes that also a stupid signing.
If Kemp keeps hitting like he has been hitting, those "only" two years are worth a huge amount of money. For whatever it might be worth, neither MLB nor the Dodgers have said anything about considering a starting OF of Ethier, Jones, and Kemp next season...
Why thank you. I'll pass that on to my mom when she brings me the meatloaf she promised.
As for the non-insult part of your post: the deadline to accept or decline arbitration is not March 31st. I could see how having to wait on Andruw might be a problem if the alternative were to go spend a bunch of money on Aaron Rowand or Torii Hunter. Unfortunately for us Braves fans, that isn't the case.
The most likely explanation for the Braves' behavior is that they operate under a very hard budget and are totally unwilling to go above it. I believe this to be a foolish strategy, but have neither the inclination nor the time to fully outline why.
Signing Andruw Jones to this contract is like cutting off your leg after recognising that you have gangrene and that the leg needs to be amputated.
Actually, he does. Even without signing Jones Pierre was likely to be the fourth or fifth best outfielder for the Dodgers next season (Ethier and Kemp of course, and I'd expect at least one of Young or Repko to be considerably better, maybe both).
So given that he is not somebody who should be playing regularly for the Dodgers even before the Jones signing, signing Jones doesn't change his actual value to the Dodgers. Playing Pierre would have been a mistake in any case.
This does give a nice cover though, if they want to trade him. "Oh, it's not that Pierre isn't good enough to play, it's just that we got a deal on Andruw Jones, and couldn't pass that up. Tell you what, we'll eat a little of his salary in exchange for x"
Torre's going to be the one making out the lineup. I don't see him pencilling in Pierre too often next season - at least not if Ethier and Kemp stay healthy. He has no reason to feel loyal to Pierre, and in the past he wasn't shy about playing young players over vets, so long as the kids were performing.
Just because you keep saying that doesn't make it true.
The going rate is what it is. $1 million a year was mind boggling. Then $3M a year. and so on.
But when the 'going rate' for a 'maybe-he'll-recover-full-value guy' goes from $10M to $18M in one season?
A-Rod was taken badly if Jones is worth $18M a year. I understand the elbow thing, but how many guys have an injury like that and NEVER recover fully? Plenty!
Wow, has it really been that long since the Giants were in the postseason?
The going rate for Jose Guillen is $36M. Maybe, without steroids and HGH, he never "recovers" fully?
Which multi-time gold glove CFer with a ton of career HR at the age of 30 signed for $10M last year?
The purpose is to win games. Money is only relevant insofar as it helps, or hurts, you in this cause. Spending 100 million on a marginal win is only a bad idea if you could have spent 100 million on two marginal wins. If MGL can have rules so can I.
Here is rule #1: The marginal value of players is only material in terms of the consequences it has on absolute results measured in terms of wins.
Reducing (or increasing, if you prefer) Pierre's marginal value to zero is a good move insofar as it results in an absolute increase in wins.
The relevant question to the Dodgers is not what this means concerning Pierre. The relevant question is whether it would have been better to spend the money on someone like Rowand or Guillen.
(limps away from thread, bloodied but unbowed)
I hate to say it, but this isn't true. The purpose is to make money.
This was a good deal for the Dodgers if and only if it makes them more money than any other available option. (Better, it has a more positive expected impact on the bottom line than any other option.) Since the Dodgers may well be a playoff contender next year, there's a good case to be made that this move is worth it. I suppose it depends on what a playoff spot is worth, and how much playing Jones instead of Pierre (supposing they do play Jones in stead of Pierre, rather than Pierre instead of Kemp or something silly) improves their shot at a playoff spot.
If they kick in money for Pierre, they likely get something in return. If they trade a youngster, it would presumably be to get one of the elite starters on the market.
Not doing anything meant there was a very good chance that Pierre would be a regular, or at least get a lot of at bats. Signing Andruw means that Pierre is much less likely to get a lot of at bats for the Dodgers - and if he does, the Dodgers likely have added an elite starter.
Unless of course Pierre starts in left, and Kemp and Ethier platoon in right.
Doubtful. As I wrote earlier, Torre has no reason to feel loyal to Pierre, and Torre's been willing to play the better young player over unproductive vets in the past. Even if Pierre was given the job out of spring training - which I doubt - Ethier will be the primary left fielder soon enough, unless there's an injury to him or Kemp, or unless one of them is traded.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main