Dodgers land Andruw
by SuperBean on Dec 5, 2007 11:11 PM PST
48 comments
Dodgers.com - Andruw, Dodgers reach agreement
According to the Dodgers official site, Andruw Jones has agreed to a two year $36m deal with that other LA team. Very reasonable price I think, especially after the Hunter signing. I guess we'll have to wait and see if this changes anything in the market. The article mentions he wanted to stay in the NL, but that seems like it may have been a good deal for the A's at that price.
0 recs |
48 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Great deal
If Colletti recognises that Pierre is a sunk cost, instead of having delusions of Pierre as a LF, the Dodgers have improved.
Yeah, that would have been very nice for the A's
Looking at what the A's spent last year
and where they stand right now... this deal was doable. They wouldn't have had much left afterwards but doable.
And for 2 years? Very low risk.
If Jones' long-term goal
is to resuscitate his hitting credentials after last year's contract-contracting suck-fest, does he want to:
- Hit in Dodger Stadium or the Coliseum ?
- Face the NL, with its awful Central Division, or the AL ?
- And specifically the NL West (Peavey notwithstanding) or the AL West ?
by green star oakland on Dec 5, 2007 11:40 PM PST up reply actions
Not a bad decision for him
and it may not have been possible (probably wasn't) for the A's to get him; just saying it would have been nice.
Absolutely on Jones.
And teams like Baltimore must really feel this effect ... why would you sign on to lose to the Yankees/RedSox for the rest of your career ?
by green star oakland on Dec 5, 2007 11:48 PM PST up reply actions
Emm, the pitching in the NL West
is pretty damn good.
By ERA+ in 2007, Dback: 114 (2nd in the NL), Rockies: 111 (3rd), Padres: 108 (5th), Giants: 106 (6th). Dodgers were 4th.
By ERA+ in 2007, AL West: Angels 108 (4th in AL), Rangers: 95, Mariners: 91. The only teams in the AL whose pitching was worse than Texas and Seattle were Baltimore and Tampa.
If Andruw came to the AL West, he would get to beat up on the pathetic pithing of the Rangers and Mariners.
Only if we give them Kotsay and Crosby
And they give us Billingsley. And Kershaw. And Broxton. And Loney. Yeah, that seems fair.
I'm glad we didn't sign Andruw...
...I don't want 1/4 of our salary used on a player coming off a bad season that often swings at crap pitches. Also, as per all Scott Boras signings, he has a no trade clause.
I'm glad he went to the NL though, I think he's more dangerous than Torii Hunter, and I wouldn't want Jones on the Angels.
And this might sound crazy, but the shock of seeing that Ned Colletti signed Juan Pierre for 44 million dollars still hasn't worn off...even a year later.
44 million dollars for Juan Pierre...Still one of the worst moves of all time, and that's including the deal Francisco Cordero got this offseason.
by Travis Buck Nuckin on Dec 6, 2007 1:37 AM PST reply actions
that makes no sense
the fact that he's "coming off a bad season" is WHY they were able to sign him for two years.
i'd rather have jones for 2 years $36 million after the year he had last year than for 8 years $120 million if he had hit as well as he did in 2006.
obviously the dude is going to be very motivated to put up big numbers for the next two years so he can cash in with a huge contract afterwards.
but by that logic ...
... shouldn't he have been similarly motivated in '07?
no, he knew there would be more money
in the FA market in 09 than 07.
As opposed to now ...
where we spend 1/5 of our salary on a player coming off a bad season that often swings at crap pitches?
more like
1/7th
And also, I like how people are acting like 18 million dollars a year is cheap...especially for a small market club. HA!
by Travis Buck Nuckin on Dec 6, 2007 11:37 AM PST up reply actions
It is
The "small market" Royals could afford Jose Guillen at $36M / 3. The "small market" Royals offered Torii Hunter $75M / 5. The "small market" Royals are reputedly chasing Aaron Rowand.
MLB: $6B in revenues, 41% on player salaries.
Each team gets about $60M a year from national TV revenues + MLBAM revenues. This is before revenue sharing and anything else.
and...
...the "small market" Royals are horrible every year, and the "small market" Royals will be horrible this year.
by Travis Buck Nuckin on Dec 6, 2007 1:36 PM PST up reply actions
The "small market" Royals
only started spending in 2006.
Regardless, the point is that "small market" teams can afford this.
TWO YEARS is cheap
you can't just look at $ / year
barry zito is making $18 million a year, andruw jones is making $18 million a year.
which contract would you rather be stuck with if things go wrong?
which contract would be easier to move if next year the team decided to rebuild?
you can't move them...
...because Boras seems to always get no trade clauses. But yes, 2 years is better than 7+1 option year.
by Travis Buck Nuckin on Dec 6, 2007 10:54 PM PST up reply actions
details of the deal
according to Fox Sports
A five-time All-Star, Jones will receive a $12.2 million signing bonus, of which $5.1 million is payable next year, $2.1 million in 2009 and $5 million in 2010. He well get salaries of $9 million next year and $15 million in 2009, and also will receive a no-trade clause.
Also, Haren might consider asking for a police restraining order. According to Ken Rosenthal
The Yankees are "lurking" in the Haren sweepstakes, one source says, but the Red Sox have yet to seriously engage in discussions.
So basically it breaks down to...
$14.1 million in 2008
$17.1 million in 2009
$5 million buy-out in 2010
In this market, that's a fairly team friendly deal.
they're lurking...
in some very dark shadows, seeing as Hank Steinbrenner has publicly expressed his incredulity at the thought of having to actually part with legitimate players in exchange for Haren.
can't see how anyone...
would want Jones at this price. Mattingly may think his problems at the plate last year are correctable, but many an overconfident hitting/pitching coach has had hubris cloud their judgment on such matters in the past. This is a guy with a career OBP of only .342...and you want to pay $20 million per season for him? I've felt his reputation, offesnively anyway, has been overrated his entire career by the fact he entered the major leagues at a very young age and as a mega-prospect, and that it's been even more inflated due to his 51-HR season, which is hardly the norm for him. It wasn't a Brady Anderson 51-HR season, but it wasn't a Griffey season, either. The Los Angeles teams continue to throw money at outfielders with hilarious ineptitude....
Give me 137 games of Mike Cameron for half the price....
Problem there:
Cameron wants more than half the price.
He wants a Guillen deal-- 3 years, $36 million.
I'd still go for that
And hopefully grover would have to retract his contention that $12 mill annually would have been better spent on Francisco Cordero than on an FA CF.
There is more to being a good player
than career OBP.
Let's see, $18M a year over 2 years, should give a return of about 2 wins above average per year, 4 wins above average over 2 years, according to Tango's salary scale.
Using Baseball Prospectus Batting Runs above average, which is park adjusted, takes into account SBs and baserunning, to evaluate offense, Andruw, last 3 years: 33, 29, -6. Let's be conservative and assume that CFs hit like league average hitters and not give Andruw extra credit for playing CF.
Just for comparison, Carlos Beltran last 3 years by BRAA: 2, 47, 30.
Ichiro!: 14, 16, 27.
So yeah, if Ichiro! and Beltran are overrated offensively, Andruw is overrated.
Defensively, the BIS based metrics consider him great, the STATS based metrics not so much. Let's be conservative and say he is merely average defensively.
So, conservatively speaking, Andruw was 3 wins above average in 2005, 3 wins above average in 2006, 0.5 wins below average in 2007.
Reiterating, to be worth $36M / 2, Andruw has to be worth 2 wins above average.
In 2005 and 2006 Andruw was worth 3 wins above average, conservatively speaking. So, as long as he returns to form, he doesn't even need to be as good as he was in 2005 and 2006, he is easily worth that contract.
Also, Andruw will NOT cost a pick, whether 1st round or otherwise.
As PT has pointed out, you are NOT getting Mike Cameron for $18M / 2.
Not in a market where Torii Hunter cost $90M + 1st round pick. Not in a market where Jose Guillen got $36M / 3 and Eric Brynes got $30M / 3.
Yeah-- it's a good contract
unless his decline is pronounced and permanent. Especially given that he's probably (although with LA, this is never a given) replacing Juan Pierre.
Maybe if the KC Royals...
weren't so intent on doing their best Baltimore Orioles' impression (making meaningless upgrades in order to improve a last-place team to a team with a great shot to challenge for fourth place), the prices for these guys wouldn't be driven up quite as much. Amazing to think that the Royals are more or less responsible for this year's escalation in free agent salaries.
You, being an NYM follower first and foremost (correct?) do tend to lean towards free agent profligacy. I certainly do not consider Carlos Beltran anything less than the best centerfielder in the game, but Ichiro on the other hand, yeah, I do think he's somewhat overrated. If he would stop trying to hit .400 and instead harness some of the BP power that he displays regularly enough to convince people that he could hit 30 HRs if he tried, well, then I'd be more impressed. His ability to hit for average is admirable, but not all that valuable.
Jones. I get TBS; we all do. The guy resembled Bobby Crosby at the plate last year in way too many occurrences. He was apparently trying to hit 100 HRs in his walk year; any off-speed pitch did him in. The OBP issues, in any year, cannot be overlooked. That is the single most important elementary stat in baseball...and it would certainly preclude Beane from signing Jones.
Cameron, on the other hand? Beane tried to get him before, and we know he tends to fixate on certain Holy Grails. So not only would I like to see the man in Green & Gold, but I think BB would too.
Last point: for roughly the same amount of annual salary, which would you rather have (and I do think this is an either/or situation, given the A's budget...I know, I know, MLB is raking in the revenue, but the A's are among the many teams who still aren't showing willingness to respond with increased spending. As much as you may argue that the notion of small-market is obsolete, that may be true theoretically, but the reality is that the A's seem content to spend thriftily, and in my opinion prudently, till Cicso opens its...electric fence or whatever will pass for gates there)...anyway, which would you rather have: Bonds and Cameron, or Jones? If Bonds' current asking price is indeed $8 million as reported in SwisherSweet's Bonds diary (by another poster, I believe), then that would be a combined $20 million, roughly, for 2008, about the same as it would've taken to land Jones. Me, I'm taking Bonds/Cameron every day and 20 million times on Sunday. As for having one too many guys for OF/1B/DH (Cust, Bonds, Swish, Buck, Barton, Cameron)...well, first 25 games we'd be without Cameron, some games would be rest days for Bonds, injuries are inevitable, Cust could get some time off against lefties, Barton could shuffle to AAA if nescessary...but frankly, with this group of players, I think having what seems like one too many guys would be appropriate. It would be perfect protection against injuries/dropoff from Cust/Barton. And it would make a lot more sense than the Angels' stockpiling of overpaid centerfielders.
I'll take Bonds and Cameron
Those guys no where to get the good stuff . . .
by BlameChannel53 on Dec 6, 2007 3:32 PM PST up reply actions
fuck me
I really do know how to spell know.
by BlameChannel53 on Dec 6, 2007 3:33 PM PST up reply actions
you have some problem, however ...
... spelling "merciful goodness gee whillikers me"
No, I do not lean towards profligacy
I lean towards looking at each deal on it's merits, instead of chanting the hard core mantra of "oh noes, FA contract, bad".
Since you're interested in my Mets fandom, IMO, the Beltran deal was great. The Schoeneweiss signing was idiocy. The Castillo signing left me unimpressed.
As for the Royals, many people were saying the same things about the Tigers when they signed Pudge, and Magglio Ordonez. There are more ways to building a good roster and an interested fanbase than the Indians method of sucking for 5 years while stockpiling talent.
But, lets look at Ichiro!. Might he be better if he changes his approach? Yes. OTOH, he might also not be better. Instead of wondering what he might be if he changes his approach, he should be assessed for what he is.
As for Jones, here's the thing: it's well known that he was playing with a painful elbow injury. Only he, and this teams, know how serious it was. Many players unfortunately idiotically try to play through injuries like Manly Men, only to end up playing like crap. Since we're all A's fans here, I am not going to bother to cite examples.
Bonds + Cameron or Jones? Bonds + Cameron, partially for ticket sales. However, you have already pointed out some of the flaws of that plan. Cameron has to serve his suspension. Also, having Bonds + Cameron does mean that good players will have to sit at some point
Indians ...
simply not true. The Indians have not sucked for 5 years, total over the past 14 years, much less had any period that long of suckitude.
They sucked in 2002 and 2003 -- in 14 years, that's it.
thanks to devo for pointing out the Tribe...
were not on a five-year rebuilding plan...that Colon trade for Sizemore, Lee, and Phillips was an amazing heist...imagine now if they would've kept Phillips (though I can see why they gave up on him--he couldn't stick in Cleveland, and then he started to struggle even here in AAA Buffalo) instead of feeling as though they had to trade Kouzmanoff for Barfield in order to fill their 2B void...well, at least the first player in MLB history named Asdubral seems to be an upgrade there. I guess it was honorable that Minaya actually made a playoff push GMing the Montreal Expos that year, trading for rentals Colon and Floyd (only to re-trade Floyd once they fell out of contention) and trying to convince Juan Gonzalez to un-retire (not that that would've helped much), but really, that trade helped set the Expos/Nats up for their current/upcoming five-year period of being a bad team. Well, maybe they'll start throwing some money around when they new stadium gets built...even in weak free agency crops...Kyle Lohse would be almost be the ace of that pitching staff, lol. Sad state of affairs there. At least Milledge, Pena, Kearns (and maybe Dukes) have the talent to be the best outfield in the division. Whether or not they will be is a different question.
I didn't know An (not Ad) Jones was playing through injury last year...I guess that might explain things a bit. But I'm surprised I didn't hear Skip Caray and co announce that at some point during the season, unless the Braves kept the info under wraps till the end of the season....
also
I like how "suckitude" (or sometimes "suckTitude") has become a common ANcillary term if not a contender for addition to the 2008 dictionaries, thanks in large part to AN....
Question for the Council
Would the Dodgers do this deal?
To LAD: Haren, Blanton, Chavez
To OAK: Kershaw, McDonald, Elbert, LaRoche, Kemp, Hu
Or for that matter, would the A's? Or is this just the height of stupidity?
Are you convinced that Kemp is the answer in CF?
That's really my biggest question.
It would really suck to see Haren and Blanton gone, because we know Harden won't be healthy and that means Gaudin is our number 1. Kershaw and Hu won't be ready until 2009, and that's fine -- I've said before that as long as I know the rebuild is happening, having a bad team next year is not a problem. Being the Giants and thinking that we have a chance year in and year out while winning 72 games a year is what is unacceptable.
No
They don't need two pitchers, only one. If they did that, they'd probably end up releasing Esteban Loaiza.
a 4-team trade is more likely...
than one that features those those three being grouped together. Might as well inquire about swapping entire rosters...sans Juan Pierre, of course. And I guess we could excuse them from taking on the burden of Kotsay.
Dunno
I do know that I'm #5 on the council. And grover is #8.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
