Keep hope alive!

Good news on both fronts!

Oh, now he's just doing this on purpose.

Hmmm Interesting.

Could it be that the only source for the done deal was Jerry Crasnick and his source was just- a source...

come get your man sabes!

As for Garciaparra, that seems like a different mindset from last season. IIRC, any talk of Nomar playing anywhere other than 1B was squashed early.

I'm kind of wanting Pierre to sign with the Dodgers if he grows back that mustache (post 110 in the other thread). I also wanted Scott Elarton last year because of his manly beard (he decided to shave it off before the season). Consequently, he had a bad year.

Maybe Jon saved us all. Ned read his piece and said maybe I should not do this.

I want to believe.

5 Sabes...You can do it.

You're not gonna let your "protege" (and I'm using that term loosely here) steal JP away from you.

Be a man. Step up. I dare you.

You know what they say:

It's always darkest...just before it goes completely dark.

8 - No, it was my desperate, barely coherent phone call to the Dodgers switchboard!

10
If you want wishes to come true, go sit in a corner and try not to think about Karl Dorrell.

If Garciaparra is being genuine, how do you NOT start him at third.

Isn't Loney > Betemit pretty roundly agreed upon?

13 If Juan Pierre somehow meant that the Bruins would can Karl, I would have only one reaction...

Where's my liliputian little Dodger batting helmet!?

Timline Nov. 20, 2006

noon- Pierre and Dodgers in talks
DT- AHHHHHHH

1500- Pierre agrees to 5/45
DT- #$%&

1800- Pierre and the Dodgers in talks
DT- hmmm

Right at this moment, Ned could field Greg Brady at third base and it wouldn't matter.

Speaking of money, I went to the bank today and I discovered I had $20,000 less than I thought I had saved up.

Turns out that I never deducted the money I spent on my car last year from my personal accounts.

11
Lol

I am sorry Chaminade, but now all my anger is directed at you and I hope UCLA crushes you without let up.

18 - Ouch.

20
Well, at least I figured out where it was pretty quickly and it wasn't like I had bounced any checks.

LA Times make it seem like it a done deal

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-dodgers21nov21,0,2185664.story?coll=la-home-sports

okay, hope has been crushed.

from latimes...

Left-handed slap hitter, who has played in 162 games each of the last four seasons, agrees in principle to a five-year deal worth about $44 million.

Yes, Chaminade must pay for this.

"This man gets on base an awful lot," Colletti said of Pierre

huh......?

It's official.

The Mustache is a moron.

"This man gets on base an awful lot," Colletti said of Pierre "He gets 200 hits or more, is a great guy on a club".
I don't know whether I should laugh or cry.

This is the man who is running the Dodgers?

I wouldn't spend a lot of time on the spin, Nate. Its pretty meaningless at this point, the fundamental equivalent of Karl rove claiming two weeks before the election that republicans would hold congress.

Uggggghh!

25 and 27

My jaw just hit the ground!

"We lost 20 home runs with [J.D.] Drew, but there are people in the organization who feel there is more power with Wilson Betemit, Andre Ethier, maybe more with Russell Martin. Matt Kemp has a chance to rebound and hit 20."
I thought Kemp was going to start the season in the minors. No mention of LaRoche who is one of the best power hitters on the farm.

Ok, maybe Ned does not use metrics, but does he even know what OBP means?

"If we come up with a surplus of pitching, maybe we can move a pitcher to get a hitter," he said.

Yeah, and sign Juan Pierre. Make sure to do that too. Just make sure you LOCK THAT GUY UP TO A 45 MILLION DOLLAR DEAL.

Dios Mio.

Never mind all that: "Garciaparra's wife, former soccer star Mia Hamm, is pregnant with twins."

I'm guessing they're gonna be pretty athletic. :)

Talk about ading insult to injury: first Lofton loses his job, then this from the Times:

"Pierre, 29, is in many ways a younger version of 16-year veteran Kenny Lofton, who batted .301 with 32 stolen bases in his only Dodgers season."

Hmmmm...
He has plenty of money to spend even after committing more than $60 million to Pierre and Garciaparra.
Makes me wonder what the budget is.

I'm sick to my stomach. $45 million for a slap hitter who doesnt get on base?
We better buckle in because this is going to hurt.

28

its not spin, its just an outright lie!

So, do we just pretend that this thread doesn't exist?

And if so, do we wait for a new one?

And where the HECK are my slippers?

34
Twins! Luis Gonzalez scoffs! But maybe those twins will keep Vin happy.

I need a due date. I have to put it in my calendar. I did that yesterday with a friend's wife who told me a due date. I'll probably be wondering my Blackberry will be buzzing next month around 5 pm on December 17.

Miles OT:
Is anyone watching Giants-Jags now? Jax coach Jack del Rio is wearing a suit and tie. I can't remember the last time I saw I coach dress in anything fancier than a polo, or a sweater over a button-down shirt.

41 The league wouldn't let Mike Nolan and Del Rio wear suits last year.

The made NFL liscensed suits for the this year. Yay for our economic overlords!

34
I would also bring up my mom's theory about how children will look when they get older.

I predict that the Garciaparras will have fraternal twins, a boy and a girl, and the girl will look like Nomar and the boy will look Mia.

41- Jim Tressel was wearing a suit and tie under his jacket on Saturday.

I do not want to lose Laroche.

Save the centerfielder!
Save the world!

Make the hurting stop.

If you play in 162 games a year and have an OBA of .330, you are getting on base a lot, as in, the absolute number of times on base is high, higher than the number of times Kenny Lofton got on base this year even with his higher OBA thanks to Lofton missing a lot of games. I think that is all Colletti meant, and he is, technically, correct. [Smiley face]

pierres 2007 ZIPS as a cub...
663AB 299/.342/385 38BB 41K 45SB 18CS

49
Can't wait for that at the top of the lineup.

43 Imagine if they had a psychic-connection thing going on like the Sedin brothers -- I could see them kicking butt as the first MLS brother/sister combo on the LA Galaxy in 2026. ;)

42 - My GF and I agree that is hilarious.

I'm glad that Furcal was signed before this new character policy was put into place.

I picture one of the Garciaparra twins getting an ill-deserved red card from a stupid Uruguayan ref in the 2026 World Cup that will be played in Australia.

52 The league would not allow Peyton Manning to wear black hightops in honor of Unitas the week that he died.

The NFL is not flexible. In fact, you could say that they are "quite inflexible"

More on the NFL and suits:
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/16042576.htm

With the kids right now. Does Colletti confirm the signing in the Times article?

So, do you think Jon shudders when he adds JP to the salary numbers on the sidebar?

Or does he give out a hearty Sideshow Bob laugh.

HAAHHAHAAAHHAAAHAAAA!

From the story:

"If we are able to come to terms with [Pierre] and he can be at the top of the order along with Raffy, that will help the ballclub," General Manager Ned Colletti said.

The paragraph after Henson quoted Colletti with "[he] gets on base an awful lot", he added "his critics, however, point out that he doesn't walk much".

I wouldn've gone with "his critics, however, point out that he does not, in fact, get on base an 'aweful lot'".

The Dodgers have basically re-acquired Cesar Izturis and put him in centerfield.

ESPN reports that the signing is just contingent on a physical.

Dave Revsine wouldn't lie to me, would he?

how much money do we actually have to work with? I personally have the dodgers payroll at around 90mil right now with 8.8 to pierre and 7.5 to nomar...

63 I have it at 79,235,000 pre-Pierre.

61- I wouldn't go that far. Pierre's worst is pretty much Cesar's best.

It astounds me how badly people make the counterarguments on issues like this. I humbly suggest that if an argument for Pierre must be made, simply take soriano's contract, divide by his win shares rinse and repeat. Otherwise, an alligator simply isn't a hamster.

from pierre's agent...

"It came down to a variety of factors," Peiper wrote. "He likes the players and really respects Grady [Little]. It's also a team that is going to win for several years. They have a good mix of veteran and young players and an owner that is committed to trying to win a World Series. Once you've won a championship like Juan has [with the Marlins], you want to do whatever you can to try to get back there."

In your face Gurnick!
Colletti indicated there probably is room on the same roster for Garciaparra and top first-base prospect James Loney.

"Obviously, [Loney] is a first baseman, but he also can play some outfield and he may play both this year," Colletti said. "Guys get banged up. He has a great shot to make our club. He'll play first base more than a year ago and also some time in the outfield."

From Pierre's agent
"It came down to a variety of factors," Peiper wrote. "He likes the players and really respects Grady [Little]. It's also a team that is going to win for several years. They have a good mix of veteran and young players and an owner that is committed to trying to win a World Series. Once you've won a championship like Juan has [with the Marlins], you want to do whatever you can to try to get back there."
Translation: The Dodgers offered Juan a 5 year deal for a substantial amount of money. We ran with it.

Or put another way, does soriano's contract justify Pierre's? That would be a possibly justifiable proposition.

Come on guys, let's have a little perspective. This is nowhere near as bad as the time we signed Juan Pierre to a 4 year, 44 million dollar contract.

Wait...Nevermind.

That's five years.

If Brad Penny had a hand in this we must trade him now!

Those 2003 Marlins have had a magic touch wherever they've gone:

Brad Penny
Alex Gonzalez
Luis Castillo
Josh Beckett
Jeff Conine
Mike Lowell
AJ Burnett

Two of them have gone on to win another World Series:

Juan Encarnacion and Braden Looper

I think we can take DePaul and Kentucky. Neither of these teams can play defense.

Just wait a sec:

"He's another guy with great qualities as a human being, like Nomar [Garciaparra]," Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti told the Associated Press.

In related news, the Dodgers sign former Czech president and human rights advocate Vaclav Havel to a six year, $72 million deal. According to Dodgers assitant GM, Kim Ng, Haval brings another big heart to the Dodgers lineup. He is expected to share time at third base with Wilson Betemit.

75 Nice. Really well done.

I don't know whats worse, this signing or Chris Berman's tie.

Seriously. The tie is that bad.

i wish we signed carlos beltran back in 2004.

The Dodgers have the high bid in to for the negotiating rights to Aung San Suu Kyi.

I wish we signed Vlad.

79- what position does she play?

I wish I had a better pair of dress shoes.

I wish I was in Maui.

Bob T:

I like Kyi, but she has trouble against power lefties and really doesn't have a position.

She did, however, put up a 6.93 RC/27 in the Burmese Fall League.

ka

for others that are keep track of the 2007 dodgers salaries, what do you have the payroll at right now?

I wish my essay for my ethnic studies class would finish itself

keeping

I wish we would sign Juan Pierre.

Wait a second...

83
I went to the Maui Classic once. It was before they put AC in. It was really hot. USC beat Memphis.

A few months later Brian Scalabrine came in to the library to research a paper. I helped him find his books, but he left his wallet behind. I chased him down as he is an easy guy to spot in a crowd.

Greg Brock will now cast further aspersions on my UCLA bona fides.

Oh, and, I was rooting for USC that day as well.

Make the bad man stop.

89 I cast no aspersions on your UCLA bona fides.

It is your improperly aligned hatred that I decry.

Ned Colletti thinks Pierre gets on base an awful lot.

Well, it's a pretty awful lot, I will say that much.

How many 100s did he have in his wallet?

73

Pierre had a great touch last yr

Last place touch

Among 160 ML qualifiers in 2006, Pierre ranked 130th in OBP. That's a bit more convincing than "doesn't walk much."

I think Mr. Scalabrine at the time would have been fortunate to have enough to pay the parking attendant.

That would not be a problem for him now.

If USC paid off their basketball players, they would likely have better basketball players.

But he doesn't strike out!

They at least got to the NCAA tournament back in those days. I do not think this era of suspect students with me first personalities will get them there.

85 Assuming Pierre gets nine million, $87,815,00

The LA Times reports that Furcal's power last year was "surprising," and that he might bat third.

I trust Ned Colletti now less than I trust Rick Honeycutt and Rich Donnelly combined.

100 - actually, the stronger statement is true:

My distrust for Colletti now is greater than the sum of my distrust of Honeycutt and Donnelly combined.

Oh, and, I was rooting for USC that day as well.
I wish Frank Robinson was the Dodgers manager

100-

That's hopefully not true, but if it is, that's the worst 1-2-3 in baseball. Except for maybe the Pirates.

Hey Guys!

Just wanted to let you know that I'm super excited to be a part of the Los Angeles Dodgers, and look forward to a meaningful and cordial relationship with the loyal and supportive rooters of Los Angeles.

Any thoughts?

Who bats number 2?

Juan Pierre..ROFLMAO!!. Since this is a big market club that can waste money as it sees fit, this kind of signing is typical for a Dodgers club trying to keep up. They have basically turned into the Oakland Raiders of MLB. Barry Bonds would have been a better signing.

Please do not feed the Padre troll.

105-

Garciaparra, I would think.

Ok I am a Raider fan and a Dodger fan and in no way are the Dodgers like the Raiders.

107

the troll in 106 or 104?

I think 104 is a joke.

104 But if it is the real Juan Pierre...

Perhaps we could guilt him into not signing?

FYI: Per 162 games, Pierre has averaged 4.7 baserunner kills.
Lofton has averaged more than 11.

I think this deal demonstrates one thing:

$9 million is the new $4 million.

I pray that this deal does not have a no-trade clause. I can understand this deal solely as a stop-gap. He could be helpful as a #2 hitter until a better one comes along. He provides some experienced help in center-field. He uh...uh... is mysteriously popular among other GMs, which could make him attractive trade bait after Matt Kemp, James Loney, Andre Ethier, Jason Repko, Rick Monday, Duke Snider, the Maytag repairman and Pliny the Elder render Pierre's services redundant.

I don't like this deal. Colletti's pursuit of great clubhouse guys has jumped the shark.

I'm not a big Pierre fan, as I've said earlier, and don't feel real excited about this signing, but nor do I have the "end of the world/jump off a bridge" feeling that many of you seem to have. I do wish I could discover that he's a lot better defensively than Lofton. The free agent market is thin this year, especially with power hitters. Since a lot of people here seemed to agree that power's a little overrated (though it would certainly be nice), anyway... the only way to get a real good power hitting outfielder would be to trade the farm for one, and I don't see that happening. So if this means the Dodgers are just going to focus on a top line starter and keep the kids intact, I'm not as depressed by it as I was. Not thrilled mind you, but copacetic.

As for the Padres, well, I don't see a lot being done to improve that team in the off season, and they could use it, too.

re 99

Assuming Pierre gets nine million, $87,815,00

hmm, so roughly close to 90mil as well. Thats interesting considering the latimes article states we still have "plenty" of money to spend, it seems that payroll will be closer to 115 then 100 (i think Jon insinuated that as well).

113 Kills, or skills? I kind of like the idea of baserunning kills, would make the game more exciting. Not as exciting as blurnsball, but exciting nonetheless.

Regarding a variety of subjects covered in several recent threads:

Good heavens.

conversation with my wife:

"Whoa, whoa!"

"What's up?"

"Well you see, there's this player that Dodgerthoughts always kids about, kinda makes fun of because he's fast, but that's about it. He steals bases, but he doesn't get on base all that often so it doesn't really matter, and he can only hit singles...and now the Dodgers are offering him $45 million dollars."

"Dodgerthoughts isn't going to be happy huh?"

117 - Kills.
Bill James thought that to be a more descriptive term than "assists."

Dodgerthoughts is not happy.

That would be correct.

Tom Goodwin must be wishing he'd been born about 10 years later.

The Linear Weights averages that I got from the old page on DodgerMath indicate that Pierre's basestealing has a net positive impact.

Based on his career averages, I got a net linear weight of 2.01 for Pierre, which is still better than Russell Martin last year.

I'm jumping in late here...

but does anyone know if this deal is official?

If so, this arguably might be one of the worst signings I've ever seen....

122- Ryan Church can take care of that

So, in theory, two Juan Pierre's are worth more annually than one Soriano or Bonds.

Maybe, maybe, maybe this is one of those Colletti head scrathing bluffs that only sets up another move? Hasn't he done this before? He's preparing us for Bonds right?

Yeah, is there any proof Juan Pierre isn't Tom Goodwin?

I'd rather have Pierre than Bonds.

hey, he had no errors last year!
(Insert comments from previous Kenny Lofton discussions about how you need to cover ground and touch the ball to make an error)

I'm sorry, he's not Tom Goodwin bad, that's just low! He's had a much better career than that, even if I see where the comparison comes from. Is he better than Kenny Landreux is what I'm wondering.

Juan Pierre made four more outs while we were having this conversation.

Zone Rating loved Pierre last year, giving him a .911 rating. Here's the career trend:
2000: .843
2001: .873
2002: .892
2003: .868
2004: .848
2005: .882
2006: .911
AVG: .877

Rate2 says slighly above average in Colorado, slightly below average in Florda, 101 last year, 99 career.

He'll run balls down a lot better than Lofton, but he'll still be run on like he's Mike Piazza.

130 - He makes outs in the offseason! What a guy!

(That was with his glove right?)

131 - Makes me wonder about park effects for ZR, like how Fenway's Monster ruins most attempts to get a true read on Manny's (bad) defense.

130 - By the way, Greg... Slappy McPutout gets my vote.

133 - Manny had a ZR of .694 this year

132 - Juan Pierre will never be accused of driving in runs with his glove.

134 - To clarify, Slappy McPutout is my vote whether we're choosing a nickname for Juan Pierre or providing punch lines to dirty Irish jokes.

135 - See?

137 - Come on, that's pretty drastic; the closest to that ineptitude in left field is Josh Willingham at .790. Carlos Lee is at .815, at third worst.

The other way around is his failure average is .306, versus Willingham's .790 and Lee's .185.

138 - Correction

The other way around is his failure average is .306, versus Willingham's .210 and Lee's .185.

I was arguing that ZR is affected by the player's home park; Manny's rating proves as much.

Manny is an indifferent fielder at best, but that ZR is like Greg Luzinski or Pete Incaviglia on sedatives.

140 - actually, and Rate2 show this too, Manny was good defensively his first year in Boston, but he dropped off a lot.

Year: Zone/Rate2
2001: .877/102
2002: .779/89
2003: .789/91

you get the idea. This year his defense was especially bad. An 86 rate2 to go with that .694 ZR.

all stats for left field

For instance, here's Pierre's and Soriano's Runs Created over the past four years:

Soriano: 117, 93, 99, 125
Pierre: 89, 102, 74, 87

I mean, it's not like this isn't doable.

from the LA Times:
The Dodgers already have an excellent leadoff batter in shortstop Rafael Furcal. Pierre, who has hit primarily in the leadoff spot throughout his career, would bat second or leadoff, with Furcal moving to the No. 2 or 3 spot. Furcal displayed surprising power last season, hitting 15 home runs to go with 37 stolen bases.

So would we see
Lineup
1. Pierre
2. Furcal
3. Nomar
4. Kent
5. Ethier
6. Martin
7. Betemit
8. Loney

144 - But when you consider how many outs Pierre used to reach those totals...
RC/27 outs:
Soriano: 6.29, 5.49, 5.58, 6.85 (in '06)
Pierre: 4.7, 5.43, 3.89, 4.42

145-

What bothers me so much is:

1) it's just an awful, awful contract
2) the LAST thing we need is another hitter with no power
3) it eats up an outfield slot that could have just gone to Kemp or to Lofton for one more year
4) this money could have gone to sign a pitcher.

I mean, once we were out of the Soriano race we might as well have just used this money on both Schmidt AND Zito and just let Kemp or whoever else play centerfield.

I think I just threw up in my mouth.

145-

I don't mind Furcal at #2...I just thought the whole point of a lead off guy was to get on base...can you imagine those innings when we have 8-9-1 coming up? Those are going to be a nightmare.

146 - Look, it's not a good argument, but there are no good arguments for this. But in any event, you can still use your numbers for what is the best argument, which is that if you stipulate that Soriano is worth $138 million (a bit of circular logic that itself collapses with a puff of breath, but go with it), then someone who is about two-thirds the player is getting about one-third the money.

Now, I'm aware of issues like marginal utility and replacement value, and those would play out. I'm just saying that here's the starting point and the enterprising Pierre fan will take note, and it will probably lead to a better conversation than incessant use of the word "stathead."

In looking at the contract, I think the years are much more problematic than the yearly sum. Sure 9 mil is ton for Slappy McPutout, but if the payroll is set to be $110-115, there's still a lot more money for pitching. Of course, there's no confirmation either way as to what the payroll will be. The years, on the other hand, are indefensible.

147

I believe there is a de facto "no vomit" rule around here now.

My lineup

1. Furcal ss
2. Martin c
3. Nomar 1b
4. Burrell lf
5. Kent 2b
6. Ethier rf (won't be traded)
7. Betemit
Pierre/pitcher (depending on the pitcher)

What I expect the lineup to look like
1. Pierre cf
2. Furcal ss
3. Nomar 1b
4. big hitter lf/rf
5. Kent 2b
6. Ethier lf/rf
7. Martin c
8. Betemit 3b

if you stipulate that Soriano is worth $138 million ... then someone who is about two-thirds the player is getting about one-third the money.
If that's the defense, I can get behind it.

Pierre/pitcher (depending on the pitcher)

That got an actual LOL out of me.

I sense a Barry Bonds signing soon...gah.

153 -- and that's what I'm saying. It was the same thing with DePodesta. It's less about him than the quality of his enemies.

68 "In your face Gurnick!"

I wrote Gurnick today. Amazingly, he wrote back an hour later (is this normal?) Here's the exchange:

-------

Sent: Mon 11/20/2006 7:57 PM
To: Gurnick, Ken
Subject: Mailbag

firstname_lastinitial : Paul B.
hometown : Santa Barbara

question : In your piece on re-signing Nomar Garciaparra, you referred to Loney's " chronic knee problems"? What chronic knee problems? Did you make that up, or get confused? And what makes you think Loney is "expendable"? Is that your opinion, or that of the Dodgers' front office? They've already said Nomar is willing to play 3rd and is expected to be rested frequently as well. And Loney too could play elsewhere than 1st.

----------

loney had knee surgery in high school, but it hasn't prevented him from playing first base every day. colletti indicated today that there's room on the roster for both garciaparra and loney. i believe loney is expendable if garciaparra is the everyday first baseman, or if that's what it takes to get a top hitter or pitcher, because that would be more valuable than having him off come off the bench.

MLB.com: Where Baseball is Always On

See? Slappy McPutout is clearly the people's choice. This is a grassroots movement, a groundswell. Practically a mandate.

Now, how about we refer to all statistically inclined commenters here as "Stathead O'Sabr?"

I eagerly await the World Series when Slappy McPutout bunts toward Slappy McBluelips.

156

so it went from loney having 1 knee surgery in high school to having chronic knee problems now.

lol, way to go gurnick.

I have it on good authority that Ned has signed Pierre so that he can make him the centerpiece of a deal with the D-Rays to get Crawford.

Other throw-ins will include Billingsley, Kuo, Laroche, Kemp, Loney, Ethier and Furcal.

(yes, I know you can't trade free agent signings that quickly------------unfortunately)

Darren Collison might be faster than Juan Pierre. Can he play cf?

If Loney goes so Nomar can play everyday first base then Ned is even more out of his mind than I thought.

I'm not against the Nomar signing but let's face it, the guy isn't going to play 162 games...Loney is very valuable to us.

160
i hope that authority isn't ken gurnick, cause his authority ain't good

158 - Molly Ringwold plays a corner infield position for an American League team?

10 reasons not to hate this signing:

1. Pierre has a career .350 OBA, not too shabby
2. He costs one third of what the Cubs paid for Soriano
3. He steals a ton of bases, which is very valuable in a lineup devoid of power
4. His liability of getting thrown out stealing a lot is less harmful in a lineup devoid of power
5. He is a veteran in his prime (he's only 29)
6. He walks more than he strikes out
7. Signing him doesn't automatically prevent the Dodgers from winning the World Series
8. Signing him doesn't automatically prevent Matt Kemp from playing for the Dodgers
9. Did I mention he is a veteran in his prime who plays a premium defensive position and has decent offensive prowess and costs less than $9m per year?
10. The Dodgers scored a lot of runs with Lofton and a similarly powerless lineup last year. No one has made the argument that a similar approach, plugging in Pierre for Lofton, won't work in 2007.

Chaminade is clearly paying for the sins of The Mustache.

As well they should.

165-

you were being facetious, correct?

165 He is also not a member of the Khmer Rouge.

To my knowledge.

167 Not facetious. Overly optimistic, maybe.

164 - Over at BBTF, A-Rod's nickname is Slappy McBluelips.

Just because the Cubs are idiots does not make this signing excusable. They are the Cubs!!

This is the kind of thing I don't understand. .350 is nothing, particularly when adjusted for playing however many years he played in Colorado. I mean, the value might be there, as pseudo-demonstrated, but that's not where it is.

165-

Why would you even compare Pierre to Soriano?

That's like if we signed Shea Hillenbrand to a 50 mill deal and going "he makes a fraction of what Arod makes!"

It makes no sense...sure he makes a fraction of what Soriano makes, but Soriano produces...Pierre just isn't a good ballplayer. We overpaid by about 4 years and 40 million dollars.

if pierre can repeat his 2003 season of:

311/366/378 55bb 65SB 20CS 4.4 WARP

for like, 5 straight seasons, he will worth his contract.

170 - Thank you.

I was pretty sure Molly Ringwold was still in the Independent League.

Where is Rancho Santa Margarita?

172 - Pierre, in three seasons in Florida - which is a pitcher's park - compiled an OBP of .352.
Just FYI...

176 - http://maps.google.com/maps?oi=map&q=Rancho+Santa+Margarita,+CA

176

southeast orange county.

In Orange County.

It was not really a good moment when I was out having a drink with a neighbor and talking about possibly applying for a job in his office and the "Jerry Crasnick reports" thing showed up on the crawl at the bottom of the tv behind the bar and I said a very bad word out loud, not quite realizing it was out loud.

This best captures my reaction, and to me is really a very thoughtful comment on why this is a drag: "And now it seems like whatever the case, nope, were going to do it just like everyone else does it."

This was funny too: "Average is the new above average."

What's happening in RSM?

I'm going to go watch Facing the Giants. I hear it's an uplifting story. Seems appropriate. Anyone seen it?

182 James Keefe, one of the new UCLA basketball players, is from RSM.

Great...Juan Pierre has made the whole site italicized.

The guy is bad news.

184

my high school.

Juan Pierre is the new Ryan Church.

162 - If that happens, we will utter the words that should never be uttered:

"You should have listened to Plaschke."

184- exactly. Keefe is going to be a good one. He's a very good rebounder. He needs to improve his post game.

173

It's useful to compare Pierre to Soriano because they are in the same free agent market and they will both be playing CF next year.

Soriano gets on base less, strikes out a lot more, walks a tiny bit more, and hits about 40 HRs per year more than Pierre, and costs $9m more per year. That means that annually, under this market's calculus, adding 40 HRs to your lineup costs a premium of $9 million. That is about $250k per HR. Ask yourself: is that rational?

My point is, signing Pierre is a very Moneyball move to make. HRs are way overvalued in this marketplace. If Colletti can put together a team that scores a lot of runs without hitting a lot of HRs, theoretically he should have a team that will outperform its payroll. He did it last year, and the pieces are there to do it again now. And if maybe, just maybe, the Dodgers can coax some HRs on the cheap from the new kids, they might have a World Series team next year.

189

keefes not bad. hes a good complimentary player but his lack of offensive game is going to limit his abilitites. he rebounds and plays defense well though.

165 reminds me of Cliff Clavin's Final Jeopardy answer.

i so want to believe 190 that i will believe it.

I think I've got it all figured out.....Ned's just setting things up to offer arb to Drew, have him accept, and stay a Dodger--after Boras bombs getting Drew a better deal elsewhere. Har. (Might make as much sense as some other things.)

From Gurnick's Q&A on dodgers.com==

Q:: Do the Dodgers get draft-choice compensation for J.D. Drew if he signs with another team?

A: That depends on several factors. If he signs with another club by Dec. 1, the Dodgers would receive that club's first-round pick and a sandwich pick. If he is still unsigned by Dec. 1, the Dodgers must offer him salary arbitration to be eligible to receive compensation. But if they offer arbitration, Drew could accept it by Dec. 7 and revert back to the Dodgers at a salary to be determined by arbitrators.

If the Dodgers have already replaced him in the lineup and on the payroll, they probably would not take the chance of offering him arbitration and would not be eligible to receive compensation. If arbitration is offered and Drew rejects it, the Dodgers would receive compensation from the club that signs him.

190 - Sori has an arm too, though

190 - I'm with you all the way to the point where you suggest that Colletti hasn't overvalued Pierre. I'm all for not overpaying home runs beyond their worth - that's why I (like others) think Soriano got too rich a deal, at least in cumulative value.

But how does Pierre efficiently help the Dodgers on the grind-it-out level, when he is his overall offensive and defensive contributions are barely above replacement value. Even granting that someone like Pierre is the answer, why get this expensive a version?

191- he doesn't need to be great. That's going to be Kevin Love's job. He's a perfect fit for Howland's system. His offensive game is better than Mata's when he first came to UCLA. This year's team is very deep.

Luc Richard is an absolute beast.

Is Eduardo Najera Mexican?

but most people, whether they've read Moneyball or not, feel Soriano was overpaid.

It's not that in contrast with the Soriano deal Pierre isn't a good value, but that if $12 million a year can almost get you Schmidt or Zito or Dunn on an extension, or Garciaparra, then there has to be cheaper ways to get you the little that Pierre brings to the table.

194 He'll offer arbitration.

Of course, after today...

Never mind, found it, Najera is from Chihuahua.

hmm, I used $12 million to make the point that if $3 million is the difference between Pierre and a much better FA, get the better FA.

Damn I knew an answer to a question from Bob, but he beat me to it.

197
Keefe has a better offensive game than Mata period haha, not just comparing them as freshmen.

It's not that in contrast with the Soriano deal Pierre isn't a good value, but that if $12 million a year can almost get you Schmidt or Zito or Dunn on an extension, or Garciaparra, then there has to be cheaper ways to get you the little that Pierre brings to the table.

Which is to say, the Pierre signing does not look to overcome its oppurtunity cost.

Although it is better than redoing "The Gates" twice.

But how does Pierre efficiently help the Dodgers on the grind-it-out level, when he is his overall offensive and defensive contributions are barely above replacement value. Even granting that someone like Pierre is the answer, why get this expensive a version?

Exactly. I don't defend the Soriano signing...but it's like they bought an 80 million dollar yacht for 136...sure they overpaid, but at least they still have an 80 million dollar yacht.

At the end of the day we just paid 45 million dollars for an average at best player. That is completely inexcusable. Couldn't we have just signed Lofton for one more year to bridge the gap to Kemp?

These are the times I honestly wonder why some fans aren't real GM's....there isn't a single one of us on this board that would make this deal because of its absurdity...so why the heck would Colletti?

I appreciate Mata more because I think gangly looking guys from Southeast L.A. make for nicer stories than more sculpted guys from South Orange County.

Mata is Weevil.
Keefe is Logan.

196 I don't think Pierre is expensive at all. It's extremely cheap when looked at in comparison to the current free agent marketplace and the amount of money now in the game. In fact, I thought Pierre would go for a lot more considering he's a CFer. I wouldn't be surprised if he got a no-trade clause, because this deal seems low to me.

At $9m per, Pierre doesn't have to carry the team. He doesn't have to be the answer. He just has to be consistently productive. He'll steal his 50-60 bases, score 100 runs, play CF better than Lofton, and play every day. And, the Dodgers will still have room for an ace like Zito.

Looks like Mata has the size of his shorts under control this year.

These are the times I honestly wonder why some fans aren't real GMs...
Malcolm Gladwell ("Blink," "The Tipping Point") made the case that GMs often out-think themselves - used Isiah Thomas as an example.
I'll try to find the interview...

190 Conversly, you can compare him to Frank Catalanotto (not a perfect comparison, but work with me here). They have similar career batting averages (.297-.303) but Catalonotto has a better on base percentage, and a far better slugging percentage. Even if you assumed that Pierre could do the same thing (which he never possibly could), you'd be paying $157,854 dollars per stolen base (this ignores the fact that his 65% stolen base percentage makes his steals useless). If $250K per home run is a bad value, $157,000 per stolen base from a player that's much better than the actual Juan Pierre certainly isn't worth it.

good poing. Lofton at 1-year for $5 million sounds so sane right now. Use the other $40 for 3 years of Schmidt. Let Kemp fill out the remaining 4 years of Pierre's contract.

as in your point sounds very good, poing, I guess.

Couldn't we have just signed Lofton for one more year to bridge the gap to Kemp?

Sure we could have, but this signing would seem to indicate that Ned doesn't believe Kemp is the CF of the future. What I wonder is why we couldn't have signed Lofton for one year to bridge the gap to signing a free agent Vernon Wells/Andruw Jones next year.

I don't think Pierre is expensive at all. It's extremely cheap when looked at in comparison to the current free agent marketplace and the amount of money now in the game. In fact, I thought Pierre would go for a lot more considering he's a CFer. I wouldn't be surprised if he got a no-trade clause, because this deal seems low to me.

You've gotta be kidding me. Look at Pierre's numbers...to say he's anything but VASTLY overpaid at this point is just naive.

Look at the numbers...we could just let Repko patrol CF next year for, what, 400K? I'd MUCH rather have Repko put up BETTER numbers for NINE million dollars less and use that money on something useful.

While I'll root for Pierre, it's still a fact that we paid 9 million a year for a guy who can't hit or get on base...not very savvy.

199 I say we wait until Schmidt and Zito sign contracts. The way this market is going I wouldnt be surprised to see one of them take home more than FAR ABOVE $12m.

213
I always say that there is a disturbing lack of onomatopoeia at Dodger Thoughts.

Many of Ned's moves (especially Lugo)just make it seem like he has no plan whatsoever (whether that is true or not). He just gets pieces and then hopes they fit.

211 - Juan Pierre's stolen base rate is 74 percent.

58-78 last year, 325-441 career

We are apparently now at the point of hoping that Colletti's stupidity won't do serious damage. Or that the market is so crazy that 45 million won't be enough. Hard to believe there's a bigger fool out there.

Here we go:
http://gladwell.typepad.com/gladwellcom/2006/03/nba_heuristics.html
*Let's say I'm so dumb about basketball that all I know is that the best college programs in the country are Duke and UConn, and so as a GM my rule is only draft and/or trade for the first and second best players, in any given year, from those two schools.
So I fire all my scouts. I disband my front office, and basically say that I cede my basketball judgment to Jim Calhoun and Mike K.
What's my team? It's some combination of Elton Brand, Emeka Okafor, Ben Gordon, Luol Deng, Shane Battier, Mike Dunleavy, Rip Hamilton, Corey Maggette, Jay Williams, Caron Butler, Donyell Marshall and Grant Hill - which is a really wonderful team. Now, of course, in the real world I couldn't get all those people, because lots of them were really high draft picks.
But let's say I got Brand in a trade, after Chicago soured on him, and I was lucky enough to be in the lottery for Okafor. Maggette was a 13; Hamilton and Deng were 7s; and Butler was a 10—so at least some of them are doable, particularly since in off-years for Duke and UConn I can trade down and stockpile picks. Battier I wine and dine in the free agent market, because who wants to be stuck in Memphis? Ditto for Gordon, who, it seems, Chicago is thinking of moving anyway.
Is that the best team in the league? No. It is better than the Knicks? Absolutely.
The point is that clinging to a very simple rule of thumb here — that doesn't require knowing much about basketball — can leave you looking pretty smart.*

At $9m per, Pierre doesn't have to carry the team?

Isn't this the same salary as Garciaparra, Lowe, and Penny?

As crazy as the market may seem, Nomar signed for a reasonable amount, and Schmidt and Zito aren't asking for THAT much more than Pierre.

Curious what the stats say. How much better is Pierre than Mark DeRosa or whoever the Cubbies signed for a few million less that still seemed overpriced?

I don't take this as Colletti being anti-Kemp. Colletti is one of Kemp's biggest boosters. He was eager to promote him, obviously satisfied with his debut, and said nothing more about his slump than the guy just needs more time. Just today, Colletti suggested that Kemp might add 20 more HR to the lineup before the 2007 season ends.

220 - I'm beginning to believe it's the market.
A BPro writer recently advised to ignore the numbers coming out of this offseason, because they'd seem crazy.

222 - The Juan Pierre signing probably added millions to the Zito and Schmidt contracts.

215 Repko can't be counted on to play anywhere close to 162 games, or even to produce after the month of May.

Kemp will probably end up a corner outfielder anyway.

Gary Matthews is highly sought after and will be overpaid at Soriano proportions.

Anyone else?

172 -- The year that Pierre OBPed .332 at Coors (2002), it had a park factor (according to ESPN) of 1.44. But all of that comes out in the wash. I think you have to start from the premise that .350 isn't much to write home about in the first place anyway. Ethier can OBP .350 with his eyes closed.

I minimized the concept of marginal utility earlier, but it really comes into play when comparing a player like Pierre to a player like Soriano. Using WARP (since Pierre is a 5 and Soriano is a 10 and its just easy to hypothesize around), the first couple of WARP points are not worth very much because they're more replaceable and probably not outcome determinative. After that, you likely start to see some value as you get into the 3, 4, 5 category. But going from your eighth to tenth win is far more valuable than going from your fourth to your fifth win. So even if you take both players contracts at face value, you can't make the broad conclusion that I earlier made (2/3 player at 1/3 price) without determining marginal values and a whole host of other things. That value might get unlocked upon closer inspection, but in most cases (and s choir is doing an excellent job, so present company excluded) what you generally get is people making up stuff then assigning their own value to it.

216-

I say we wait until Schmidt and Zito sign contracts. The way this market is going I wouldnt be surprised to see one of them take home more than FAR ABOVE $12m.

All the more reason not to spend 9 mill per on Pierre.

Seriously...9 mill on Pierre or say, 14 on Schmidt? I'll take the Schmidt deal because he actually helps you win games.

222
Yeah, and the Mark DeRosa contract was stupid to me in the first place. Career back up has a career year in a free agent year.

but Jon, if we HADN'T just signed Pierre to that contract, and offered $12 per to one of those two pitchers?

224 - I've been doing the same thing. Again, that's not the point. We don't know the final market totals and we don't know the payroll, so we can't evaluate the Pierre signing in that respect. But if Pierre is so medicore that we know that cheaper alternatives are available for a smaller commitment, then we can go from there.

226-

okay, you still didn't answer the burning question though...

how do you justify paying a guy 9 mill per year when he's league average AT BEST?

Seriously.

What's next? Shea Hillenbrand for 48 mill?

165 How is $9 million 1/3rd of $17 million? 208 And he is deservedly extremely cheap compared to this year's free agent signings. He's not Soriano. He's definitely not Aramis Ramirez. He's more like Julio Lugo than he is like any of the big-time free agents. The Cubs are throwing around money like it was Necco wafers, but they didn't offer Pierre $9 million per.

If Pierre is worth $9 million, then Aramis Ramirez should've held out for two more weeks. He could've gotten $20 million. You'd have to pay Zito $20 million, and Jason Schmidt $22 million if Pierre is the new face of the $9 million player. Hell, we should've picked up Gagne's option if this is the going rate. He'll probably get paid more than $10 million per.

By the way, let me try this:

UCLA football scouting report?

BYU has accepted a bid to the Las Vegas Bowl.

230. According to Gammons, the Dodgers have been in talks with Schmidt so perhaps they are offering a contract to one of them.

Did it work?

I think you have to start from the premise that .350 isn't much to write home about in the first place anyway

.350 is above average. when you consider that average is the new above average, .350 is the new 9 million dollar mark.

It didn't work. We're still italicized.

231 - Never said it was the point.
Look, I'm no fan of this signing. But we've got to get past the "He'll be overpaid!" argument, because we don't know where that line is, at least not yet.

But blaming it on the "market" is just as circular, as saying that "average is the new above-average." Whose fault is that? The concept of efficient markets is hard enough to prove with a completely liquid, thousands of issues market like NYSE, much less a rickety, jerryrigged cartel like MLB.

211 Catalanotto doesn't play a premium defensive position. Somebody has to patrol CF for LA, and it sure ain't gonna be Kemp, Repko or anyone else you can find on the market for less than $9m per.

211- Cat is a corner outfielder/DH. I think you have to compare Pierre's contract to those of the other center fielders on the market. We'll see what kind of contract Matthews and Roberts get.

231-

Yeah the problem is just Pierre's contract in general.

If we paid Schmidt say 14 mill...well we could discuss over and over if we overpaid or not, but at the end of the day we signed an elite pitcher.

The reason I'm so amped up on this is I can't even begin to wrap my head around why ANY team would give Pierre more than a couple mill a year...it would be like voluntarily buying a Civic for 500 grand.

I'm not italicized.

I would dare say that if you've lost dzzrtRatt on an acquisition, you've lost the center. Pending ToyCannon's two cents ...

Me neither.

I really don't think Ned pulled $9m out of his hat. The Giants had to have been offering big money too. Either that or Sabean played Ned big time.

But I suppose the counter to this argument is that you could have not signed the guy in the first place.

45/138 = .3260869

232. The justification is the market. Colletti had to pay that to get an outfielder he wanted. The money shouldnt be the question as much as why Colletti wanted Pierre badly enough to pay this year's market price for him.

Somebody has to patrol CF for LA, and it sure ain't gonna be Kemp, Repko or anyone else you can find on the market for less than $9m per.

Uh...Lofton?

You seem to be blind to the fact that Pierre doesn't have good numbers. It's not the fact that we spent 9 million that people are getting upset, it's why was it spent on a guy who isn't good?

I'd have no problem spending 9 mill if it was on a CF like Jim Edmonds...I'm not big on him but that wouldn't upset me...signing a guy who plays replacement level baseball has absolutely no logic to it.

233 $44 million is 1/3 of $136 million

Toy Cannon...The new Walter Cronkite.

But he likes Eckstein!

Dodger Stadium supresses doubles and triples, that cannot help Juan. I have heard from a lot of Cubs and Marlin fans that Juan has the worst arm they have seen in center.

250. Edmonds had already re-signed with the Cards, making Pierre's price go up that much more.

Molly Ringwold is currently starring in the Broadway Across America production of Sweet Charity. I'm sure she's done other good work, but she's wrong for the part, can't sing that well, and is not a very good dancer. The rest of the cast, however, is pretty amazing, and there are some incredible Fosse-inspired dance numbers, the best I have seen. They are worth the admission if you know that's what you're going for.

If there were free agent signings for the stage, Molly Ringwold would be the Juan Pierre of Broadway musicals.

249-

I don't think the justification is the market. If we signed a GREAT player and overpaid then yes, it's because of the market.

I don't care what the market is...if you're going to pay someone 9 million bucks they better be a DECENT player....Pierre's numbers could be put up by Lofton for ONE year at a fraction of the cost.

I just can't for the life of me figure out why Ned would even consider this deal when he could have just brought Lofton back for a lot less money and BETTER production.

241 - A Repko-Lofton platoon for the first half and Kemp-Lofton for the second half will give it to you with a small dropoff in defense but better offense (Lofton against righties, Repko/Kemp against lefties) at about 2/3 the annual cost and 13 percent the total commitment. And I say that as no huge fan at all of Repko or Lofton. I'm sure better options are available.

250 Lofton is at the end of his career. He's also injured a lot. Having him play CF means having Repko or Kemp play there half the time. Doesn't having stability in CF mean something?

Roberts will probably get a similar deal, and he'll likely play only 120 games.

Andrew, I wanted to write a comment on your great right up at True Blue, but blognation won't let me do it.

is it a coincidence that pierres walk rate last year was basically the lowest of his career while playing for dusty baker?

Doesn't having stability in CF mean something?

No.

239/249 - I agree.

255 - There have been some wonderfully literate comments in today's threads, and this is just the latest. And I really appreciate that the discussion has been so civil. That part has been a pleasure.

258 - I see 3 years/18 million for Roberts as a low estimate. I feel good about 3 years though

Wait - is there any guarantee Lofton will post better numbers than Pierre (or a league-average CF) next year? Because, at the end of last season, he looked awful.

Having him play CF means having Repko or Kemp play there half the time. Doesn't having stability in CF mean something?

Yeah but you're forgetting the simple fact that Kemp will put up far better numbers than Pierre would....and for roughly 8.7 million dollars less.

I'm all about signing guys...just spend the cash on guys who HELP...Pierre is almost detrimental to this team right now.

251 Lofton is not an ideal guy to platoon. He hits well against most lefties. Not to mention he wouldn't take that too well.

234 There was nowhere else for BYU to go. The Las Vegas Bowl is what you get when you win the Mountain West Conference, provided you don't make it to the BCS bowls. I'd like to see them play Oregon. Or UCLA, if that Mormon QB is back playing for them. In Provo, Olsen is hated more than you hate ND, by many people, since he spurned BYU.

Lofton, post-ASB: 306/369/424/793.
Shows what I know...

221 How can you forget Ray Allen and Carlos Boozer?

256. Well, here's the question you should be asking then. Why did Ned feel that Pierre was worth what a CF in this year's market was going to bring? Obviously Ned feels that he's going to be able to count on a healthy Pierre playing everyday more than a nearly 40 year old Kenny Lofton...Unfortunately, the market in this off season has dictated that a healthy Kenny Lofton is costing 9 mil a year.

Mind you, I think this deal is terrible but I'm just trying to figure out the mindset behind it.

Oooh, wait, I was confused. I thought we'd signed the great Belgian filmmaker Jean-Pierre (Jeunet), of Delicatessen and Amelie fame. So, never mind. This sucks.

But seriously, I'm going to wait until Spring Training to officially judge the Dodgers off season and chances for next year... I'll just grouse quietly to myself on occasion and bite my nails in worry.

----

Poor Molly, isn't it "Ringwald," though? At least to give her some slack. ;-)

I realize contract length is important, but budgets are set year to year. Remember when everyone thought Colletti overpaid in signing Furcal for $13 million? It was justified by the fact that our commitment would only be three years. Right now, if Furcal was a FA, he'd easily pull in $15-$16 mil for four years. That's what's happened to the market due to this new TV contract and labor agreement.

245 I like that. I'm a battleground state. I'm Ohio!

My bias is, I'm not that into speed, unless it comes with power. Speed added to power makes a player really dangerous. Power alone is dangerous, too. Speed alone is rarely that dangerous. It'll win you a game here and there, but it's not worth $9 million/year. And that's about all Pierre can brag about -- he can run fast.

Lofton vs. LHP: 214/275/274/549.
That, that is not good.

Jon - Maybe the Juan Pierre signing has everyone wanting to make an emphatic point, but I'm seeing everything in italics. (OS X.4 w/ Safari). Could you do a favor and throw an ending italics tag at the end of your entry, if that would solve the problem? Thanks..

the simple fact that Kemp will put up far better numbers than Pierre would

I wish this were a simple fact. If it were, you could call the NL West right now. Besides, Kemp will likely play RF.

Also, I think it borders on irrational panic to say that a guy who OBPs .350 and steals 50-60 bases and plays an average CF is detrimental to the team.

I realize that last part is controversial, but he's not going to sieve runs out there at quite the clip that Lofton did.

271
It is like we woke up in the City of Lost Children, with this nightmare.

262 That's very nice of you. I enjoy contributing to this site more than any other. I'm going to add "wonderfully literate" to my CV, in Roger Ebert style quotes.

273 You're right, that's not so good.

Right now, here's the lineup with the 2006 PA numbers, and some estimates for 2007:

Pierre 750 PA/740 PA
Furcal 736 PA/725 PA
Nomar 523 PA/501 PA
Kent 473 PA/501 PA
Ethier 441 PA/650 PA
Martin 468 PA/550 PA
Betemit 412 PA/550 PA
Loney 111 PA/500 PA

Taking last year's OBP stats, the OBP for the lineup, weighed with the 2006 PA numbers, is .356. With my 2007 estimates, it's .354 if they repeat their 2006 OBP.

See guys, here's where not being a Kenny Lofton hater comes in handy:

2006 RC/27

Lofton: 5.14
Pierre: 4.42

Your premise is faulty.

274 - I put another end-italic in, but I proofed the post again and it didn't need one, and I'm not seeing italics.

277 All I know is, if I opened my hotel room door and it was Molly Ringwald on the other side in fishnet stockings, I'd pretend I was a cop.

281 Jon, whatever you did cured the problem.

281 The italics are gone now.

Juan Pierre, however, remains...

I hate that I misspelled Molly Ringwald's name, because I loved her in her teen movies. I should have looked it up, but I trusted the prior DT comments to get it right. Never again!

272 Speed also helps on defense. Not too many good, slow, CFers. If Pierre was an amazing defensive outfielder, you could view this signing as a way to strengthen the defense, with maybe a later move getting a big bat. Unfortunately, I'm not sure it can be spun that way.

Sooo... starting pitching discussion anyone? Where are we in the Barry Zito sweepstakes?

Juan Pierre talking points at the presser to introduce him:

-He's a veteran presence in the lineup
-He's won a championship
-His speed is very disruptive and along with Furcal, can allow them to be more aggressive
-He had 200 hits last year
-He covers a lot of ground in center
-He stole 58 bases and you can't just find that anywhere
-He'll be a great presence in the locker room
-He can help the younger outfielders

I think I'll go at least 6 for 8 on this.

287 Again, not a member of the Khmer Rouge.

280 RC/27 ignores durability. Lofton only played in 129 games last year. He will turn 40 in May, so he will probably play in even fewer games this year.

287 meet 227.

287. He's also never been in my kitchen.

Is there a site to track down how many pitches Pierre sees per PA? Since he doesn't strike out you think the number would be okay, but he doesnt walk so that probably drags it down a bunch again.

Amazing comment in the BTF thread. Please don't shoot the messenger:

Pierre is looking better and better as a 3,000 hit guy. Seriously. The favorite toy has him currently at 32%. This contract almost guarantees 5 years of full time play, which should give him around 2100 hits at age 33. That's about the same as Rose had at the same age. I'm rooting for him, if for no other reason that to see the consternation on the faces of the voters.

Well, how many would he play? 110? 120? So we paid 45 million for 40 games of average production a year? That can't be your argument. Please tell me that's not your argument, because we can't have come all this way for that to be your argument.

What you really need to understand about Juan Pierre is that his speed and veteran leadership make it a virtual certainty that he had no involvement in the JFK assassination.

See? The superlatives do not stop

I'm going to throw something out there, tell me if I'm crazy... Having Pierre and Furcal at the top of the line up will help the 3-4-5 hitters on their power numbers.

Here's my logic, two speed guys (both capable of stealing 50-75 bases) who can get on base will mean teams will be more likely to throw fast balls rather than off speed and breaking balls against the 3-4-5 hitters.

So, it's possible that Furcal and Pierre could lead to more HRs for Nomar, Kent, and whoever bats fifth.

Am I crazy?

281 Ooh... Thanks. I was getting a crick in my neck...

285 He might be able to get to a deeply hit ball, but then what does he do with it? He can't throw it far. Maybe he could run it toward home plate.

I hate to keep going back to J.D. Drew, who is persona non grata around here, but he had the right kind of speed. He isn't thought of as a Pierre type of player, but he gets more out of his speed both defensively and on the basepaths.

Maybe Ned's mind has been befuddled by the Drew defection. Ned...man...J.D., he's...just not that into you. Okay? Gotta accept it.

281 I looked at the HTML source that was being served and there was a missing tag. Dunno what that means...

296 Actually, that's not crazy at all.

Justifying 9 mil over 5? Not so much...

287-
-He's a throwback player
-He's a "proven winner"
-He's one of the best leadoff hitters in baseball
-He's an offensive catalyst
-He made no errors last year
-He plays with a lot of intestinal fortitude
-He'll be compared to Maury Wills

"Juan has proven to be one of the game's top leadoff hitters and a tremendous defensive presence in the outfield," Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti said. "We expect him to be a major force in our lineup for the next five years and hopefully beyond."
Modified for the Pierre press conference (original quote was from after Furcal signed)

296. Something similar along those same lines that I've often wondered is: What effect do runners on base have on defensive stats?

296 -- That's all already priced into the runs he creates. Which is not to say that it can't exist theoretically, or that you can pull the ingredient out of the stew, but it's like Prego -- it's in there.

Further proof the world has turned upside-down: the Utah Jazz are 10-1, better than they ever started with Stockton and Malone.

296 - Interesting . . .

Your guys are usually going to see more fastballs with fleas on base. As Steve said, that's factored in.

The problem is how often Pierre gets on base, and as we've established, it's not enough.

That's Enron accounting.

296 -

SB-minus-CS of Dodger CF last season (Lofton/Kemp/Repko/Cruz): 32

SB-minus-CS of Pierre last season: 38

308 - That speaks for itself, right?

304 - I really do hate the Utah Jazz, always have, pretty sure I always will.

303 - ok, I'm going to have to admit, I haven't been paying that much attention to all the new stats. How does one figure how a player creates runs? Because I've not seen any measurement that would take my point into consideration.

294 Considering the market, Lofton will probably get $6 million or so for next year. Pierre plays in 30-40% more games, steals 100% more bases, and plays better defense. The extra $3m is probably worth it. Especially considering that if the Dodgers signed Lofton as a stopgap, they'd still need to pay through the nose to get someone in 2008, unless Kemp shows he can handle CF, which is not a great bet.

304. Boozer and Williams are Jerry Sloan's new cogs in the pick and roll machine. Plus, they have an sweet shooting big in Okur and the second best athlete available in last years draft in Ronnie Brewer...get used to it, theyre gonna be good for a while.

Paul Milsap was really underrated coming out this year. A big scoring power forward from Louisiana Tech...they have some good depth.

308/309 - um, yeah, not really... see 310

Total championships
Pierre= 1
Lofton/Kemp/Repko/Cruz= 0

314 The Dodgers should have signed John Salley.

308 SB minus CS is a little misleading, don't you think? Pierre got himself into scoring position by stealing a base 58 times last year. If he stays at first instead of getting caught 20 times, he probably still doesn't score on a team with no power bats. On a singles-hitting team like the Dodgers, getting caught stealing is an acceptable risk. Pierre probably wouldn't be as good of a fit on an AL-style club, but his caught-stealings don't hurt the Dodgers as much.

308/316 - what's an acceptable SB%?

Pierre's percentage:

73.7% career, 74.4% last year, 77% in 2005.

Those acceptable numbers for everyone?

317 80% is the accepted number.

75%+ is acceptable. 80+ is very good.

316 - The SB-CS totals were almost exactly the same. So again, this is an area where the idea that Pierre is bringing signficant improvement is a myth.

Whatever you think of the stolen base, Pierre barely does it better than what the Dodgers had at the position last year.

"If he stays at first instead of getting caught 20 times, he probably still doesn't score on a team with no power bats. On a singles-hitting team like the Dodgers, getting caught stealing is an acceptable risk."

On a team that needs more at-bats to score a run, outs are even very valuable. A home-run hitting team can score more easily with two out than a non-homer-hitting team.

If Pierre makes out, either at the plate or on the bases, and your hitter with two out is Nomar Garciaparra rather than Albert Pujols, it's more damaging. Pierre steals at a rate that makes it his attempts worthwhile, but not by a large margin.

Which is not to say that Pierre should steal willy nilly with Pujols up. Caught stealings are just plain bad, no matter what your offense is.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6192462

cubs still going hard after lugo. that would suck for us.

318/319 - well considering he gets a bunch of games against Piazza, Torialba, and whoever the stiff in SF is, his percentage should see a big jump next year with the Bums...

This signing makes you realize how critical J.D. Drew was to the Dodger's offseason plans. Thus, I still find it somewhat remarkable that Ned let him get away without a fight. We now are committed to $2 million less per year for more years, likely getting half the annual WARP (a cumulative statistic) in CF. Of course, a week ago, the ridiculousness of the market had not been fully revealed, but still...

That being said, I don't think the Pierre signing is all that bad. There really aren't many good options available for center field. In our farm system, there's just Kemp and scouts have been pegging him as a right fielder for a while now. Neither Roberts and Lofton appear to belong in center defensively (either subjectively or from a stastical perspective). Repko hasn't proven he can be relied on either health-wise or production-wise. Jayson Werth anyone? So, that really left J.D. Drew (perhaps 4 years, $60 million), Alfonso Soriano (8 years, $136 million), Gary Matthews (??), Juan Pierre (5 years, $44 million), or a trade (likely involving one of Ethier, Kemp, Loney, or Kuo). So, if this deal allows us to keep our young players and keep them relatively unblocked, I'm alright with it. Also, as I mentioned in the other thread, Juan Pierre will likely continue to have value to many GMs out there, so if we do come up with a better option in the future, we'll probably lose at most $0.15 - $0.20 on the dollar.

Last, having a player who is extremely healthy and consistent, even consistently (slightly) below average, has value. Every team should try to come up with the right balance of risk and reward in order to maximize their odds of making the playoffs. Pierre has very little upside, but he doesn't appear to have much risk either, whereas our young players are quite the opposite. Having too much variance, even if your expected value is high can still hurt your chances.

Overall, this move rates a blech, but our season next year is still going to depend primarily on the ability of our young players to maintain or improve upon their success. Well, that and some pitching... :)

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2006/10/net_stolen_base.php
When stealing bases, a player needs to be successful somewhere between 70-75% of the time.

322 For a stolen base to be worth the risk, you should have around and 80% probability of success.

311 -- ack.

1) We used total guaranteed contract value for the rat. You don't get to now cherrypick your way back to a year over year valuation. 6/45, not 6/9.

2) Playing in "more games" is a non-sequitur. I could put a cow in centerfield for 162 games and it would play 162 games.

3) You're double-counting (and cherry picking) stolen bases. Those are priced into the offensive statistics and Lofton comes out ahead already.

4) Everyone plays better defense than Kenny Lofton. There are ways to value what that's worth given the loss of offense. But that's your burden to prove.

5) They might need to pay through the nose to get someone in 2008. So? They just paid through the nose for someone now. This is more like nihilism than anything.

6) Why is Kemp not a great bet to handle centerfield? I mean, I can see why you assert it, because your case rests on it, but it strikes me as just an assertion, easily made (I make them all the time) but to be taken with several grains of salt.

I would answer KG16's question, but now Heroes is on, and I am still depressed, and I need some joy in my life. Greg Brock, the floor is yours.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/circle-the-wagons-running-the-bases-part-iii/
FYI, Pierre is one of the best baserunners in the game.

#326: Offensively, after including all aspects of baserunning, the difference between Lofton and Pierre is likely a wash. Defensively, Pierre probably picks us up about 10 runs (1 Win) over the course of the season (100 Rate vs. 93 Rate last year). The career numbers give Lofton the edge(99 Rate vs. 101 Rate), but subjectively I put more faith in last year's numbers since Lofton is getting older and was just awful to watch. Lofton also has more risks, both in terms of injuries and dramatic performance decline, due to his age. Thus, $3 million more next year for Pierre seems justified.

Now, the argument for future years is more about where the market is trending. If we don't have an in-house option that we can trust, and we think the market is going to get more and more expensive, then years 2 through 5 would make sense in that regard.

In very limited sample size, Kemp had a 65 Rate in center field. Combining that with my limited (and likely useless) observations as well as the scouting perspective (likely more useful) leads me to believe Kemp's future is not in center field. The signing of Pierre leads me to believe this is the organizational perspective as well, which certainly doesn't make it right, but it does at least add a little weight to the claim.

As long as Ned doesn't trade Kuo, I'll remain excited about next season. He's been my favorite prospect since the days of Choi.

324- 70 % is on the low end for me. I'm pretty sure it was Depodesta who said that 75 % was acceptable.

Steve, I hope you enjoyed Heroes. At least something finally happened in today's episode.

320

On a team that needs more at-bats to score a run, outs are even very valuable.

Very interesting point, Jon. I'll have to think about that.

Pierre is going to be doing a lot of this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oczf9Db91PQ
and this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gz3cWSsIp-M
next year

Not to bring yet more negativity to the Pierre signing. But, has anyone mentioned;

1) the only usefull thing about using average (pierre's is pretty good) over OBP is on a hit you have a chance to advance runners. But, Pierre gets so many infield hits its really almost negated. Bringing us back again to his OBP.

2)If Pierre isnt batting first (I dont know if he ever has) He will have atleast one more plate appearence with a possible runner on making his infield hit less dangerous with a force at second

Not to bring yet more negativity to the Pierre signing. But, has anyone mentioned;

1) the only usefull thing about using average (pierre's is pretty good) over OBP is on a hit you have a chance to advance runners. But, Pierre gets so many infield hits its really almost negated. Bringing us back again to his OBP.

2)If Pierre isnt batting first (I dont know if he ever has) He will have atleast one more plate appearence with a possible runner on making his infield hit less dangerous with a force at second

oops......sorry

Speculation warning: Rosenthal is reporting the Cubs are courting Julio Lugo.

http://tinyurl.com/styqk

Just our luck, on a day we lose a 1st round pick, allegedly to sign a "slap hitting" CF (a description used to positively describe Pierre), we might get diminished return for Lugo.

Seriously, the only thing that has kept me from going insane from the whole Lugo fiasco was the light at the end of the player development tunnel, the 1st round plus the supplemental.

Now, if Lugo goes to the Cubs, we wouldn't get a 1st rounder (because they pick in the top 15--#3, which is protected), NOR would we get a 2nd rounder, because the Cubs signed a higher-ranking Alsonso Soriano (Nationals get their 2nd rounder).

The best the Dodgers get from the Cubs for Lugo is a 3rd rounder, and that makes my head hurt more than usual.

Just our luck, on a day we lose a 1st round pick, allegedly to sign a "slap hitting" CF (a description used to positively describe Pierre)

we dont lose any picks for signing pierre.

Has there ever been any work done on objectively measuring how a baserunner "disrupts" the pitching and defense of the opposing team?

335 His double play percentage is really good for a slap hitter.

339 I forgot where I read this but I remember that a fast runner adds around .010 to the hitter's OPS. I forgot how they defined a fast runner, but I'm sure Pierre qualifies.

323 made the point better than I will be able to, but who exactly is this mythical league-average CFer who is available on the market this year? Matthews is the only second-tier CF still available and given the market inflation we've seen I would not expect to see him go for less than $10m/yr, so who else is left? Lofton? After all of the howling on this board all year about Kenny Lofton, now you'd rather have him back?

I read DT all of last season and didn't even know until I went to check his stats that he put up 32 steals, 149 hits and hit over .300, pretty damn good for any leadoff hitter let alone one who is 39 years old. Seriously, you guys just added a player who led the league in hits and was second in steals, and you are howling like Colletti traded Vin Scully for Joe Morgan.

Take a deep breath, zoom out from the rate stats for a while, and take a look at the rest of the league. There are more teams out there than you realize for whom Pierre would actually be an upgrade in CF, but who was able to spend what it took to bring him in? AND still have enough $$ left over to bring in a top flight starter. Sheesh.

339 - For a start, batters always hit better with runners on. Check the league-wide numbers.

I actually don't agree that Pierre and Lofton are a wash, offensively. For whatever Pierre's flaws, I think the fact that he's considerably younger and in the prime of his career vs. Lofton's age and quickly degrading skills should factor in here, too. I think Pierre actually still has some potential to get better (granted, probably not much, but possible) while Lofton likely will decline in skills and stats. I wouldn't trust him much next year, even as a platoon player.

The more I read about Pierre, the less I hate the deal.
I'm not about to say I like the move; just that I don't actively loathe it.

*341. das411
32 steals, 149 hits and hit over .300*

only problem is Loften played in alot less games

341. das411

I still think he can be a upgrade over loften though

I don't think Pierre will be nearly as bad as he was last year. For some reason he was better on the road (.301/.336/.411) than at home (.282/.323/.363). Who knows, maybe he didn't like the cold weather. In the second half of the season, he was pretty good (.311/.340/.418). Let's just hope that he can give us a .740-.750 ops with good defense. If not for his terrible arm, he might have (deservedly) won a gold glove this year.

338 Nate, you just bought me a few more hours of sanity. I was thinking Pierre was a Type A free agent, but I just looked it up and he's a Type B.

Science be praised!

It's the 5 years that bothers more me than annual salary. Ned please don't include an option for a 6th year!

The problem with Pierre is how dependent on batting average he is. There's a really good chance that one year, he'll have good success on balls in play and hit .325/.370/.380 and be a pretty effective part of the offense.

Of course, it's almost as likely that he'll hit .275/.320/.330 and be a complete offensive sink hole. As he gets older and his speed starts to go, the .275 scenario becomes far more likely than the .325 scenario.

If this was just one year of Juan Pierre, I'd be upset, but it wouldn't be terrible. Committing to a guy like this for five years when far more palatable options will emerge on the market is where the mistake is.

only problem is Loften played in alot less games
Yes, because Lofton can't hit LHP.
Over the last three seasons, Pierre has hit 298/347/352/699 vs. LHP. Not great, or even good, but a damn sight better than Lofton.

has anyone checked out the Dodgers.com or ESPN boards? Im too scared to look. Im sure they are all real exited about the new Dodgers 1-2 punch

Heroes is a good show.

Nobody is advocating signing a mythical league average centerfielder. We just signed a real league average centerfielder, so there is no need for a mythical one, though I suspect that Dave Roberts, though I guess technically a leftfielder now given our penchant for over-specialization, would come something close depending on your definition of average, and whether that definition actually means "above average."

Of course, all that means is that baseball teams tend to stick lousy baseball players in centerfield, then justify themselves in the media by calling average "above average."

341 - The fact that a case is being made for Lofton over Pierre doesn't necessarily mean that people want Lofton back. It's just to prove a point.

I don't think I'm being unreasonable about Pierre - I said in my post this afternoon that he was above-average. I've said all offseason that dollars aren't what they used to be. There are valid points made in Pierre's defense - most recently Fearing Blue's point that Pierre has a minimum value that you can count on.

But that does not change the likelihood that by the end of 2007, it should be rather easy for the Dodgers to come up with three outfielders better than Juan Pierre - with Kemp and Ethier at the corners by September '07, they're two-thirds of the way there, and that the outlay for Pierre will soon be a waste.

And unfortunately, some day, on a de facto basis (not literally), the Dodgers will trade Vin Scully for Joe Morgan, and the howling will resemble that scene near the end of from Raiders of the Lost Ark. Keep your eyes closed.

353 - Yeah, Heroes is cool and charming. I need to Screen Jam that show.

it should be rather easy for the Dodgers to come up with three outfielders better than Juan Pierre - with Kemp and Ethier at the corners by September '07, they're two-thirds of the way there, and that the outlay for Pierre will soon be a waste.

That is what I feel will dramatically hurt the Dodgers over the last 3-4 years of the contrat, way more than just the money. I dont see Pierre with a shared duty mainly B/C playing 162 games seems to be his most attractive quality. So lets just hope young pitching brings us back to the Dodgers of old, B/C we may not have another choice

Heroes is like Russell Martin. Solid early, have to be patient, all the pieces are there. Studio 60 is like Julio Lugo -- looks flashy but devoid of content.

Juan Pierre is like Will and Grace. Always on, never good, and generally beloved for all the wrong reasons.

This has been a great thread with some great comments. Great to see S.Choir really trying to prove his point even if he's in the minority. I've never seen Steve put so much thought into his comments.
I've got nothing to add other then Juan Pierre is very much like Eckstein for me. They are both players I love to watch play baseball but hoped they would never ever ever ever be seen in Dodger Blue until they retired. I love speed but I'm no fan of a rabbit with no plate patience and a popgun bat. I enjoy his love of the game and the flair with which he plays but I don't like this deal for many of the reasons outlined in this thread.

322 Well, Piazza is most likely not going back to the Padres and Torrealba isn't guaranteed a starting job with young hot shot Chris Iannetta ready for the show. It seems that non-Dodger NL West catchers will be fairly average next year, so don't count on any magical bumps in value for any of our base stealers.

357 Extremely well done.

I just wanted to see if an argument could be constructed for Pierre that had some sort of quality to it, rather than just opinion or bias or, at worst, ignorant knee-jerk scouts v. stats brainlessness. For lack of a better term (since I sense, though I might be wrong, that there wasn't really anybody who would have done this, though there are those who are willing to justify it after the fact), the pro-Pierreites have I think brought their best stuff to the table. One thing I would say about Fearing's risk assessment argument is that since Pierre is so average-dependent offensively, his risk is larger than it might be otherwise because there is no diversification of ability -- just like if you put your whole 401(k) in Cisco or Dell, we put $45 million on how many balls find themselves in left field rather than the shortstop's glove.

63,64 I have the current Dodger 2007 payroll at $69.975m pre-Pierre. This is actual dollars spent, not the same for luxury tax purposes (since the luxury tax minimum for 2007 is $148m, I think the Dodgers are safe).

I show 10 players currently under contract:

Furcal - $13.0m
Garciaparra - $7.5m
Kent - $9.0m
Saenz - $1.0m
Anderson - $0.525m (salary is $0.925m; Nats paying $400k)
Martinez - $0.8m
Lowe - $9.5m
Penny - $8.5m (includes $1m of $3m signing bonus)
Tomko - $4.1m
Dessens - $0.0m (KC paying all of $1.7m salary)
Total - $53.925m

Other 2007 obligations:
Gagne - $1.0m (buyout of 2007 option)
O.Perez - $10.25m ($8m to KC + $2.25 of signing bonus)
Mueller - $4.5m
Cruz - $0.3m (buyout of 2007 option - released in 2006)
Total - $16.05m

Total 2007 payroll, as of 11/20/06: $69.975m

A question in Gurnick's mailbag asked about offering arbitration to JD Drew before December 1. Doesn't it seem obvious to offer Drew arbitration? Is there really that much of a fear that he will accept arbitration? And, if he does, would it really be all that terrible?

It never occurred to me that Drew would not be offered arbitration. Chalk this one up to another hypothetical move to blame Colletti for.

GSfRB, somebody over at Primer just made the point that because of Pierre's offensive skill-set, a pitcher's park wouldn't affect him as much. It seems like the opposite would be true of Coors though, given all the space in the outfield for bloopers, dunks, and banjos to land. Thoughts?

And, just to remind the body, only one stadium in the 2006 playoffs was in the top half of MLB parks for offense. But that is for power reasons, correct?

362 You're missing everyone not under contract, so that's another six million or so, plus arbitration eligible guys like Hendrickson and Hall for another six million.

Not a whole lot out there next year either.

The top free agents after the 2007 season are:
Andruw Jones CF
Vernon Wells CF
Adam Dunn LF (Team has option for 2008 for $13M, option is void if traded)
Bobby Abreu RF (Team has option for 2008 for $16 M)
Milton Bradley RF (Will be interested to see if he gets extension this off season)
Jeramine Dye RF
Ichiro Suziki RF
Cris Carpenter SP (St. Louis has an option for $8 M for 2008, my guess is that they try to extend for at least one year beyond that)
Carlos Zambrano SP (With all the money the Cubs have been throwing around, hard to see them not trying to tie him up beyond 2007)

Right now, probably only two will be free agents, Jones and Wells and they may both want Beltran/Soriano years and money.

Its possible that the Reds will deal Dunn but I think a team will want to have him for more than one year to deal any real prospects for him.

366 But at least for the Dodger's purposes there are four guys who could be very good centerfielders.

367 My hunch is that its possible that only Andruw Jones will be free agent due to the fact that he has a full 10/5 no trade protection and since he too is a Boras guy, he won't negotiate any extension and give up his free agency. If he hits over 40 home runs again, we are talking 140-150 for 8 years type of deal.

Remaining Type A free agents for 2006.

Carlos Lee - OF
Gary Matthews, Jr. - OF
Barry Zito - SP
J.D. Drew - OF
Cliff Floyd - OF
Dave Roberts - OF
Mike Piazza - C
Ray Durham - 2B
Julio Lugo - SS
Jason Schmidt - SP
Tom Glavine - SP
Jeff Suppan - SP
Greg Maddux - SP
Woody Williams - SP
Eric Gagne - RP
David Weathers - RP
Danys Baez - RP
Rudy Seanez - RP

I probably missed some relief pitchers, my guess is that for many of these players, the real negotiations will wait until after December 7th, the last day to offer arbitration and secure compensation. Once that passes, you should many of these guys signed.

369 For instance, Eric Gagne won't be signed until he shows someone he is back to throwing and the Dodgers are not going to risk offering arbitration for him so why not wait until after the 7th to pursue Gagne.

361 These have been some of the best DT posts in a long time. I wouldn't have believed there was that much to say about Juan Pierre, but apparently there is.

I guess if the Dodgers got Albert Pujols, we'd have a pretty boring thread. No puzzles to solve or preconceptions to examine.

"136. Terry A
132 - Juan Pierre will never be accused of driving in runs with his glove."

Correct, but neither will anyone else. I would suggest that you read that one BP article on hits per balls in play. All of those defense independent things, such as walks, HBPs, homers, and strikeouts are fairly consistent for any given pitcher from year to year, and so he's predictable in those regards. But not so with respect to hits per balls in play. With respect to that matter, the best predictor is not the pitcher's own past history, but his teammates' rate of hits per balls in play for that same year. So please don't underrate defense, since other than sharing the same park, the only other common is the same defense playing behind the pitching staff. I would otherwise suggest that we look for a pitcher or two or three or four who will get that K when needed and so reduce the hits per balls in play to the irrelevant.

That being said, I'd have no problem with Juan Pierre if we still had J.D. and Pierre was being paid Cesar Geronimo dollars, adjusted for inflation [he'd then be as valuable to us as Cesar was to the Big Red Machine, and Cesar was valuable to the Big Red Machine]. But we don't have J.D. or his facsimile replacement, so until we do, call it paying yacht dollars for an inflatable.

To round out the long-standing ineptitude, I'm preparing for the reality of the Red Sox pitching Matsuzaka, with J.D. in right and the despised one named Lugo at short, who will both score aplenty hitting in front of Papi, and that while Matsuzaka pitches a gem.

Sorry, one more, re yacht dollars for the inflatable, from the Boston Herald:

"To lock up Matsuzaka for four years, the Red Sox probably will have to pay him between $44 and $56 million."

Oh, and Jon, if you happen to see or speak with Ken Rosenthal, please tell him for me that he need find a functioning cerebral cortex. As to why:

"How Lugo would fit into the Cubs' plans remains unclear. He could bat second behind Soriano or first if Soriano hit in the middle of the order. He could start out in center field, then move back to shortstop if the Cubs promoted top prospect Felix Pie and/or parted with shortstop Cesar Izturis, whose contract expires after next season."

Yeah, as if there's some reason other than the insane and/or the stupid that would explain why you'd have your 40+ homer and 40+ double guy hit behind your pitcher and your no. 7 and 8 hitters [and that's what it becomes after the initial leadoff at bat]. And that's why, Ken, Soriano had only 95 RBIs last year, while Ryan Howard had a 149. And, Jon, so Ken gets the point when you speak with him, Howard had 12 more homers than Soriano, 16 less doubles, and 3 more hits, but yet, had 149 RBI to Soriano's 95, and that's because the Nats were insane and stupid and had Soriano hit leadoff a not insignificant portion of the season, I mean, 12 solo homers, 16 less doubles, and 3 more hits, do not account for 54 more runs batted in, but hitting behind the pitcher and no. 7 and 8 hitters, as opposed to hitting behind the no. 1, 2, and 3 hitters, most certainly does account for the discrepancy, and I suspect that Sam in D.C. can confirm the point.

Oh, one more. The despised one can consider himself lucky, since even with the Cubs, he'd be hitting in front of Soriano, Lee, and Ramirez. And, Jon, I know that you despise him, but would you rather have Lugo for 4 at $32mil or Pierre for 5 at $44mil? Some are otherwise reporting that the Cubs have some desire to make Lugo their CF. That would truly seal the ineptitude, as I know that with an everyday job at any one position, Lugo will outperform Pierre.

5 years and $45M for Juan Pierre... Wow... I think you guys have adequately summed up this (hopefully false) free agent signing. I mean, this just looks terrible to me-- and I'm in Iraq!

Maybe it's just a hoax?

371 Well argued. What time is it where you are?

Eleven hours ahead of West Coast-- all things considered, not a bad time difference...

#361/371: I conceed. The argument of the risk inherent in Balls in Play is a good one that I didn't consider. Also, I did briefly think about Lugo in CF, but I chose to ignore that option for fear of it destroying my argument. But, it seems PDH5204 has done that for me. Still, while most of us are in agreement that the move was bad, I think it's unlikely to be catastrophic. That is, unless you feel the way Bob does about Pierre and his small head :).

No new record, just 117. A valiant effort, but I'm still the champ.

The Lugo-Pierre question was posed in the comments yesterday morning, and people of all Lugolosiphies, pro and con, seemed to come down in favor of Lugo.

On Nov 13 @ 1:53p, 3UPN3DOWN wrote the following. Be prepared for the Maddux, Weathers, and Lee signing to follow.

200. 3upn3down
Here is my prediction for the '07 Opening Day Roster:

Lineup:
Furcal SS
Pierre CF
Nomar 3B
C. Lee LF
Kent 2B
Loney 1B
Ethier RF
Martin C

(Martin and Pierre are interchangeable in the lineup)

Bench:
Saenz
Betemit
Martinez
Kemp
Repko
Backup Catcher (not Piazza or T. Hall)

Rotation:
Lowe
Penny
Maddux
Billingsley
Kou

Pen:
Saito CL
Broxton
Miller
Tomko
Weathers
Hendrickson

371 - "Correct, but neither will anyone else."

Cesar Izturis was.

376 - And that record shall fall!

Finally: Apologies for the spelling woes regarding Ms. Ringwald. They all began with me. I actually started with the correct spelling, then went back and (in)corrected it. Simply put, I just didn't care enough to look it up. Lazy, lazy, lazy. And I am ashamed.

379- You talk pretty tough for a guy who averaged seven words per sentence in that post.

I'm pacing myself.

I wonder how many bar fights have begun with the sentence, "You talk pretty tough for a guy who averages seven words per sentence"?

381 - Seven.

Juan Pierre for 5 years?

Nah, couldnt be.
No one is that stupid.

382 - And people wonder why I spend so much time here.

OK, Mr. Smarty McBarfight, can you also tell me how many actors have appeared on both Grey's Anatomy and Sports Night?

Hmmm . . . Well, I've read all this and I'm still not feeling too good about Pierre or what we've learned about Ned Colletti. And at the risk of immolating this entire wonderful thread, it boils down to my biggest regret re the axing of Paul DePodesta. With DePodesta, I felt like I was watching something interesting and challenging unfold. I don't think all his moves worked out, but cliche or no, he had a unique set of ideas/plan for building the team and I really enjoyed being along for that ride. I've tried to give Colletti the benefit of the doubt, and the Furcal signing had a logic and boldness that gave me some hope. But pretty much since then, the moves have all seemed very superficial, very obvious. It's not even that it's so bad to have signed Juan Pierre to an overly long contract, it's just so dull. Is there really any more logic to the move than the talking points in 287. As Steve put it way above, it's now pretty clear that we're just doing what everyone else does.

I can't believe I'm about to say this next bit, and don't question that I think the guy is obnoxious and totally unlikeable, but I'm stunned to be finding that watching Jim Bowden turns out to be a lot more interesting than watching Ned Colletti. Bowden has shown some serious bad judgment on a number of fronts, but he also strikes me as a good deal more creative and thoughtful than Colletti.

Huh. One thread for all the weeping and moaning and gnashing of teeth, a second thread to hear all the reasoned and intelligent comments. No disrespect to those from the first thread, but, Jon, I think you've hit on something here.

OT: Ryan Church Update

From nationals.com:

The Nationals wanted Church to go to Mexico to learn how to hit slow breaking balls on the outside part of the plate. The Mexican Winter League is considered a breaking-ball league. Church did, however, work with visualization specialist Bill Harrison on tracking the baseball.

When reached by phone on Sunday night, Church declined to say why he didn't go to Mexico. But, on Monday, agent Jeff Borris said he advised his client not to go because he nothing more to prove in Mexico and should be given a chance to start with the Nationals. Borris pointed that in the last two seasons in the Major Leagues, Church hit a combined . 282 (131-for-464) with 19 home runs 76 RBIs.

"He finished the season strong, and he had nothing to prove in [Mexico] and [the Nationals] were going to put somebody in his spot anyway. So, I didn't think it was appropriate for him to go down there," Borris said. "[Church] has played sporadically up and down during a two-year period. Those numbers would warrant him getting an everyday job."

Now I've been defending Church for a while, but this is ridiculous. I don't know if the fault lies with Borris, or if this was Church's scheme. But how can a player on the outs with his team and on the bubble of making the roster (whether he views it as fair or not) refuse a team directive like this? Very bad judgment.

And at one of the Nats chat sites, people I consider credible are now saying that Church showed up in a Scout.com forum that was discussing this issue and called a commenter who had been dumping on him a mild animal related profanity that start with "j." That comment has since been purged from the thread, but the whole thing is pretty bizarre and, again, shows some pretty poor judgment.

Oh, and "visualization"?

To me, the worst part of this signing basically eliminates the possibility of seeing Vernon Wells, in '08, on the same team as Loney and Kemp.

And I thought that the "commitment to mediocrity" years were finally behind us.

maybe Pierre is just being hired as a special assistant to Bill Mueller?
vr, Xei

At this point, Church is probably looking for a way out of D.C. Endy got traded for refusing to bunt, or whatever. Is there any way in which Church's life wouldn't be better if the Nats dumped him?

Not that it makes it okay to not play along with whatever little prove-you're-not-worthless scheme the Nats come up with, but, if he isn't contractually obligated, and if he has nothing to gain by doing it. . . At least he won't spend the winter straining US/Mexico relations, putting Catholics to the sword for refusing to denounce the Pope. And so on.

390: Maybe I'm just a hopeless rule follower at heart.

391- I'm a scofflaw at heart. I don't go out of my way to break rules, but, if they're in the way. . .

He'll be 28 next year, and he has 527 major league at bats. He was brought along slowly, so it's not entirely the Nat's fault he's so far behind where it seems like he ought to be, but they haven't helped. If he can get them to just non-tender him, it could be worth big money. If he can get them to trade him, he'd still have a chance at a good career. If he keeps sitting on the Nat's bench, he could wind up thirty with nothing much to show for his efforts.

I wonder if the new FA market will filter down to arbitration rates, this year. Anybody know, off hand, if they did during the last big spike in free agent compensation?

eliminates the possibility of seeing Vernon Wells, in '08

The Pierre deal is an organizational killer. No Vernon Wells or Andruw Jones in CF.

The worst thing about Pierre is that he's not going to be benched, bc he makes 9mils a year. He's only going to get worse these next 5 years.

A year or two of Roberts/Izturis at the top of the lineup was tough to handle, but at least there was hope there bc you knew it wouldnt last.

5 years of Juan Pierre..

5 years of Juan Pierre..

Let that settle in.

Robert Altman, RIP.

Can't find a news story on it, yet, but it was just on the radio.

372Stay safe.

Good Morning everybody. I just had the most awful dream last night. That guy that we all made fun of? Yeah, the Dodgers had signed him for 5 years and 44 million dollars and everybody was angry and people were defending it and I hated the deal.

Wait...What?

And then Robert Altman died.

Man, that stinks.

395- Here's one: http://tinyurl.com/vwryd

Which move after the announcement appeared worse. Devon White or Juan Pierre?

I know, sort of makes you want to be sick a little!

Robert Altman! A sad day today. He will be missed.

Proof Colletti has no friggin clue about player evaluation:

"Pierre gets on base an awful lot...."

An awful lot? You realise there's a statistic to measure how often someone gets on base, specifically the percentage of their plate appearances in which they do get on base, right? 35% is not an awful lot. Nor is his more standard 32-33%. Actually, that's just awful. In fact, his freakish 36-37% seasons are barely adequate for a top of the order hitter. Ned, do you even realise what you're saying when you refer to someone's ability to get on base?

Devon White's signing was horrible. This one's merely questionable (imho) and Pierre's not someone who's detrimental to the team, at least.

RIP, Altman. I thought he was looking a little John Huston-ish as of late but hoped he had another film or 2 in him... Rats. Time to plop in M*A*S*H* for the hundredth time.

401
Not getting on base an awful lot is the new getting on base an awful lot.

I started watching Altman movies in high school, to impress a girl who let on that she liked him. So, while I did like them, I've always felt a little guilty, since I would have liked them whether I liked them or not.

OK, here is something to cheer you up. We may be able to fight cancer:

http://tinyurl.com/yzof59

Makes the Pierre signing seem inconsequential.

I was at least comforted by these words in the Times story: "Carlos Lee has told the Dodgers that he doesn't want to play on the West Coast, and Colletti reiterated that he has no interest in signing Barry Bonds."

1. MASH
2. The Player
3. Nashville
4. Gosford Park
5. McCabe and Mrs. Miller

I know a fair amount of people don't like McCabe, but I love that movie. I could hear arguments for Short Cuts, but it can't crack those five. Buffalo Bill and the Indians was alright, but not great.

Devon White's signing was horrible. This one's merely questionable (imho) and Pierre's not someone who's detrimental to the team, at least

White was only signed to a 3yr deal.
Pierre's detrimental effects will be much longer lasting. He's not a good player. He'll get worse. And the opportunity cost of paying Pierre 9mil than someone else, is great.

Pierre for 1yr would have been questionable.
5 years has answered that question.

McCabe is beautifully done - it's pretty bleak, but excellent. I'd have MASH, The Player, Nashville, too. Underrated: The Long Goodbye, California Split, Thieves Like Us, Secret Honor.

Wow, Juan Pierre had more OF assists than Andruw Jones last year? Wouldn't have expected that. (Granted, it's 5 to 4...)

407 Prairie Home Companion was very good. Like a lot of Altman's movies, I found myself sitting in the theater with an awareness that I was watching something great, and I just didn't want it to end.

405 Thanks for the article, Professor.

It's a testament to how great Altman was that he became one of two directors that everybody in the world wanted to work with at one point in their career (Woody Allen being the other).

Screen Jam has an Altman thread, if anyone wants.

We'll see Joey - but White was also quite a bit older when he was signed, 36. I'm just playing devil's advocate here because I questioned the move, too, but it's just as likely that Pierre will get a little better than it is he'll get worse. He's already a better player than some of you are making him out to be. He (unlike White, who I recall had some attitude problems, and unlike JD Drew for that matter) actually really wants to play for the Dodgers and at least we know effort won't be a problem.

My problem with it is it doesn't seem to fill their most pressing need, but I also know there weren't a lot of options for outfielders out there, especially those with power, and while the Dodgers surely would prefer a shorter contract too if they really wanted him they had to add that extra year.

I do hope there's no no-trade clause in the contract though.

Not going to take the time to read all the posts. This signing just depressses me. Pierre in and of itself seem to make so sense to me for even one or two years, much less 5 ! More importantly, this give me no faith in Ned and his ability to make postivie player decisions. Not sure if I even want to check out Dodger Thoughts anymore as it will just frustrate me to know that we have better baseball minds, (not me, but others) on this site than the man in charge of running my ( our) beloved Dodgers.

414 - I think if the Dodgers gave J.D. Drew a new contract paying double what anyone expected him to earn, Drew would actually really want to play for the Dodgers too. A small point, but true, I think.

In other words, I don't know that Pierre has any great love for the Dodgers beyond the usual paycheck love.

But all the "effort" is reflected. It's not like he gives you x+effort. He gives you x, which includes all of his effort and whatnot. His effort leads to certain results.

I mean, I'm really willing to understand this in a kum-bay-ah sort of way (We've all got until 2011 together), but if we buy a pie, cut a slice out of the pie and serve it, we don't have a pie and a quarter at the end of the day.

Unless Juan Pierre is Ryan Church's ideal.

Oh the postive side, this seems to have saved to lockeroom from that proselytizing lockerroom cancer Ryan Church. Canuck Dodger it is still safe to cross the border.

Double-counting is one thing, but the Rawitch strategy appears to be quadruple-counting.

After reading the Inside the Dodgers blog, I wonder if Jason Repko's bride took a really circuitous route to the altar at the wedding and then laid out in a dive at the end.

I got 4 hours of sleep last night. While I was writing a paper, I'll blame my lack of sleep on the Pierre signing.

I had no idea that Pierre had so many bunt hits. That's going to help a ton with the new "bunt hits are automatically triples" rule MLB enacted this year.

And, apparently, Pierre works so hard! There are only two things I value more than hard work...talent and above average production.

Walt Jocketty looks pretty smart at the moment. Declines option on Edmonds, and resigns him to 2/16.

Jim Edmonds- 2/16
Juan Pierre- 5/45

The market is out of whack.
Indeed.

Bunt hits count as two hits. Pierre has 1,182 hits and 135 bunt hits; therefore, he has 1,317 hits.

As for Pierre, while it seems opinion on the blog is split on him ...

Maybe on ITD, Josh. Over at Dodger Thoughts? Not so much.

You really can't give Rawitch too hard a time, because he does a great job with a "company" blog, and he can't exactly criticize the deal. But let's be serious here Josh...

Edmonds is another guy like Aramis Ramirez who should've waited a few weeks. An electric charge has gone into the market for players. It's like a real estate bubble. I would have happily seen the Dodger lay out $10 million/year for Edmonds.

425 - There's a split here in the sense of some people think this signing to be the Titanic, some think it the Minnow, and some are booking reservations in steerage if not first class.

425

i agree. i was about to go on a rampage over at ITD but i sat back, thought about it for a sec and realized Josh basically has his hands tied in what he can say.

Hey Josh, if you actually believe Pierre was an horrible signing (because we know it was), at the end of your next blog entry, type:

)) ((

it wont be suspicious at all. we just have to know that everyone in the dodger org has been brainwashed yet.

Is someone who works dawn 'til dusk to get the most out of his ability more desirable than someone who is naturally better with 75 percent effort and can still improve if he's motivated to give 100 percent?

427 Well, yes. In the literal sense, there is a split here Jon.

LOL

hasn't

Ugh, when I think of Devon White, I immediately think of Marquis Grissom.

Just when the Dodgers were almost out of the Devo contract (1 year left, 2001) they traded him for Marquis Grissom, who had 2 years left on his deal.

Grissom had arguably the worst 20-HR season in history in 2001 (.221/.250/404, 73 OPS+). To be fair, he did have a good 2001 in part time duty (.277/.321/.510, 124 OPS+).

Pierre had arguably the worst 200-hit season last year (81 OPS+).

429 Since I am a lifelong member of the 75% crowd, my inherant biases prevent me from honestly answering that question.

I will say that hard work, while admirable, is not as important as results.

Slackers of the world, unite!

I mean, I work hard. And I like to be rewarded for my effort. But at some point, if a writer is better than me with less effort and isn't The Big Bad, shouldn't he or she get the nod?

McCabe and Mrs. Miller is my favorite Altman movie.

435 I hate (I'm using the word "hate" here) Warren Beatty, but he was great in McCabe.

But he and Altman did not get along at all, which is a big part of why I don't like him.

Shampoo is pretty good though. Towne/Ashby!

Posted on screen jam:

My Altman faves:

1. McCabe and Mrs. Miller
2. Thieves Like Us
3. California Split
4. MASH
5. The Long Goodbye

I just think that if Josh Rawitch really wants to sell a deal like this (or Hendrickson, or Baez, et. al) he should have the courage to do so as someone like Fearing Blue did and take the issue head-on, and not revert to John Kruk talking points.

I think I am a pretty level-headed contributor to this board and while I don't think this is the best signing the Dodgers could make (in particular the years), it is not the doomsday scenario that others are looking at either.

Here is a list of names:
Ethier
Repko
Kemp
Anderson

Those are the current members of the 40 man roster that played at least 30 or more games in the outfield for the Dodgers last year.

When Drew opted out, Ned had to sign an outfielder, Soriano would have been nice but in the end, I just don't think Ned could rely on making a trade for one nor did he want to go to spring training and hope that Kemp, Werth or Repko showed that they could start next April in Dodger Stadium.

Guys like Anderson and Loney will probably get their time in the outfield too but I just think that he needed someone who had a track record of playing everyday in the majors and Pierre just happend to be the right guy in the right place.

Of course the next guy he gets may really cost something like Elbert or LaRoche so at least right now, Pierre only costs something that it appears Ned has plenty of, which is money.

BTW, I think for this off-season, money really has to be a non-issue for all analysis or else it will poison everything that comes out.

439 I agree. You are very level headed and a great contributor.

If you can look past the money, and Ned has plenty of it, there is also the not-so-subtle problem that Juan Pierre isn't that good. That's the real problem. And he'll be playing...every day...for at least three years.

438 It reminds of a friend of mine who worked for a certain presidential administration that was prior to the current one. I heard him speak once and knew he was on message and was not the guy I knew.

When you take a job, particularily a PR job, you have no other opinions but what is the one your company wants out there.

Then again, look how Andrew Bynum is turning out for the Lakers.

441 Thanks Greg, by the way, you got rid of the porn stache by now right. :)

The only thing we can pin our hope on and its as thin as Nicole Ritchie (for those who are too young for the Lara Flynn Boyle references) is that there are rumours out there that a trade for someone is in the works, probably not trading Pierre but maybe bringing that bat to the Dodgers.

Then again, look how Andrew Bynum is turning out for the Lakers.

How does Bynum relate to the pierre issue?

All that I'm goig to say about this deal is that at the office today all of the Cubs fans are laughing at me, I don't think that I have ever been laughed at by a Cubs fan in my life.

443 Okay, maybe Ned has a power hitter up his sleeve (though I doubt it).

After this Pierre trainwreck (no, not you trainwreck), Ned is backed up to his own one yard line in the bottom of the ninth and only 30 seconds left in the third period.

He's got to throw a hail mary from the blue line and knock that nine iron right between the uprights, or else he's completely lost me.

BigCPA takes the ITD comments plunge with aplomb!

439 - I do think that is part of the best case for Pierre. Basically the case is, we don't want Repko to start, we don't want Lofton to start, we aren't ready for Kemp to start, we don't want to trade a farm system jewel, so we're going to find a player who overall isn't a negative force, and we're going to close our eyes to the cost. That's the argument. Essentially, we're willing to pay $45 million for five years or five minutes - however long we need Pierre to be a placeholder.

I woke up hoping it all was all a dream.

It wasn't.

I'm going to be making the "wanna get away?" face for the next month until I come to grips with this.

I love California Split. That's gotta be my favorite Altman, in a way. Like a buoyant variation on Cassavetes' Husbands.

Oh, the hand-wringing. While I agree with Sam DC's 385 in spirit (that DePodesta was interesting, where Colletti is more predictable in his moves,) one can't but observe that Colletti is also somewhat limited by market availabilities and conditions. While I can hardly say I'm delighted with Juan Pierre, I'm not less comfortable running him out there than I was Valentin, Jason Phillips, whatever-the-hell-the-name-of-that-Japanese-third-baseman-was, or...someone else whose name I won't mention. When Ned deals Matt Kemp for some long-in-the-tooth number 4 starter, I'll worry. But this is hardly the sky is falling scenario some people seem to think it is.

The bright side to this signing is that our SB and Triples category will go up. Playoff spots are awarded based on rotiserrie style rankings right?

446 However, unlike the last guy in his post, Ned has Frank, Jamie and Tommy protecting him, now that is not a great O-Line but they will support him until the end.

447 Frankly I was more disappointed in Heroes last night than this Pierre business, but I have a lot of hope and other things riding on how Heroes turns out.

451 Archie Manning had a better O-Line than that crowd!

But I will always support the Dodgers. After all, It's my duty...Judy...

Amid all this JP controversy is the little tidbit that I've been grousing about for two years and that is if Shane Victorino had been accepted back from the Phillies when he didn't make the team in the spring of 05 we'd have our CF. Granted Shane is no great shakes but compared to what were spending on an inferior player I'd say he'd be worth his weight in gold right now. My only two quibbles about Depo's reign were how he handled Roberts and Victorino and to a smaller degree Odalis cause I was still mad at his NLCS implosions.

Morneau beat Jeter...

Hoorayyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I really don't care how well Pierre plays, if he lets say, hits .310/.360/.425 with 40 SB every year (pretty much his ceiling as a player) I still won't like this deal. Not for any statistical, or even rational reason, I just don't want to watch Pierre play every day, especially when I know 1/10 of my teams salary is going to such a mediocre player.

I don't give a flying, well, I don't care how much of a "good person" he is ... thats really beside the point. This signing doesn't make me want to come to the stadium and watch the Dodgers, nor does it even make me want to watch the Dodgers on TV. It only makes me want to root for a different team, one that doesnt frustrate me. Now I'll be waiting, even hoping, for Pierre to crash and burn just so the front office can wise up and get rid of him. I don't enjoy rooting against my own players.

444. Bynum relates to the Pierre issue because it reminds us that there is still one team in the area that has the brain-trust to win championships.

The difference is that Valentin, the Jasons, and Nakamura were only killing us for one year.

433
I'm a slacker without any talent, what percentile does that put me in?

Jeter was jobbed. Even a Yankee hater like myself sees the injustice in this vote.

458 Loveable scrappy guy...

Just like Ecksein!

A player with a name, I might add, that I will not even spell correctly...

454 - Fair enough.

457. and their combined salaries in one year are about a quarter of what Pierre will make annually.

Has Flanders said anything in regards to how he fills the void left by Drew in RF? This pierre signing does absolutly nothing to answer this question. We still need a corner outfielder, not to mention a starting pitcher. Im guessing we'll be stuck with Ted Lilly or Gil Meche rather than Zito or Schmidt. And Gonzo in the OF rather than someone who can play.

I'd be more then happy with Lilly. Bring him back home, his vagabond days should be over.

Is it just me, or does every player brought up in any discussion deemed a poor defender since there are so many conflicting defensive metrics out there? Are there any CF who are universally regarded as being very good?

I'm just wondering aloud here, and not disagreeing necessarily, but is Victorino really that much better than Jason Repko? Granted, he had a lot more playing time over the past year or so, with Repko's injury, but there was actually something about both guys when I saw them play earlier this year that reminded me of each other. Not sure what my point is here... Except, yes, it would probably be good if they still had Victorino, though I can understand why at the time they didn't see reason enough to make room for him.

Speaking of room, I still think there's room to sign Barry Zito, because I think the Dodgers payroll is going up almost as fast as our deficit. (If only it were for the same amount.)

456 "Now I'll be waiting, even hoping, for Pierre to crash and burn just so the front office can wise up and get rid of him."

Now, I don't believe being a homer for its own sake is the right path, but do you really think actively hoping for a Dodger player to implode is the right way to go about being a fan? Do you see the problem here?

465 Willie Mays?

467 Agreed. And wouldn't it be better for the Dodgers if Pierre did really well, anyway, even if they do eventually trade him? Why should we hope for him to be terrible so they can trade him for... what, magic beans? I'd rather they eventually trade him for somebody good, which would be more likely if he did well for LA. So there are several reasons to root for him. Rooting against him seems only to assauge the egos of those who predict he'll be terrible, no?

464 - Can Ned make amends by getting two starters? I'm thinking Schmidt and Lilly, but is that even in the budget now? That's about $25-30M for those two.

463 I'm assuming it'll be a competition between Ethier, Loney, and Kemp for the corner spots with Ethier and Loney the odds-on favorites. If someone gets hurt or struggles badly, the loser of the competition switches places with the AAA guy. Or, when Nomar gets hurt, Loney goes to 1B and Kemp gets RF. Seems to rely on the young guys a lot, maybe we could sign a cheap veteran to be a 4th outfielder and safety net in case the rookies crash and burn. Then there's always the forgotten man (Werth).

#454: I will point out that it's never been fully resolved whether DePodesta was at fault for Victorino. There was a thread out there that suggested Victorino was the one that got to choose whether to become a free agent after having been a Rule 5 draft pick twice. In that case, you could argue that DePodesta should have protected him prior to the season, but that's a tougher case to make. I'm still not sure what the truth of the situation is, but the latter seems more plausible considering what our outfield situation was (or rather wasn't) at the time Victorino would have been rejected.

471 - Or you get two FA starters, and trade Penny for a RFer.

one thing i like about lilly is that he is a type B FA and wont cost us our draft pick. Id be fine with losing our first rounder for schmidt or zito but with anyone else, it would bother me.

Obviously, once a player is on your team, (except maybe Barry Bonds), you root for him. (Although the Karl Malone experience makes me wonder if you can ever bring someone who you rooted against on your team at the end of their career)

Its like the debate on whether you want UCLA to win football games, there was a part of the fan base that wants them to keep losing to give the faintest of hopes that he will be let go if the team keeps losing but in the end on December 2nd, their true colors will come out only to probably be crushed by Petey's boys.

475 bhsportsguy is aware of the conflict that rages within...

474 From my post at [368} above, here are some of the top Type A free agents left.

Remaining Type A free agents for 2006.

Carlos Lee - OF
Gary Matthews, Jr. - OF
Barry Zito - SP
J.D. Drew - OF
Cliff Floyd - OF
Dave Roberts - OF
Mike Piazza - C
Ray Durham - 2B
Julio Lugo - SS
Jason Schmidt - SP
Tom Glavine - SP
Jeff Suppan - SP
Greg Maddux - SP
Woody Williams - SP
Eric Gagne - RP
David Weathers - RP
Danys Baez - RP
Rudy Seanez - RP

476 Trust me, after the WSU fiasco, I thought that no one would show up at another game.

457-Kill us they did, though. Whereas Pierre, I suspect, won't. Honestly I marvel at the way ideological bias can trump fandom at times (certainly not singling you--or anyone else--out, Jacob,) not that this is any better or worse than the blind fan's optimism triumphing over reason. But...we'll root against Pierre and continue to call Colletti "Flanders" (O, the wit! The hilarity!) because it makes us feel better somehow. OK. But, uh, this team was better and more interesting last year than it had been in a while (no, I'm not laying that expressly at Colletti's door, anymore than I'm removing it as such,) and until the team actually starts sucking-in-practice, not on paper, I'm retaining an open mind.

Danys Baez is a top Type A free agent?!? Good God, what is the world coming to? I am now firmly planting head in sand for the upcoming armageddon.

I wouldn't mind taking a flyer on Floyd but the loss of a number one pick for him ends any interest.

So our guys are Maddux, Gagne, Lugo, JD?
Hoping
Maddux - Padres
Gagne - Indians
Lugo - Toronto
JD - Redsox

Gotta figure that Weathers, Seanez, and Williams will find a tough market for their services if they were offered arbitration and declined.

466
Victorino according the link provided by Jon from Baseball Musing ranks 3rd. A far cry from Repko. Plus he's a switchhitter and a short stocky dude so no, I don't see any semblence between the two other then they are both fast.

I have no problem with Pierre as a player. There are times when he can take over a game, going 4 for 4 with three stolen bases. But the Dodgers already have a player like that--Furcal--who also has some power. Swapping Drew for Pierre guarantees a season of extreme small ball.

481 Just hope that all happens before December 7th, I don't know if we would offer arbitration to any of them before then. The problem is that Maddux, Gagne and Drew are all Boras' clients and they never sign early.

Jon, I agree with you that this move will not in and of itself kill the Dodgers. However, the underlying philosophy of Ned Colletti's now seems to be so removed from reality that this move signals the eventual demise of the team under him.

As the team already has a vastly superior lead off hitter and Pierre's is completely unable to address the team's obvious weakness from last year, this is a move just to be moving. Colletti's acquisitions of Lugo and Anderson at the trading deadline in hindsight appear to be the same sort of busywork. Colletti doesn't get what he really wants (probably Soriano in both cases) and so he makes a big play to someone else to show that he can make a deal, any deal. It reminds me of a frustrated poker player who follows up a losing hand by going all in. This is just a funny quirk at the garage $20 buy in game, but Colletti is playing with the big boys and I have serious doubts that his knowledge of the game extends beyond the rules.

The worse thing of all is that I think Colletti is going to have a lot more rope to hang himself with than his predecessor as I doubt Mccourt is anxious to find his fourth GM since he took over the 2003. The hope and fear for the Dodgers is the youngsters; if they come up and carry the team it may prop up Ned, but then that might mean we end up stuck with him. Today, like the day when Depodesta was fired, I wish I was the fan of the A's or some other rational team.

I'm holding out hope that after playing 162 games a year that JP's puppet strings have elastisized and he fails the physical.

And my final comment on Victorino via a Philly fan who posted on Baseball Musing:
"Victorino can actually hit--he was international league player of the year, and between his defensive and offensive abilities, actually earns win shares on a pace equal to Pat Burrell's. Victorino is a switch-hitter, and while only about 5'9", has vicious line-drive power, hitting doubles and triples and spraying the ball to all parts of the park. He has ability to walk and his OBA should improve as he gains more experience."

483-Well, it does if we don't add a power bat. But I gather Colletti's plan is to stock up a bit on pitching and deal somebody, presumably Penny. I concur Pierre is, well, a familiar acquisition: Lofton, revisited. But until all the pieces are sorted, I'm willing to wait and see.

484
I don't see a downside to offering any of them arbitration if they are not signed by 12/07. I would take any of them on a one year arbitration deal including Lugo, though I have no fear that Lugo or JD would accept arbitration. If Ned fails to offer them arbitration I will be a tad more upset then I currently am.

Kill us they did, though

How so?
Nakamura, Phillips, and Valentin didnt prevent the team from trying to acquire a better 3rd basemen or catcher.

Pierre's mere presence and salary (9mils) will prevent the team from acquiring a better CF'er, of which there are many.

But I gather Colletti's plan is to stock up a bit on pitching and deal somebody, presumably Penny.

How can the Dodgers improve by dealing their 2nd best starter?

There is the local propaganda and house organ caucus (Plaschke, Modesti, Gurnick) and then there is its national counterpart (Verducci, Rosenthal, and Olney). Verducci has already criticized it, Olney will no doubt love it, which leaves Rosenthal to determine whether this can even get a majority of the hack vote.

this is a move just to be moving

I think thats the best case scenario.
A worse case scenario, and a more likely one IMO, is that Ned really believes Juan Pierre is a difference making player. That Ned would come to that conclusion, is most troubling.

485

You know, I really thought I was going to be into watching the A's more last year because Colletti is lame and I moved back to the Bay Area.

But while I rooted for them in the standings, I just couldn't get myself to sit and actually watch many A's games.

For me it's the same with the three sports I really follow: If it's not a Dodgers, Lakers, or Rams game, I can't sit through it. I just can't make myself care.

One guy no one has talked about is Randy Wolf. He had shoulder surgery a few years ago, but I think he'll be fully recovered this year. He seems to be a better and more durable pitcher than Lilly. He probably won't command a 4-5 year deal either. I'd love to see the Dodgers sign Zito/Schmidt and Wolf.

489 But when will they be available?

Assuming no one want G. Matthews Jr., then next year, the only probable free agent CF will be Andruw Jones, who right now has to think that playing CF gives him another 1-2 MM year over Soriano so maybe 140 for 7 years. Wells will either be extened this winter or traded, and if traded, the Dodgers would be in the mix because of their farm system and bankroll.

After 2008, Carl Crawford becomes a free agent. But by then, we should know if Kemp, LaRoche and Loney turned out well.

The key will be for the Dodgers is if guys like Loney, Kemp, LaRoche, Martin, Ethier, Billingsley and Broxton all turn out well, is to sign them beyond their arbitration years so you can get a set budget.

Frankly, free agency may become less and less an option to get players because teams are going to be more willing to invest in their own and try and set budgets that way.

DodgerDugout says Colletti is after Floyd. Depo and Ned seem to like the injured don't they.

If Ned is to be a free agent signing Hero, taking on the powers that are around him, I hope he is not trying to fly while standing next to Japan guy.

Someone about 2 feet up the screen from here made comments about how Pierre wasn't interesting to watch, etc...

I have to disagree.

We all know that from a stat perspective, he is either way over paid, or there has been a huge market correction and the bar has been raised.

Throwing all numbers aside, which to many is blasphemy. I do tend to be fond of Pierre. He has the appearance to me to be enjoying himself on the field, playing hard, and in my eyes, I view him as a likable guy. He flies in the OF and on the base paths.

Whether any of my soft observations/assumptions are true or not doesn't matter, because it is how I perceive him. And you can't deny his speed, which we'll all enjoy watching.

Is it the best us of resources? Absolutely not. Are posters on this board a bunch of whiners prone to mob mentality? Probably a little bit.

So when I ignore how much of Frank's money Ned spent, I have no problem getting excited about seeing Pierre play for the Dodgers. I'm sure there will be more to come that will make Pierre seem more as a compliment to the team, as opposed to the featured character in the off season dealings.

I'd imagine Kemp/Ethier is on his way out of town in some type of deal. It would make sense for Ned to want OF depth if everyone is after one of the kids.

JP is an upgrade from Lofton and also the best free agent CF available.I remember that when the Dodgers signed Furcal last year a cry went up from many worried about squeezing out Guzman etc.He tuned out to be a significant upgrade for LA at SS.
Like last year Colletti isnt finished.This is a work in progress as were the Dodgers last year at this time.
Who knows whether Kemp will ever be able to hit a curve ball?Repko-not better than JP.
We need pitching pretty badly.JP frees up some outfield bodies to trade.
I like the deal on many different levels.
P.S.Pretty exciting to have two premier base stealers at the top of your line up.

Premier base stealers have a career % way above 65. Pierre is not, nor has he ever been, a premier base stealer.

Pierre's career (ESPN):

325 SB
116 CS

This is not at all a good ratio. The man is an out machine in every way.

But everyone here already knew that :-)

486 Thanks for the info. Sounds like one who got away, indeed.

Hmm, who's this "Eric Gagne" fellow I keep hearing about? Sounds like someone I'd like.

Cliff Floyd? Gack. Say it ain't so.

499 Wait, I'm confused:

"Premier base stealers have a career % way above 65. Pierre is not, nor has he ever been, a premier base stealer."
Pierre's career (ESPN):
325 SB
116 CS

Feel free to correct me here if I'm missing something, but isn't 325 out of 441 nearly 75%?

I am math challenged. I divided 116 by 325, thinking that 35% was how often he was caught.

75% is still not premier, though.

Pierre is a good basestealer. He's not the best because of the CS, but he's a good. In the end, 75 percent is a plus.

Pierre is a career 73%, which is barely break even. Not 65% bad, but still not a premiere base stealer. If nothing else, an unnecessary waster of energy.

499- Pierre's steals bases at a 74 % clip for his career.

Compared to..
Lou Brock 75.3 %
Otis Nixon 76.9 %
Bert Campaneris 76.5 %
Maury Wills 73.8 %
Eric Young 73.4 %
Brett Butler 68.4 %
Delino DeShields 75.9 %

Most of the really elite base stealing steal at an 80 % clip. Except for 2004, Pierre has been stealing at an acceptable to good rate.

503 - I am math challenged.

Hey, you're apparently qualified for a job in Colletti's front office!

500
That's 74%, which is way above 65%

Great, now we're being mocked on Deadspin.

Kill me now Lord. Take me, I'm ready.

503 No worries.
By way of comparison, though - among some of the all-time SB leaders, Rickey Henderson and Vince Coleman were around 80%; some feller named Lou Brock was around 75%.

506 Damn, Miltie beat me to it!

The "Ambiguous Monichers Attached to Sports Achievement Reference Guide" clearly stakes that a SB percentage better than 73.0% warrants the title - "Premiere Base Stealer."

Sorry Icaros, I have to go with hart01 on this one.

What is Deadspin and why should they ruin our day?

Lesson from the last 10 posts:
DTers know their math, so don't get yours wrong.

Most of the really elite base stealers steal at an 80 % clip
I'm talking about Rickey Henderson, Tim Raines, Vince Coleman, Joe Morgan, etc.

510- you beat me on the 2nd part

Uncle Miltie all I'm for bringing the Wolfman home.

Not including 2006 Floyd has around 128 win shares since 1999 compared to JD's 121. Floyd was a big zero in 06. His career OPS is 855 not including 06 after playing most of career in pitching parks(Marlins, Shea). His signing would get more of a thumbs up from me then JP. Ned has to take a chance on some power and a healthy Floyd would deliver that power. I expect him to nab either Floyd or Nixon, I don't expect him to go into 07 with Loney/Kemp/Ethier fighting it out for the corner spots. At this point he will take a gamble that Floyd or Nixon has something left. Not saying that is the right thing to do, just saying that is what I expect him to do.

513 Just a small little website that nobody reads and is not filled with brutally hilarious commenters.

Jon wrote the Dodgers playoff preview for Deadspin.

What's the rule on the spelling of premiere vs. premier?

Which one refers to movies and which one refers to national leaders?

I bet Tracy is kicking himself over losing the opportunity to hit Pierre in the #3 spot.

519 I think the former refers to, say, a movie's opening night vs. the latter which refers to, say, a country's leader?

Yeah, my problem with Floyd is mostly due to injury worries. If he came cheap with an incentive laden contract then i could see being okay with taking a flyer on him, as he has produced in the past.

This is a really rough and dirty way to look at things but consider Pierre's 2006 rate stats:292/330/388. For every caught stealing I am going to subtract from his hits or walks in proportion to how often he got on base by either way ( 13.6%BB 86.4% Hits) and I will add one to his TB for every successful steal (again minus one for every CS). Thus, I take away 17 hits and 3 BB for his 20 CS and arrive at a batting average of .268 and a OBP of 303. Adding a net of 38 TB (58 SB-20 CS) to his 271 arrives at a SLG of .442. His complete line would thus be: 268/303/442. The real downside to looking at it this way is that you obviously can't drive in any runs by stealing bases and so that would be an even emptier slugging percentage, but nevertheless here are a list of hitters with an OPS in the .743 range: Jose Vidro, Jeff Francoeur and Josh Barfield. No one I would particularly like to pay 9 million a year for and again this is vastly overrating Pierre's value and it still is basically non-existent.

Good fall back.

Wait a minute, aren't about 60% of Pierre's career steals against Dodgers pitchers/catchers anyway?

I could steal off those guys.

515
So basically the best of the best. I think most of us who perceived JP to be a lousy basestealer were remembering his 2004 season when he was caught 24/45 for a 65%. He did rebound from 04 to post decent percentages. In 02 he hit the sweet spot of 80% (12/47).

So basically the best of the best.
Yea, even those who were perceived to be very good basestealers in the past are about the as good as Pierre. If Pierre picked his spots better, he could be an even bigger asset on the base paths. He doesn't seem to mind going when guys like Andy Pettite are on the mound or Yadier Molina is better the plate. This is an assumption, but I think if Pierre limited his attempts, he could steal around 40 bases at 85 % clip. I've seen him get thrown out by Pudge by a hair. Pierre could conceivably be an elite basestealer if he was a little more risk averse.

The tipping point, if you will, is whether you make an out or you get on base. Everything else is meaningless in comparison. This deal does not rest on the extraordinarily marginal value to being a 75% basestealer against being a 70% basestealer.

For some reason the JP signing has re-energized my winter. Was a tad late this year in ordering the James Handbook but it should be arriving any day and I can't wait to bore the lot of you with multitudes of information only I find usefull.

I was in an interview today discussing salary. I mentioned I wanted a Pierre type deal in comparison to my peers because I work harder then anyone else to make up for my lack of skills other then my blazing typing speed which works well when wasting company time on the internet. They evidently weren't baseball fans and so I'm still unemployed.

468 Man, how much would Willie Mays make in today's market?

By the way, 512, really funny. Can I buy that book, and is it big enough that if I hit Steve Lyons over the head with it, it will hurt?

529 - $3-4 million, but he is, what, 70?

Did anyone else see the article in the Times today that says signing Pierre could bump Furcal to second or third in the line up? Furcal, batting third? Um, huh?

Did Ned deed no-trade powers to Pierre?

Anyone remember this article from THT called "So, Billy, What Does Work in the Playoffs?"

It's from May 2004, by Vinay Kumar. A great read, but also makes some interesting assertions that are relevant to this thread, especially concerning Pierre's proclivity for getting caught stealing.

According to Kumar's calculations, teams with more total stolen base attempts are more likely to win a playoff series. And strangely, the team with the higher stolen base percentage is more likely to lose a playoff series. This indicates that the team that risks more on the basepaths, in the playoffs, is also rewarded more.

The crux of the article is that pitching, defense and speed win in the playoffs. Here's the link:

http://tinyurl.com/43jxk

517 Wouldn't out outfield acquistion kinda sorta hinge around trying to plug Loney into the outfield when he's not subing for Nomar in 1st? Would the involve picking up a righty? (ie: not Nixon)

Inside the Dodgers has there blog up about Juan. I encourage everyone to post their thoughts over there. For the most party I focused on Pierre's numbers last year and just his overall areas of weakness, so there is still a lot to be said.

*their

What are the chances Pierre is able to approximate his numbers of 2003-04?

In 2003, he had an OPS of .734 and an OPS-plus of 98. In 2004, he had an OPS of .781 with an OPS-plus of 107.

Is it unrealistic to expect that he will split the difference of those seasons and return, say, an OPS of .755 and an OPS-plus of 102 in his first 2-3 years with the Dodgers?

He is 29 years old and relies heaviy on balls finding holes and on his speed. Seems incapable of drawing walks at a rate that would take pressure of trying to find holes. I tend to think Florida was a better park for him as a hitter than Dodger Stadium is, but also tend to think Dodger Stadium and other NL West venues will be better for his offense than Wrigley Field.

I suspect that most hitters of his ilk decline in their early 30s, that, in fact, his prime years were ages 25-26. However, I am intrigued at the career-best performances of Dave Roberts at age 33 and again at age 34.

Does anyone else think it odd that this "signing" is dragging into its second day? What if it is all a masque or a ploy in negotiating with someone else? I think, and hope, that it is a possibility...

With all our debating here this week on Juan Pierre, pros and cons, can we at least agree that we feel less worried about our team's 2007 than we would if we were, say, Giants fans? The Giants have to replace, what, like 6 or 7 positions in their starting lineup? With little immediate help at positions from the minors. They were very much after Juan Pierre, among other players, and have a lot more to fill than do the Dodgers.

539 - Yes, we're in better shape than the Giants.

539 -- But Juan Pierre had no effect on that, because we were already far less worried about our team's 2007 than the Giants' 2007. That gap has closed now, to whatever degree it has closed.

For all the talk of Juan Pierre's one positive attribute, the stolen base, keep in mind that the correlation (r value) with runs scored of stolen bases is -.02 which means that there is "no" correlation between teams that steal alot of bases and teams that score alot of runs.

Another argument in favor of Pierre that I have heard is that he plays 162 games. I would once again argue that 750 plate appearances of someone who's best asset has no correlation to scoring runs is like pulling out a cylinder in your car. Yeah the thing still runs, but it would run better on all cylinders.

vr, Xei

539. Letting the Giants have Juan Pierre for 4 years @ 32mil would've driven the golden spike into the hated ones hearts. Instead the spike landed on our foot. vr, Xei

The Apocalypse has seemed to hit the fans of Blue Heaven in the form of Juan Pierre. I thought getting the much despised Lugo and H&H from the Rays last year were the first signs of the end times. Those pale in comparison to the "Sky is falling" doomsayers here at DT. While I myself disagree with giving Pierre a five year deal, thinking money could have been better spent, I am not willing to say it's the end of the Dodgers. The Hot Stove League is just getting started. Lighten up fellow Dodger fans, we have a long way to go. :)

Can anyone come up with a worse Dodger signing than Pierre 5/45, in terms of magnitude?

Kevin Brown- bad contract, but at least he was good.

Dreifort--close, but at least Dreifort had some potential at the time of the deal. What does Pierre have?

Devon White--close, but White's was for only 3 yrs.

I dont think the Dodgers have signed a free agent as bad as Pierre, for as long as Pierre...5 yrs..

I have no anger. Just lots of amazement. This is historic.

Giants are in bad shape, because their GM never planned for the future and the team was so dependant on Bonds and Schmidt. We knew this day would come, when the lose Bonds and become a bad team.

If anything, this does end Ned's streak of buying high. Pierre is coming off a down year, and as many have already said, a return to 2003-2004 form would make this deal more palatable.

*they

545. Over the past 20 years how many (and which) Dodgers have been signed as free agents for >= 5 years? I'm just curious as to what company this puts Pierre in to.
vr, Xei

How many times shall the DT rule #6 be broken before I lose my appetite?

Anyway,
540 Hooray! Group hug everyone.

Pierre on balls in play:

2004: Slightly lucky
2005: Very unlucky
2006: Slightly unlucky

And this is the problem with Juan Pierre. By all rights 2005 should have been one of, if not the best seasons of his career, he had by far his best line drive percentage, and he had good patience and power for him. But, his BABIP was only .296 when it should have been .370, consequently, Pierre sucks through absolutely no fault of his own (beyond his usual crapitude).

He did not buy Maddux high or Nomar and Furcal was not coming off his best season, same with Lofton. I do not know if Tomko has every been good enough to say buying high.

Not meaning to lump 544 in with the above. I was thinking of equating Juan Pierre with one of the horsemen of the apocalypse but you beat me to it in the imagery department. ;-)

*ever

What an error-prone start to the day and I am not even noticing them when I check

Awww Robert Altman died.

RIP Sir.

539 --

The Padres are smarter than the Giants. Several people here underestimated them last year.

552
Eh, you're right. I guess when he bought two bums like Hendy and Lugo high, it clouded my vision.

545

Odalis Perez.

Dreifort.

553- Thanks, I was just trying to get some levity to break up the dark mood this thread has created. I feel like I'm in a morgue mourning the death of a beloved franchise. Remember we could be the Giants, or the Royals or the D-Rays, (though Ned tried to make us D-rays West)!

When espn knows enough about stats to make fun of a deal you know you are in trouble:

"The Dodgers paid more than $18 million for two more years of Nomar Garciaparra and are in the process of chasing it with $45 million over five years for the right to watch Juan Pierre play center field.

Chew on that for a minute, because it might be the most amazing one: $9 million a year for a singles-hitting leadoff man with a good glove, a poor arm and sporadic knowledge of the strike zone. Dodgers GM Ned Colletti said Pierre is a guy "with great qualities as a human being." Sounds like Gandhi, and he couldn't drive the ball into the gaps, either.

If Pierre loses a step and a half at some point over the next five years, he'll become a late-model Omar Moreno. In more modern terms, the Dodgers will be paying $9 million for an outfield version of Neifi Perez, only without the glitzy power numbers."

http://tinyurl.com/tol5p

I don't see much sense in arguing that this contract was worse than Dreifort's. He got 11 million a year on potential. At least with JP we know what we're getting (as lame as that may be) and we know we're going to get it. If we end up paying JP 45mil to ride the pine, then this will be close to being as bad as the Dreifort deal.

Dreifort was a good reliever for a while lol.

561 The Dreifort deal was better because you could argue for the upside of the deal. He was young, really talented, and could turn into a really good pitcher, even his record was only .500. However, what is the upside with Pierre? What is the best case scenario for him? Why keep someone for 5 years when they have no upside and could probably be easily replaced? Plus what happens like they mention above if he loses a step? Do you sit your $9 million per year CFer on the bench for the last 4 years of his contract?

These are the sort of questions that Colleti should have asked but didn't. In the end the years are the most troubling part of the deal to me.

People keep saying that we know what we're going to get with Pierre, and that he'll be out there for 162.

These are not positives, people. Being good is a positive. Being alive and predictable? Not impressive.

How quickly we forget Carlos Perez.

Furcal
Pierre
Garciaparra
Kent
Ethier
Loney
Betemit
Martin

Not too shabby. Not as good as Arizona, but on par with SD; better than SF and Colorado. One Nomar or Kent injury away from mediocrity.

Expensive Free Agent
Lowe
Penny
Billingsley
Hendrickson/Kuo

Dependent on Ned signing someone to be our new ace and push the others down the bench. Assuming Ned signs an ace, I would rate Dodger starters atop the NL West. In the event Ned can't get it done and Lowe is our ace, SF and SD will leapfrog ahead, with LA, Arizona, and Colorado duking it out for 3rd 4th and last in the NL West.

The bullpen is very much in flux, as is the bullpen for SF. Too early to rank them. Same thing for benches.

Looking good for 2007, but maybe not enough to keep Arizona and SD down. Depends on Ned signing an ace and weaving some magic with the bullpen.

Some nice gallows humor posted at Deadspin... "This deal is the front office equivalent of having two runners thrown out at the plate on the same play."

544, 559 - To me, this is a major misread of the comments. However many sky is falling comments there are, I see more people here striving to place this contract in perspective. Very few people have said this is the end of the Dodgers.

563
I recognize the problems with this deal (the years and the risk of losing a step). My argument is that Pierre is a known commodity. Dreifort was not. Both contracts were/are for five years. Dreifort's was for 10 million more in a market not nearly as inflated as this one. I understand the advantages of locking up a young pitcher with lots of upside, but to do so for the length and money that Driefort got seems very unwise to me. Not that this contract doesn't seem unwise to me either, the other was just unwiser.

Win Shares from 2001-2005
Pierre - 88 high of 22 in 04
Jd Drew - 91 high of 31 in 04

566 I will be reeeeally surprised if the Giants don't get last in the NL West next year unless they somehow sign at least 2 premiere free agents. Right now they have a promising young pitcher (Cain) and two decent hitters (Vizquel and Winn) and not a lot of anything else.

I see more people here striving to place this contract in perspective.

To the point of sacrificing credulity, in fact.

568 - There was enough hyperbole comments in this thread regarding the level of disaster this signing could incur that I felt there was such a negative trend that I had to make that observation. I was only doing so with the best of intentions despite the "gallows humor". I am not naive enough to think this is a good signing, just saying it is not a sign of the Apocalyse. Again, don't take my comments today that seriously, just having a little fun with my fellow posters.

Am I the only one who applauds Ned for singing the 29-year old center fielder with good wheels and a noodle arm instead of the 39-year old version?

573 - I guess I'm defensive because I've been feeling all along that this has been one of the better threads on this site - the dollar figure alone would have been enough to rend garments, and once the initial shock wore off, it has been calm. There has been a real nuance to the discussion that I think should be praised.

574
I do not think so, but you could probably count the number of supporters with one hand.

576
If you were Montana Senator elect Jon Tester and you were referring to his left hand.

574 - No, if you look at the comments, you're not alone. Among those who find money to be no object, you'll find yourself companions.

Man, I can't believe I'm missing out on this. I was in Florida when Depo was fired, now I'm in Redding during PierreGate...

577 So who would you rather have in CF in 2007? Our in-house options as of yesterday were insufficient. The rest of the free agent market for center fielders is downright scary. Repko is not an every day answer and Kemp isn't ready yet. When Kemp IS ready to be an every day major leaguer, he'll be a corner outfielder.

I am more disappointed in the Nomar signing than the Pierre signing. IMO, Loney is ready to play every day and I'm afraid he's going to get the Aybar treatment (quoting Jon).

575 - I do grant you that there has been some very reasonable, intelligent posts in this thread as well. It has been better as you say after the shock has worn off. So many of the earlier posts were like Bill Murray's comments in one of the Ghostbusters film "Mass hysteria, dogs and cats living together" type posts that I was actually laughing at the extent of Dodger demise in the posters diatribes. Some I afraid were about to suffer a "Howard Dean, Michael Richards" type breakdown. Great entertainment for reading, I do say.:)

571 I agree, though they've surprised before and Sabean may still make a move or three. But yeah, cupboard looks pretty bare at the moment. I hope Bonds re-signs just to see him suffer, though mostly that would mean we'd see him walk. A lot.

Btw, I think the words "Carlos." and "Perez." do put things in perspective rather well.

Funny, I saw the phrase "sky is falling" above at the same moment I was listening to a "Super Chicken" sound file someone had sent me. Super Chicken isn't Chicken Little, but close enough.

Repko is not an every day answer and Kemp isn't ready yet. When Kemp IS ready to be an every day major leaguer, he'll be a corner outfielder.

This argument has been made several times and it doesn't really work, or at best, it's like ships passing in the night. If Pierre himself is not an everyday answer, than the problem isn't really solved.

578 -- If money were no object, we would have signed Soriano by beating out the Cubs' offer. I think Colletti doesn't believe we can afford to spend $17 millin a year on one player, but we can afford $9 million. People here are not objecting to $9 million being spent, they object to it being spent on a player they hate and wouldn't want if he cost $1 million, or quite possibly $19.95 -- after taxes.

I support the deal not because I think "money is no object," but because (1) I don't think Pierre is NEARLY as bad as most people here think he is, and (2) because I like the overall plan the Dodgers are going with, and that Pierre is just one, quite logical, part of. We are not going to be a power-hitting team. We are going to be a team of high-average, line-drive hitters. Having a lot of speed at the top of that sort of line-up makes sense.

578 I "find money to be no object"...and I still wish this deal hadn't happened. The concern some have about the out years of the contract is not my problem with it. By 2009, $9 million will not be an obstacle to DFA'ing or benching Pierre if that's what's called for. His salary isn't so bulbous that another team wouldn't be willing to take him in trade (maybe we'd eat some of it.)

As obscene as Soriano's deal was -- if that's the market, so be it. I would have preferred the Dodgers signing him over the Cubs because I think Soriano would make a difference. Not a perfect player. But a force. I'm all for signing Schmidt or Zito -- hell, Schmidt AND Zito -- and pay them whatever it takes.

My problem with this deal is Pierre is at best an average player. If that's the best we can do, then I say play a NRI or a kid like Repko, or bring back Lofton, until we think we have a true prospect like Kemp ready.

Pierre won't kill the team. But he's a pointless distraction, sort of in the same category (though not as bad) as Jim Tracy's "experiment" with putting Jason Phillips at first base. It's a move for the sake of making a move, with so little potential upside that the better move would have been no move at all.

581 Yeah, what happened to Michael Richards anyway? He was like someone stricken with Tourette's Syndrome the other night... Yikes.

580-

So who would you rather have in CF in 2007? Our in-house options as of yesterday were insufficient. The rest of the free agent market for center fielders is downright scary.

It's not about what the rest of the free agent market has to offer, it's just that you don't spend that kind of money on a guy who's OBP fluctates greatly and is nothing but a singles hitter. We need some sock in this lineup, not another slap hitter.

I guess when it comes down to it my problem isn't actually getting Pierre, it's with the dollars and years. If Pierre was far above average then I'd applaud..but if you look at this numbers they're simply not worth nine million dollars no matter what the inflation rate is. Heck, you could trade for an average CF if you don't like Repko/Kemp and all you'll lose is the SB's. Really, that's just about all Pierre is good for.

Overpaying players doesn't bother me as long as you're getting good production out of them. If we sign Schmidt it'll probably be for more than he should get but at the end of the day he's still an elite pitcher. We VASTLY overpaid for an average player.

584-

We are not going to be a power-hitting team. We are going to be a team of high-average, line-drive hitters. Having a lot of speed at the top of that sort of line-up makes sense.

But how do we know we're going to have a high average team? Pierre doesn't hit for THAT high of an average. We have no idea how long Nomar will actually play. Betemit has to platoon...Kent is an injury risk at this point and we really don't know what we're getting from Loney or Ethier.

If Ned signs Schmidt and goes out and trades for a Dunn or Burrell then I'll feel a lot better about this team...but as of right now, our offense is spotty at best and our pitching needs to be addressed.

586 - He lost us mind on stage when rattled by a couple hecklers and ended up going on a racist tirade and dropping major ethnic slurs and profanities. It was ugly! Possible Career-killing tirade, then again OJ is golfing in Florida, Mel is still making movies, ect...

Dontrelle likes the Pierre deal:

http://tinyurl.com/yabr8f

near the bottom.

I finally figured out who the Dodgers should have gone after: Jose Cruz Jr. Yes, he stinks, but like Pierre he can put up a .700 OPS, and he'd only be stuck on the team for one year instead of five for likely less than a million dollars.

Wow, baseball's economics are broken when Jose Cruz Jr. can't find a job and Juan Pierre gets smothered in riches.

Maybe we can get Dontrelle now too. {{wishful thinking}}

588 Yeah, I saw heard about it through some of the aftermath, but wow, he really lost it. Even Kramer would be ashamed.

587 -- You want me, or somebody, to explain how the line-up it currently looks like we are going to have is a "high-average hitting team?" If it isn't obvious, I don't think you can be persuaded. I'm not sure what you even consider a high average. The Dodgers had the best team batting average in the National League in 2006, .276. I could see every member of our current projected 2007 line-up hitting above .276, and in some cases well above that.

587
I agree with you. I do not see this as a colossal waste of resources except that I really like Repko and do not feel that he has gotten an adequate shot. I would have loved to see a platoon of Kemp/Repko in CF and the signing of Luis Gonzalez along with some pitching (Schmidt and Lily would be my preference)

This would put us right in the thick of the Vernon Wells/Andruw Jones sweepstakes in 2007 with a young nucleus and a killer staff of

Schmidt
Penny (or trade him and go with Elbert)
Lowe
Billingsley
Lily

593 - Or Kuo until Elbert is ready.

So Schmidt, Lowe, Billingsley, Kuo and Lily or Penny(if no trade is made).

I would like to trade Penny only if we get Schmidt as a upgrade to Penny and Lily to replace Maddux in the rotation.

593 594 How can you go wrong with someone named Theodore Roosevelt Lilly? And he's from Torrance.

I wonder how quickly Coletti would get a call back if we offered Penny and Betemit for Rolen if they made up the difference. It would make things look like this

SS Furcal
CF Pierre
1B Nomar
3B Rolen
2B Kent
LF Ethier
C Martin
RF ???/Loney/Kemp

Schmidt
Lowe
Billingsley
Kuo
Stults/Tomko/Hendrickson/Lily/Meche

God I love Hot Stove Season.

If it isn't obvious, I don't think you can be persuaded. I'm not sure what you even consider a high average. The Dodgers had the best team batting average in the National League in 2006, .276. I could see every member of our current projected 2007 line-up hitting above .276, and in some cases well above that.

In a vacuum, I agree. But like I said: how many games will Nomar and Kent play? Will Betemit learn how to hit lefties? Will Ethier be the dominant hitter he was in the first half or the lost guy at the plate in the second half? Is Loney even going to get AB's?

It seems to me that just about everyone agreed going into this offseason that we needed a bat with some sock and some pitching help. Ned addressed this by nabbing Pierre. I just for the life of me can't understand that logic. Pierre isn't an awful player by any means...but I just don't see how he addresses our glaring needs. If we nabbed him for say, two years at half his annual salary then it wouldn't matter...but we just spent a sizeable amount of money on a guy who doesn't really upgrade our team at all.

584.
(1) what qualities does JP bring to the table that can help the team score runs / win games.

(2) what overall plan are the Dodgers going with?

vr, Xei

I think Guo needs to be pencilled in as one of our starters next year. His late season numbers as a starter were extremely good. Guo doesn't come without question marks (health & control), but he probably has the highest ceiling of any of our starting pitchers imho. I'd like to see a little more from Billingsley before annointing him that title.
vr, Xei

Are we really sockless? We don't have any sluggers but other then CF everyone should hit between 15-25 dingers.
1st - Nomar/Saenz/Loney - 20 minimum
2nd - Kent - bounce back to 20
SS - Furcal - 15-18
3b - Betemit 20 - 30
LF - Ethier/Werth - 15-25
CF - zippo
RF - Loney/Kemp/Werth - 15-25
C - Martin 15
I don't quite agree with Canuck about the high average. You can probably pencil in Pierre and Nomar as 300 hitters and Furcal as above average but the others are real ??? to be above average. Kent could easily fade into 250. Betemit could hit 230-260. Martin/Ethier/Loney/Kemp all still have to prove that once pitchers make adjustment to them that they will adjust back.

597

It's Nov 21st. There's a loooong time until the season starts. I don't get the constant hand-wringing at this stage in the offseason.

Stolen bases (Juan Pierre) don't correlate to scoring runs, batting average has some correlation but not nearly as much as SLG, OBP, OPS (just to name a few) and a few other stats do. This team as it is will have trouble scoring runs, unless there is a break-out year for a couple of the youngsters and everyone else has a career year. The saving grace would be a top of the line pitching staff, but we don't exactly have that either. The one saving grace that we do have is that we play in the NL West, where mediocre is very good.
vr, Xei

I guess we could have waited until February to sign Juan Pierre, but we didn't.

601 - Again, as with GibsonHobbs, I don't understand this kind of comment. Most of the reaction is directed specifically at the Pierre signing, which people have legitimate reason to be unhappy with if they so choose. Everyone realizes the team has not made all its moves (although some fear what the next move will be). I don't feel people need to be reminded what day it is.

Given that the deal is unpopular - I can't even tell that mainstream fans greatly approve - I don't know that you could ask for more calm reactions from people on a message board.

598
When he gets one of his 200 hits, some of the possible scenarios would develop.
1. He will steal 2nd base about 50 times. From there he will score on a single just about every time unless it is an infield hit.
2. He will go from 1st to 3rd on a Furcal single and then score on any flyball or GB if less then two outs.
3. He will drive the pitcher to distraction and cause many throws to 1st base. Some of those throws will turn into errors and he'll end up in scoring position.
4. When attempting to steal 2nd, some of those throws will end up in CF and he will take 3rd and easily score on any ball put into play.
5. Some starting pitchers do not pitch well out of the stretch and control issues could develop. Concentration issues where Furcal/Nomar/Kent are able to drive a ball because the pitcher was just trying to hard to keep Pierre off of 2nd base.

Speed kills, he does get on base. A 350 OBP while not ideal for a leadoff with no power is still a guy getting on base at a decent clip. When you combine the two he will help the Dodgers score runs.

No one's had to step in and be the calming voice in the Dodger Thoughts comments more than me, so I know that's required some times. But the ratio of the hostility toward the Pierre contract to the disagreement with them is quite low.

606 I attribute that to the culture you have cultivated here, which values insight and discussion over heated arguments and insults. It's why I love Dodger Thoughts and continue to feel comfortable adding my own opinions. Thank you, Jon.

607 I agree with Daniel Zappala's bein' right about Jon Weisman bein' right.

Agree 100%

604

It seems to me that just about everyone agreed going into this offseason that we needed a bat with some sock and some pitching help. Ned addressed this by nabbing Pierre.

It is this type of a comment I am referring to.

603 But Steve we had to keep Pierre away from the Giants at all costs.

608 The transitive rule of agreement!

605. Stolen bases has a slightly negative correlation to scoring runs. Thanks for the reply, but I'm not all that impressed with your argument. vr, Xei

play devil's advocate here...

1. He will steal 2nd base about 50 times. From there he will score on a single just about every time unless it is an infield hit.

But how many times will he be caught?

2. He will go from 1st to 3rd on a Furcal single and then score on any flyball or GB if less then two outs.

agreed. First to third is so underrated these days. I like this about him.

3. He will drive the pitcher to distraction and cause many throws to 1st base. Some of those throws will turn into errors and he'll end up in scoring position.

It's tough to really put a number on this. Do we know he's a big enough distraction to pitchers that they'll commit errors? And if they do, how many of those errors actually turn into runs? I'll bet the ratio is so low that it's negligible.

4. When attempting to steal 2nd, some of those throws will end up in CF and he will take 3rd and easily score on any ball put into play.

You can say this about anyone. That happens like a handful of times a year right? Not enough to count it as a strength.

Speed kills, he does get on base. A 350 OBP while not ideal for a leadoff with no power is still a guy getting on base at a decent clip. When you combine the two he will help the Dodgers score runs.

I'd bet just about anything that if we just threw Kemp out there we'd score a lot more runs than with Pierre.

After a day of dealing with life and work and non-baseball stuff, I'm strangely unmoved by PierreGate. It is what it is -- I don't fathom it but so be it.

However, what may cause me to flip out (again) is if Ned spins away one of our quality young studs to acquire an "additional power bat" (the term's in quotes because I'm not sure if Colletti's definition is the same as mine).

The net result of this signing is that I no longer believe Ned will make a reasonable or solid deal. (I could see the rationale behind the vast majority of his previous deals, and even agreed with some of them).

It's a sad moment when you have little faith in your GM.

Anyone ever quantified the effects of speed with regard to baserunning? E.g. going from first to third on a single, going from first to home on a double, going from second home on a single, etc?

When I say that the line-up that it currently looks like we will go with will be a high-average hitting line-up, I am of course making a statement about the ability of the hitters. I'm not sure how questions like "What if so and so gets hurt?" are relevent to an assessment of talent. If everybody gets hurt, we're screwed. If everybody on another team gets hurt, THEY'RE screwed. We had that kind of year in 2005. And while there is a big question mark about Loney's role in 2007, I don't think his talent should be in question. Like Nomar, he is a natural pure hitter. Same with Martin. I think Ethier's talent is also a known quantity. He just had a slump that he wasn't allowed to play through the way a veteran would have been allowed to play through it. The only guy I might have a question about is Betemeit. I would platoon him. He hits righties fine, but he was just too hopeless against lefties to make me think he'll ever improve in that area. Some guys just aren't meant to switch hit.

In other words, if speedy runners really do significantly impact scoring with their speed, then their OBP should be weighted higher than that of a slow runner.

I think the Pierre fluffers ignore (among many things) opportunity cost. It's not whether Pierre is a good player or a bad player in some vacuum. It's what could you have done with the same pot of money. LA could have signed someone like Dave Roberts for less money and fewer years and obtained the same offensive production. The money saved could have gone to sign a good RP or used to help sign a starter.

456
It's comments like these that I have always felt was the problem with the sabermetric position IF taken to the extreme. For some DT posters, they seem to be so enamored by their own method of analysis that any conflicting viewpoints are shouted down as heresy.

The reality is that it is notoriously difficult to predict the champion in team sports, and baseball is probably the most unpredictable of all major sports. That doesn't mean that certain trends cannot be evaluated, and I understand that DePodesta spent a good deal of his time doing just that. However, to suppose that by examining these trends and uncovering the fundamental tenets of winners - it then becomes a simple chug and plug formula to develop an actual champion is ludicrous. I have no doubt that DePo made some interesting and innovative discoveries about past winners, but there are simply so many variables when it comes to determining who wins the championship, that it will always be somewhat beyond the control of the GM. That's not to say that a GM doesn't influence the caliber of the team, but there is no simple formula available to even the most brilliant among us to create an easy path toward being THE championship team (which in the end is the primary, overarching goal).

It's one thing to subscribe to your version of analysis and advocate for a GM that has a similar vision as yours. That to me, seems perfectly logical and expected. But it becomes absurd when taken to another level, and people start rooting for certain players to fail or for the team to do poorly simply because the analysis used to make personnel decisions differs from your chosen method. It was this vibe that I noticed would occasionally pop up on this site starting with Guzman getting traded to the D Rays. I'm certainly not saying this is the case for most, or even many DT readers, but it's an under current in quite a few posts.

All that said, I don't much like the Pierre signing either, and I agree that it certainly signals a long-term stormy relationship between Colletti and the more sabermetrically inclined Dodger fans. But I will still enjoy watching Pierre play and enjoy what he brings to the team, and I will certainly root for him to succeed. Of course, I will also mutter in disgust after his fourth groundout of the game and yell in exasperation as he fails to throw out another runner. But I have that kind of on-again, off-again relationship with every Dodger player, and that's part of the joy of being a fan.

I fully understand that the Pierre signing is viewed by many here as one of the worst possible moves that Colletti could make. I would just say take solace in the solid young nucleus that this team currently enjoys, and admit that sometimes predictions are wrong and that there is a possibility, as slim as you may perceive it to be, that Juan Pierre turns out to be the best move the Dodger front office has made in years.

My initial reaction to the (as yet unofficial) Pierre signing was roughly the same as if I had swallowed a bottle of bleach. My gut hurt and I felt hollow on the inside.

However, even though there is no way in heck I would sign JP to a 5-year deal, I must admit that aesthetically I like Juan Pierre. As a fan, I like the speedsters, the stolen bases, and I'm a sucker for a squeeze play. I like all of these things even though part (most?) of my brain is telling me of how little value lies therein.

I think I've moved past the shock and disappointment of JP's signing and have moved on to acceptance. I'm sure I'll enjoy the style of play from the Dodgers in 2007, if not the successes.

I don't know, I'm still sensing some bargaining out of you. You're not at acceptance quite yet.

619. Through a sabermetric approach you can get an expected value of runs score and runs allowed, along with a known margin of error and or standard deviation. Given these two expected values, you can then get an expected winning percentage. It's not a perfect science as you cannot predict injuries and sometimes players perform well above or well below their expected value. But it is a science, which is still a work in progress in some respect, which is better than just throwing darts at a list of names, making stuff up or going with gut instincts.
vr, Xei

618 Three reasons why they chose Pierre over Dave Roberts, Roberts is a Type A free agent, he has never player more than 129 games (which he did this year but the previous 2 years he played 115 and 113 games) and Roberts is 34 years old.

623 By the way, if Dave Roberts can put up his numbers at 34, why won't Pierre when he turns 34?

How about Catalanotto vs. Pierre in the outfield? Catalanotto has had EQAs of .280 or higher six of the past seven years. He doesn't play every day, and you'd perhaps have to gut out Ethier in center for a while. And he's 33 next April. But the Rangers just locked him up for three years at a total of $13.3 million. I think there's a case that Catalanotto is more valuable than Pierre even if Catalanotto starts to fade, slides into the bench easily if you find someone better, and certainly less sunk cost if he doesn't work out at all.

I'm not sure how questions like "What if so and so gets hurt?" are relevent to an assessment of talent.

Because they're relevant questions based on their history.

I wouldn't be asking that if we had Pujols...but Kent had trouble last year, Nomar ALWAYS has trouble staying healthy etc etc.

Those are legit questions when applied to our players.

619
I like this position. I tend to be more of a Grady Little Guy than a Depo guy, but see the value in having every piece of information possible and a staff to let you know that some player sucks when playing in a dome against a lefty with a 3/4 arm slot.

That said, I can't really identify with the position that some are taking that seeing a player fail (if his name is not Bonds) is somehow gratifying and will teach the front office to agree with my way of thinking. I hated DePo's management style, but really liked many of his decisions. I hated the way Drew carried himself but sure did not complain when he had his best month during the September crunch.

The same goes for Coletti. I wish that he would give the Repko/Kemp platoon some time and devote himself to getting really good pitching and enter the Vernon Wells/Andruw Jones bonanza next year, but I also want to see Pierre do well here.

I would rather have Coletti do a little too much than be paralyzed by his unwillingness to make a move (cough STONEMAN cough)

625 I was definitely an advocate of Catalanotto's here previously. Thought the Dodgers probably wouldn't go for him because of his age and lack of power, but then power isn't obviously the top priority in their mind. Anyway, I always liked Cat.

622
Do you honestly think that Colletti is just "making stuff up" or "throwing darts at a list of names"? Doubtful. He is using a set of analytical tools, albeit different than the ones that you'd prefer. Or, less likely, he is using the same tools but coming to a different conclusion.

I work in the natural sciences, and I deal with both statistics and the equivalent of scouting (detailed yet anecdotal observation) on a routine basis. It's my experience that both systems have their place, and both can help uncover truths not previously detected. To think that one system is infallible and the other is always misguided is naively dogmatic.

602 Last year's team scored a lot of runs with only one player having an above average but would not call it a breakout year, Raffy Furcal. Of course, the production of Ethier and Martin have nothing to base it on but lets try.

Furcal - Career - .286/.351/.415
Furcal - 2006 - .300/.369/.445
Drew - Career - .286/.393/.512
Drew - 2006 - .283/.393/.498
Garciaparra - Career - .318/.367/.540
Garciaparra - 2006 - .303/.367/.505
Kent - Career - .289/.356/.504
Kent - 2006 - .292/.385/.477
Lofton - Career - .299/.372/.423
Lofton - 2006 - .301/.360/.401
Martin - Pecota (50%) - .250/.342/.370
Martin - 2006 - .282/.355/.436
Ethier - Pecota (50%) - .275/.334/.409
Ethier - 2006 - .308/.365/.477

Those were the seven main players and aside from Furcal, no one had a breakout year, the rookies played better than was projected but there were no Ryan Howards in that group.

The worries won't be whether guys have breakout years but will they avoid huge declines and will Martin, Ethier, Loney, Kemp and Betemit continue to improve and put up better than expected numbers.

So, where are we in the Pierre/not Pierre argument? Despite having the day off from work, I've been quite busy.
615 - DZ, check out this series:
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/circling-the-wagons-running-the-bases-part-i
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/circling-the-wagons-running-the-bases-part-ii
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/circling-the-wagons-running-the-bases-part-iii
Pierre rates quite favorably.

Just an opinion, but Catalanotto's BBref page has the weakest sponsor ever.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/catalfr01.shtml

Re: 629

The other problem with a strictly sabermetric approach is that the "market" value of players is determined in dollars by the marketplace--that may be different from their "objective" baseball value, but actual players are payed in dollars determined by market conditions. Furthermore, the weakness of the Dodger farm system with regards to CFs has to be factored in. One should of course attempt to maximize performance per dollar, but cost effectiveness isn't the only goal, especially for a big-market team with a large payroll.

I must say, though, that I would have preferred to go Ethier LF, Repko CF, and Loney RF, and spent the 9 mil on making Zito an offer he couldn't refuse. Jon's Cat idea is also a good one. If we're still going to be able to sign Zito, why not go for Zito AND Schmidt? Or perhaps Maddux, who might cost 9 mil?

But I'm okay with the Pierre signing in the end.

WWSH

633 - FC wasn't my idea - I just was bringing him up today because he signed just now.

The problem with Catalanotto is that he's not a CFer and I think above all, management wanted a true CFer after watching Lofton butcher the position last year. I can see both sides of the coin, though I'd rather have the better offensive team.

Scanning the list of CF production by team has made me feel a bit better.

2006 Median OBP: .334 (.330 Pierre)
2006 Median OPS: .744 (.718 Pierre)

So Pierre is the hitting equivalent of a League Avg Innings Muncher. Of course that would make Matthews Jr worth $13M/yr in today's dollars.

Brief return from self-exile to add to praise for this thread: dozens and dozens of gems from all perspectives. Thanks and congrats to all.
629 has to be said over and over to 622; the repetitive friction surrounding the relatively new ways of seeing the game is often caused by the notion that these fledgling formulae are predictive. For the most part, they ain't, but merely suggestive. Unless and until (David Eckstein now SS and top-of-order hitter for two world champs!!!! -ain't that the Grail? and Juan Pierre - 2003 version, who, I will admit, has not been seen consistently for a very worrisome while - top of order and key defensive postion for another champ are instructive about the crap-shoot nature of the fascinatin'-physics-in-distinctive-geometric-
pasture-among-variously-talented-constantly-
transmogrifyin'-human-beans that are only mere parts of baseball's fathomless charm) they grow significantly in their "predictability" - I suggest Sabr guys are presently more artistic than scientific.
Neither, by the way, David nor Juan would be primary choices if I were a GM right now. But I am sobered by their well-earned rings...
625: apples and oranges, with quick reference to Ethier not enough to mask essential difference noted in 635.
Back to exile. Thanks again, one and all...

625 -- Catalanotto vs. Pierre. Jon left no doubt about whom he thinks is more valuable. I guess it is pretty obvious whom the Dodgers front office thinks is more valuable. But talking about one of these players being merely "more valuable" than the other understates how two different camps see these players in relation to each other. If you like one and don't actively DIS-like the other, you are walking a narrow line in the middle of what seems to me to be a kind of ideological war.

In one of his posts in this thread, Steve took a swipe at me by referring to what he called my "sabermetrics vs. scouts" analysis in a way that would have got me accused of being "insulting" if I had written the equivalent about his posts. But the fact is, between the baseball industry and the baseball blogosphere there is something of a blue state/red state cultural divide, and it is on display in the Dodgers signing Pierre for what they did, and the reaction to it on the net. In the baseball industry, Pierre is highly regarded, while Catalanotto is regarded as just a step up from any old warm body. The difference in the contracts each man received reflects that. Looking at my copy of the 2006 Lindy's Scouting Report, a publication that relies heavily on input from pro scouts, Pierre is rated as a near elite player. Catalanotto, on the other hand, is rated the equivalent of "Should be Thankful He Is Even in the Majors." Of course, sabermetricans would say that it is Pierre who should consider himself lucky to be in the majors, though I am sure they would not go so far as to rate Catalanotto as a near elite player. I seem to be alone in thinking that this philosophical divide alone is inherently fascinating.

I try to draw knowledge from both statheads and scouts. I sometimes think that scouts are wrong, but at the end of the day I expect that MLB decisions will be made according to what scouts think, not what sabermetricians have to say. One of the writers at the USS Mariner blog, Dave Cameron (who fuses scouting and stathead perspectives), said around the time that Hee-Seop Choi's being released by the Dodgers was so controversial that "Fans make baseball decisions based on stats. Major league teams make decisions based on scouting reports." I think he is absolutely right. When I read the comments section at Dodger Thoughts, now and in the past, what I take away is that people are just completely oblivious to that. It is not that the commentators are stupid. On the contrary, they are usually very intelligent, intelligent enough that there is a certain arrogance that makes them think they don't even have to TRY to understand the logic of the traditionalists who actually run the game of baseball. That, I admit, is also something that I find inherently fascinating. After you have made the effort to understand where baseball executives are coming from you can still disagree with them, and sometimes stupidity really just has to be called stupidity, but I don't think that a team wanting to put Pierre in center field for the next five years comes even close to being stupid. If Colletti signs Steve Traschsel, THEN we can all call him stupid.[Smiley Face]

You don't get to make blanket assertions about commenters and then throw "smiley face" out there.

Calling an entire group of people arrogant cannot be masked by emoticons.

I will take the stance that since Juan Pierre will be on the Dodgers that I will reserve judgment until he actually plays. I am trepidatious of his past, but I will remain outwardly hopeful.

But I also thought Cal could beat USC.

639 We can argue about analysis but never about the posters.

Actually, I thought USC was going to beat Cal handily, so I need a better analogy.

Re: 639

Come now, I think its defensible to say that there's a certain smug self-confidence to the way sabermetric analysts approach questions. I find it hard to believe that no one else has noticed the profound contempt that marks each sides views of one another in baseball's holy war between statheads and scouts.

Canuck can be a bit abrasive at times, but, really, I'd hate to see his commentary become off-limits for ruffling a few feathers.

Of course, in the end, it's Weisman's blog, and he gets to draw the lines wherever he wishes them to be.

WWSH

BTW, I should say that arrogance and error are two very different things.

WWSH

644

But I saw a boxscore once that read

FIELDING:
Errors - Kent (4, arrogance)

625

big thing about Cat is that hes a type A free agent. I would hate losing a first round pick for signing Catalanotto.

Canuck has been given a hard time around here for the last week and I find it rather puzzling. I don't always agree with him, but while his arguments are forceful, they are hardly insulting.

Canuck, at the risk of missing the point by oversimplification, this is what I took from your post...
New School: We can do it better than the Old School.
Old School: But you forget we're still in charge.
If that's the case, CD, than I agree entirely.

647 - Agreed, although it took a while to figure out where he was coming from and interpret the tone. And that, probably, is the sticking point.

Jon, if you are around can you please end this thread before the next, oh, 16 or so posts? Thanks.

638 - +1

I think a big part of the reason why Canuck's tone sticks out is because the substance of his arguments are frequently a bit different than most opinion around here. What's witty and clever to one group of like-minded people frequently appears to be smug condescension to a group that disagrees. I certainly don't agree with all of the substance of Canuck's arguments, and that frequently blends with his tone--his weird citation of Canadians' supposedly less cynical view of promise-keeping during the debates over Drew I thought to be based on a weak reed of an argument to say the least--but worrying about tone, except in really flagrant cases, is just too gray an issue in my view to get worked up about.

WWSH

639-Seriously now, we're calling out CanuckDodger for praising the ample intelligence of a segment of the DT community and then suggesting, both politely and with what appears to be good humor, that a touch of arrogance sometimes runs hand-in-hand with elevated intelligence?

That's...well, it's certainly thin-skinned if it isn't silly. Or teasing, which it also might be. But for pete's sake, a respectful and perhaps even accurate observation isn't exactly tantamount to "calling out" anybody, or doing anything that needs to be "masked" with emoticons or anything else. At least, that would be my humble (?) opinion.

638 - "625 -- Catalanotto vs. Pierre. Jon left no doubt about whom he thinks is more valuable."

I'm not inclined to read past this sentence, since it is completely inaccurate. In my comment, I asked a question, and said that you can make a case for one over the other. I haven't even decided who is more valuable, let alone left no doubt.

650 - I don't have a new post ready, so what can I tell ya?

Catalanotto vs. Pierre

I will celebrate this debate tonight by going home and eating an apple AND an orange.

I did not want Catalanotto or Pierre if that helps anyone.

You could say....

http://www.progressiveboink.com/dugout/archive/dugout9-2-05-1.htm

600 posts of self-rending over Juan Pierre. Oy. Good thing I'm on vacation now.

I really enjoy reading everyone's opinions on DT and have been enriched by so many of your observations. Although I rarely post any of my own views, I learn a lot from all of you. However, lately as I read I am reminded more and more often of Benjamin Franklin's words to his fellow delegates at the Constitutional convention when he pleaded with each of his colleagues in Philadelphia to join "with me, on this occasion [to] doubt a little of [your] own infallibility—and . . . put [your] name to this instrument."
I think sometimes we all get so caught up in our own opinions and beliefs that we start viewing others as wrong, or ignorant or as our enemies when in reality all they are is different. Sometimes different is no better or worse .... just different.

653 -- Jon, I have been reading, and enjoying, your commentary for years. When you want to state your views, but suspect it may be controversial, I have noted that you usually are very circumspect. You probably don't want to offend anybody, like I seem to be doing at every turn lately without any intention to doing so. When you precede a statement with something like "I think there is a case that..." I take what follows to be YOUR view. If somebody else were writing I would not necessarily take it that way, but as I say, after reading you for years, unassuming and circumspect are what stick out as your personal style. If I misunderstood you, my apologies. But your statement that you didn't even bother reading what I wrote after the first line or two makes it pretty clear to me that I am not exactly your favorite commentator right now, which is a shame. I have noted over the years that people who disagree with the prevailing philosophy represented by the regular commentators on this board are made to feel unwelcome and end up leaving sooner or later, and maybe some of them had to go (if they violated your rules), but I try to stay within the letter of your rules while still sticking up for my beliefs, and I am not going away even though I am getting the sense that some people would prefer to see the back of me, so to speak. I don't have any hard feelings toward anyone here, and am surprised that my arguments with certain IDEAS ot attitudes are, by some people, contrued as personal attacks. There is nothing personal about it.

If I may bring this thread back to the point - and I do mean the point - has anyone else noticed the Dodgers have not yet officially signed Pierre?
Yesterday, it seemed all that was left was to dot Is and cross Ts, with an announcement coming right after. But 24 hours later...

659 For the record, I wouldn't want you to leave.

Some generalizations have been made (people of LA, statheads, etc. Terms like arrogant and so forth) I take issue with. That's it. I stand by what I said earlier, but would certainly not like to see the back of you.

I have no idea what the back of you looks like. Could be good or bad, and I'm not willing to take that risk.

660 It's pending the physical. I'm pretty sure it's a done deal.

629. I have my opinion based on scientific fact and you have yours (whatever it may be based on you have not told us). vr, Xei

I just think we all need a good round of solid television talk to calm us down.

What say you Xeifrank?

man, ive visited a couple of different dodger blogs (ITD, latimes dodger blog) and some different dodger message boards and all i can say is that the majority opinion from all those venues differs greatly in contrast to the majority opinion of the commentators of Dodger Thoughts.

665
Isn't that usually the case?

660

You are not alone in hoping this bad dream goes away.

I came home and realized I had neither apples nor oranges. I have no fruit period.

So I will decide later about Juan Pierre.

667
Is a dream a lie that don't come true or is it something worse?

668 I have some peaches over here if you'd like one...

I'm guessing no.

I got persimmons and pomegranates if you want.

670 671

Since UCLA beat Kentucky, I will let those references to pitted fruits slides.

It's refreshing watching UCLA play and EXPECTING them to be able to beat a team like Kentucky.

Looks like Duke is going to lose. D4P will be so sad.

669
a delusion, misunderstanding, fantasy, mirage, fallacy...ok, a lie...any will suffice. Just so it doesn't become a reality.

672 That game is not going in the archives.

But we won!

640 I think we could all benefit from this approach.

I probably have no business expressing this since I hardly contribute, but...I like reading DT for entertainment and informative purposes.
But,
practically all the meat, good or bad about the Pierre signing has already been eaten and the bones are all cracked and the marrow consumed. He is what he is and we can all be happy, upset, disappointed, angry, sad, flustered, all at the same time and in no particular order. It just seemed to me in reading the posts it got to the point that most posters were just trying to one-up the previous 100 or so posts in attempt to make another knock on Pierre yet keep it unique from all the others. The minority on the other hand just got really resentful in being kind of drowned out and ganged up on.

This is not what I think of as Dodger Thoughts. You guys are too good to be discussing like this (unless Choi got acquired, of course).

Let's throw Pierre under a bridge for a day or two and maybe all you regulars can start talking about the benefits of Zito as opposed to Schmidt and who would be more successful as a dodger and why...and who is more likely to be signed and why....yadayadayada.

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve. Hehe.

Have fun!

664. if it's not animated, I haven't seen it. :)
vr, Xei

ummm....add to the end of the first paragraph there
"Being" ganged up on.

629
I guess we don't have to look far to see where Canuck got the "arrogant" impression.

To imply that your opinion is based on "scientific fact" is just silly. Your opinion is based on statistical analysis of a set of observations, that's a long way from a law of nature. It's often portrayed on this site that sabermetrics is scientific, and by contrast (whether explicitly stated or merely implied), that scouting (or old school methods or whatever name you want to use)is non-scientific. Not to get into a lengthy debate about the nature of science, but just remember that science is based on observation. It's commonly accepted in the science world that the better trained the scientist is that the better their observations and corresponding conclusions will be. This is a fairly simple, and one would hope, a rather benign argument indicating the value of scouts or "trained observers". It doesn't mean their observations are always correct, only that they're usually more correct than another person's observation of the same events. Statistics is a method of analyzing data commonly used in science, but the absence of statistics does not preclude something from being scientific.

That may have been a little garbled, but let me throw out an analogy that may make more sense:

People need drugs to cure diseases.
People are constantly searching for active compounds that can lead to new drugs.
A guy in a lab systematically analyzing the chemical components of every plant on the planet is one way of searching for new drugs. He is utilizing science (and for the sake of analogy is roughly equivalent to the sabermetrician).
A shaman in the Amazonian rainforest observing different people's reactions to different plants is searching for new drugs. He is utilizing science, but obviously not statistics (and is roughly equivalent to our old school scout).

Which way is better? It depends. But usually it's a combination of the two. If the guy in the lab actually manages to test every plant on the planet he is going to find some active compounds that could potentially lead to new drugs, BUT that's hardly the most efficient way to do things. If the guy in the lab asks the guy in the rainforest which plants he's already using than he's going to streamline his efforts. Both systems can work, but the best chances for the most beneficial outcome is a combination of the two.

The balance between those two methods is the "art" of science. And the balance between utilizing statistics and the observations of trained observers is the art of being a GM. The irony here is that I'm not a big fan of the Pierre signing, but I get frustrated when people state that they "know" that the Pierre signing is a catastrophe because the "facts" tell them so.

Hmmmmm, that analogy made a lot of sense to me when I came up with it. Now, I think I've managed to confuse myself. Damn wine, great for thinking deep thoughts, not so good for helping you convey them. Oh well, I'm done for the night.

But I did enjoy the full day session of nail biting over the Pierre deal. Who knows what tomorrow will bring?

Thank you Jonny 6 for stating so well what I have thought for so long, but have been unable to find a way to express so well as you.

Personally, I think it would be kinda cool if the Dodgers hired a Shaman.

Mesoamerican mysticism is the final frontier in baseball analysis.

{waits patiently for an argument over the proper use of term "shaman"}

678. I understand your point, but in baseball we have the numbers we need to quantify what we are seeing, arent seeing, or think we are seeing. People have already put the work in to combine trial and error and statistical research which are the two things you seemed to be describing.

I strongly believe that traditional scouting is still very effective at the lower levels of baseball and in determining which players will have a good shot at producing the types of numbers the SABR folks love. But by the time there is a large enough sample size at the major league level, using statistical evidence to predict outcomes should outweigh "traditional" baseball scouting methods.

I think the majority of the beef people here are having isnt with Juan Pierre, its with Ned falling victim to the market and overpaying for his services. I think the Pierre deal coupled with the apparent lack of proaction regarding the JD Drew situation has made Ned look a bit of a fool in a few people's eyes.

659 - I'm not looking to kick you out at all, and I value you being here. Very much. But some of your comments lately have hit me wrong, I admit - I've been trying to write this comment for several minutes and can't articulate why, but they have. And it seemed to me that 638 in particular started off in a bad way. But I have no hard feelings.

I strongly believe that traditional scouting is still very effective at the lower levels of baseball and in determining which players will have a good shot at producing the types of numbers the SABR folks love. But by the time there is a large enough sample size at the major league level, using statistical evidence to predict outcomes should outweigh "traditional" baseball scouting methods.

that pretty much sums up my side in the scout vs stats debate.

I strongly believe that traditional scouting is still very effective at the lower levels of baseball and in determining which players will have a good shot at producing the types of numbers the SABR folks love.

Did you know that SABR gives out an annual award to a famous scout? It's called the Roland Hemond Award.

There's also an award named in honor of Doug Pappas that's honors the best research presentation at the annual convention.
Here is a list of previous winners:
http://tinyurl.com/62rq8

If you can detect a pattern that there is a "SABR" way of thinking, please tell me.

I just don't see how people can argue with the fact that a stat like stolen bases does not correlate with runs scored. If your science, stats, voodoo or whatever you want to call it shows a different conclusion then please post it. I am open to listening. If you are going to say that the Pierre signing is good, then it would be nice to back it up with something qualitative. Is that too hard to ask for? I'd like to see what qualitative measures Pierre brings to the table that are going to add runs or prevent runs that a much lower paid player could not have provided. vr, Xei

686

Bob is on his "there is a difference between SABR and saber" crusade yet again :-}

I wonder what will happen to this place when Colletti inks steve trachsel to a two year deal...

688

Ascribing one, monolithic way of thinking to an organization as diverse as SABR does a great disservice to it.

686. I wasn't aware of the scouting award, nor was I trying to attribute a singular way of thinking to the hydra-esque, James Bond villain sounding beast that is SABR. Please excuse any offense that statement may have caused.

I'm just trying to build bridges here, people.

But SABR folks do love their numbers, do they not?

691 posts about one acquisition. Somebody should point both Ned and Pierre over here.

Just for the record, my only objection is giving five-year contracts to anybody.

693
I'm guessing your peeps are mighty thrilled about the mighty Bruins heading over!

My peeps...Not so much.

Ok, I have a long drive to Berkeley in the morning, from pretty much Dodger Stadium itself.

Bob, please excuse any offense I may have caused via my ignorance of SABR.

Nate, check out a band called Psychic Ills, I suspect you may enjoy them.

Goodnight folks.

694 Is that deal done? I do think the Hawai'i Bowl people would rather have UCLA and its crowd of alums (many of whom live here already) arrive than bet on the OSU or, worse, ASU alums.

I don't believe any of the Pac-10 bowl bids will be finalized until after this week's games.

696 A formal invitation has not been offered, but it looks like we're Hawai'i bound.

Where we will be destroyed by your Warriors.

I'm not sure I would have capitalized Shaman there. It's not a proper noun is it?

698

I still call them the 'Bows.

If the Catholics can capitalize their boss, I say the animists can as well.

See, now do I capitalize "Anamists?"

Somehow, being destroyed by rainbows seems a fitting end to the season...

701 It has not been a good spelling day for Greg Brock.

Well, is it "animists" or "anamists" first of all?

704 Hey! I already mocked myself on that one...

COME ON!

Self-awareness of your frailties will get you nowhere.

New post up top.

Every time a big deal goes down, the first wave is either the teeth gnashing one, or the exultation one (though, sometimes both at once). The second wave is the analytical brokering, which is the one most likely to make us proud. Then comes the morning after with pile-ons and recriminations. Which is when the board bashing starts. Then there's the board-bash backlash, which is automatically treated as an ideological putsch.

There are parts of this routine that are more enjoyable than others, but it's possible all are necessary. Like mosquitoes are important for an ecosystem. Or something. I don't know. Would it really be so bad if there were no mosquitoes?

708 In a word, no.

I've got a garden full of bromeliads, which collect water and attract skeeters.

678 -- You know, I am not sure I have a problem with sabermetrics people calling what they do "scientific." It is true that observation is at the heart of science, and scouts observe, but the information that scouts gather through direct observation can be called anecdotal, and scientists usually go to pains to distinguish anecdotal evidence from more epistemologically-sound proofs. I think scouts consider what they do as more art than science, and believe that the statistical analysis of baseball (beyond the most traditionally-accepted stats) is analogous to trying to appreciate a piece of music or a painting through mathematics. Some things in this world you just have to see, hear, or touch. The scouts who like Juan Pierre would say that counting the number of outs he makes in a year is simply an inappropriate methodology to employ if you want to know what Pierre brings to a team. Sabermetricians don't buy that, and to a point, I AGREE with them. OBA is more important than scouts usually think it is. But I do believe that a player can contribute in other ways than putting up a great OBA, and that not every player in a line-up has to be a high-OBA guy for an offense to produce runs at an acceptable level.

You can still chew food with 2 teeth. I wouldn't want to try it, but it can be done.
vr, Xei