Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
Jon's other site:
Screen Jam
TV and more ...
1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with
Ned Colletti did it.
With one reported contract offer, the Dodger general manager validated the worst fears of anyone who suspected he was too enamored of pointless statistics - yes, statistics - to make sensible decisions.
Worse than trading Dioner Navarro or Joel Guzman, who continue to generate mixed reviews, worse than acquiring Brett Tomko, Mark Hendrickson or Julio Lugo, today's news of a five-year offer to free agent outfielder Juan Pierre for $45 million has crushed all remaining faith.
Everyone knows how much I hate to validate an unsourced report, but there is reason to make an exception in this case. (And I'll take the heat if I was wrong to pile on so soon - believe me, the mea culpa will be hugely rewarding.) In the absence of confirmation from the Dodgers of this offer, consider the following a plea against it. On the chance that this reported contract has not been inked, I would urge the Dodgers to pull the escape cord.
We all understood the desire to give young outfielder Matt Kemp a few months more development time - but this is overkill, to say the least. By the end of 2007, if not this afternoon, Kemp will probably be a better player than Pierre. By the end of 2007, if not this afternoon, Jason Repko might well be a better player than Pierre.
Meanwhile, Pierre could reign as the Dodgers single-largest monetary commitment over time.
I don't want to ignore what Pierre can do. He plays 162 games a year, gets about 200 hits a year, and steals about 50 bases a year. In his best season, he had an on-base percentage of .374, which at the top of the lineup is an asset.
Oh, but the buts ...
In the thick of his prime, the 29-year-old Pierre is a below-average hitter - with a career EQA of .257, a .255 mark playing half his games in Wrigley Field this past season and a listless career-high of .276.
Aside from not tempting official scorers into giving him errors, he is considered by many observers as well as statisticians to be no more than an average center fielder. Dodger Thoughts commenter BigCPA points out that according to The Fielding Bible, from 2003-2005, Pierre had a negative rating defensively with a throwing arm ranked 30th at his position.
As a baserunner, he has a history of piling up stolen bases but at the cost of 20 caught stealings or so per year. Overall, he adds more value on the bases than he subtracts, but not nearly as much as his stolen bases alone might suggest.
And boy, does he need that value. He has never slugged more than .375 in a season. But he must consistently make that up in on-base percentage, right? Nope. His career mark is .350, which is barely adequate for someone who depends on that skill. Basically, in a year that his batting average is clicking, he will get on base at a decent rate. But the same could presumably be said of a career backup like Repko, who OBPed .345 in only his second major league season, injury-plagued at that.
The comments I've made throughout the offseason about the Dodger payroll still stand. Without knowing how high the team payroll will rise, without knowing how big a drop in the bucket a given contract is, there's no way to completely evaluate a signing.
But when you are signing a player who is barely above replacement value, then you can fairly question how much sense it makes. And Pierre, playing every game of 2006, came in 18th among major league centerfielders in Value Over Replacement Player, according to Baseball Prospectus. In VORPr, which measures a players VORP per game played, Pierre came in 25th.
In 2005, playing only 72 games, the maligned J.D. Drew had more than double the 2005 VORP of Pierre playing a full season. That means even if you give the rest of Drew's 2005 games to a player below replacement value, that combo was still likely better than Pierre. With Drew, if nothing else, at least the upside was big. With Pierre, no such luck or skill.
Pierre is above-average in the narrow sense. And his annual salary may be in line with an above-average player in this 2006-2007 offseason. And perhaps this is the kind of security blanket Colletti needs to avoid giving away a valuable prospect and getting too little in return.
But it shouldn't come to this. It shouldn't require this. Pierre is not sufficiently above-average to make much of a positive difference in 2007, and with each passing year, the chances diminish exponentially. The best the Dodgers can hope for is that by 2011, if the Dodgers haven't unloaded Pierre, baseball has become such a lucrative business that a contract with an average annual value of $9 million is fit for a spare part.
I don't want people to think this signing is the end of the world. It doesn't aggressively hurt the team. If Kemp comes out blasting the ball in AAA, he will find a spot in a major-league starting lineup. But it is a depressing, disturbing allotment of resources. Ever since he was hired, I have made a concerted effort to be open-minded about Colletti, but one can only be so forgiving. There simply has to be a better way to spend $45 million than on Juan Pierre.
I missed it by "that" much.
vr, Xei
Preach.
You're probably right about this prospective signing not "aggressively" hurting the Dodgers. But it sure would be an expensive symbol that Ned simply Doesn't Get It.
Yeah, but whose major-league lineup? This has a Jason Jennings for Matt Kemp type of deal written all over it.
I shudder. This would easily be the worse Dodger contract since K. Brown.
2) Not to quibble with your analysis (which is appropriately funerial) but I don't think it would be appropriate to characterize a "replacement level" player as "average." My understanding is that the "average" player is, in actuality, quite a good player because of the way that super players (like Pujols) pulls up the average. So, that said, I would venture to say that Pierre is far, far below average.
"And I find it kinda funny
I find it kinda sad
The dreams in which I'm dying
Are the best I've ever had"
$45 Million Frosties from Wendys?
then im going to sue colletti because it would have been his fault.
then im going to take that money and bribe McCourt to fire Colletti and give me the GM position.
see, there is light behind the large black french cloud.
All hyperbole aside, how can Colletti think this is a good move? What is so enamoring about JP? He seems like a nice guy, but forget sabremetric stats, in pretty much every respect, he is not a $9 million a year guy. That's how much Derek Lowe makes, almost as much as JD Drew was making. Wow! I'm really amazed that Colletti would pull this off. Why? The SBs? Seriously? This one's going to hurt for a while.
Not to fan the flames or anything, but I don't think a single stat-head in the world would have made that deal.
On another note, we all love Vin, but he should not be the GM. Can Pedro Feliz be far behind?
Two words: Sunk. Costs.
----------------------------
"In honor of Thomas Pynchon's new book, let's have a little reading that seems approppriate...
"A screaming comes across the sky. It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
It is too late..."
Answer: he's cajun.
Had the Dodgers never acquired Juan Pierre, I never would have learned that. So some good has come from this.
vr, Xei
http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/sports/16059408.htm
Former Detroit Tigers star and coach Lance Parrish was hired Monday as manager of the Great Lakes Loons.
Loons are our new low A team!
WOW. It's like Colletti saw the Soriano deal and said, "#### Hendry. THIS is how you #### the market!"
the only person that pisses me off is leveski. i hate seeing him laughing at our misery.
The writing is on the wall: The owners have lots and lots of money and labor peace has made them ready to spend it.
$9 million is the new $3 million.
It's embarrassing that we need for Brian Sabean to come to our rescue.
But this time they're right!
if we dont offer jd drew arbitration, that might just be the nail in the coffin for colletti.
Who considers Pierre a "below average average center fielder?" Obviously just about everybody here. The sabermetric community, very likely. However, the scouting community rates Pierre's ability to hit for average and fielding as "above average" and his speed as "plus", or way above average. They don't like his arm, and his power is worse than his arm, but scouts never hold a center fielder's lack of power against him. In total, the scouting community LIKES Pierre. That the Dodgers under Colletti make moves based on what the scouting community thinks and not what sabermetricians think is something that I can understand people here deploring, but at this stage of the Colleti Administration people expressing shock over it is being naive. Now I suppose I am going to be told I am "insulting" people here by using the word "naive," but really I am not trying to offend anyone, and I only use the word because I think it is appropriate when people here do KNOW by now that Colletti is not making decisions based on peripheral offensive stats and defensive metrics. Colletti is trusting his scouts.
No refutation, but an aside.
Our scouts need to be fired immediately.
Ned if you are listening please help this team...
Profiteer.
I had assumed Kemp unfit for CF other than in emergencies. Did some really consider him a viable CF? He appeared lost out there when I saw him. Seems to me, he's a RF who can be above average there but really isn't a natural CF. Beyond his questionable instincts for CF, Kemp seemingly down the road will be a bit large for all that running around in CF. He's having enough trouble adjusting to major-league pitching -- why add the forced fit of CF to his chores?
I agreed with the thrust of Jon's post but tend to think getting out of Wrigley will only help Pierre as a hitter. Again, not defending the signing. I would have flipped Lofton a one-year deal.
Pierre is an upgrade over Lofton.
In a key situation, I would rather have Pierre at the plate than Repko anyday.
Am I the lone voice in welcoming Pierre to the Dodgers?
bluegold, meet EJM.
EJM, meet bluegold.
chris dial rates pierre as quite good though.
first in the NL for CF
http://tinyurl.com/z3j74
I don't think this a stats vs. scouts thing. The guy's attributes and warts are in plain view.
Good going Ned!!
You can disagree, but you can't make statements with no evidence.
How can you argue that Pierre is worth five years, or even that he's a better player than Kenny Lofton?
"you don't have any information that he has"
The irony of that statement is that, in fact, I do have all of the information relevant to Juan Pierre and it is Colletti who, somehow, has failed to read or understand it.
Loons are apparently in our front office, too.
Baseball is dead to me.
But that's not a premise to like/dislike this (alleged) signing. Also, it would make for a pretty silent board here.
How is Pierre an upgrade over Lofton?
And the Repko comparison is extreme to prove a point. I'll concede that tonight, Pierre is better than Repko. But how long will that be true. More importantly, the options between Repko and Pierre are considerable - and considerably cheaper.
I'm not as stat minded as some but the point about VORP per game seems unimportant. The fact that he plays 162 can't be thrown out the window. It means as much as any other stat. And if Kemp can hit like everyone hopes, he'll play. If Kemp and Ethier are both studs, we'll be fine no matter how you slice it.
I don't believe this is the end of times. Just a waste of resources.
Seriously, I hope they're all alive.
I would guess that Juan led the NL in outs by a long, long shot...True?
How are we improved? Lofton is better, right now, than Pierre. He is cheaper. He could be had for a shorter contract.
162 games of a CFer not even as good as Kenny Lofton, with no JD Drew, is not a better team.
If Juan Pierre's name has anything to do with his ethnic heritage (since many descended from african slaves have the last names of their owner...) Pierre is probably Creole as opposed to Cajun. Cajuns tend to be white/not mixed with african ancestry and live in country areas while Creoles tend to come from at least a little african ancestry and tended to be city people.
You can abbreviate Human Out Machine, so it's in the lead right now.
HOM
This is the problem that some people saw coming with Ned's "I must make a deal to look busy" philosphy.
Agreed.
So my feeling is a little like being told dreams don't come true.
I was talking to a friend earlier today about how sad I was when I read in the Times as a 7-year-old that the Brady Bunch had been canceled. I didn't really even know at that point that a TV show could be canceled.
I don't feel as bad today as I did then, but the disappointment is there.
Furcal, Reyes, Roberts, Rollins, Soriano, Ryan Freel (higher OBP and SLG, better
SB percentage), Marcus Giles (even though he had a down year), Hanley Ramirez, and Rickie Weeks (slightly better OBP and SLG, better SB percentage).
Even David Eckstein had a better OBP than Pierre, and he sucks too. Eckstein, Craig Counsell, Randy Winn, and Chris Duffy are the only regular leadoff hitters in the NL who were demonstrably worse than Pierre in 2006. And I didn't even look at at the AL, which has leadoff guys like Damon and Ichiro.
Dave Roberts had almost identical (in fact, better) numbers than Pierre. I'll bet the Dodgers could've signed him for half the price.
This is a crippling signing. The Dodgers might still win the West in 2007, but it'll be in spite of Juan Pierre, not because of him.
I still like Juan "I hope my little dribbler finds another hole between SS and 3rd again" Pierre
1) This lowers the probability that Ned will trade quality rookies for a below-average outfielder.
2) Trashing $9 million a year in the National League West isn't going to kill us.
3) Other teams are dumb too, so when someone more capable is ready to take over, we can probably trade Pierre and only have to eat $3-4 million / year.
That's the best I've got. Otherwise, I share Steve's hollow feelings inside.
But just two years later, we got "The Brady Bunch Hour"!
2003-1
2004-2
2005-2
2006-1
Kenny Lofton drew more walks than Pierre did last year in less plate appearances.
If you're talking about Lofton's speed and defense, yes, it's bad, but Pierre is rated as a worse defensive center fielder, which is an awful portent if you remember the Lofton adventures last year.
I'd rather have an old, average, short-term Lofton, than a below average hitter in the lineup every day for five years.
Repko? 3.5? I don't like any of those choices. I think that most agree here that Lofton misplays way too many balls. Repko is still an unknown quantity. After his rookie season most here wanted to dump him.
3.5 is not a CF. So, who is your choice? Kemp is at least a year away and his play in CF wasn't much different than Lofton. Looks like to me you get who you can get.
Pierre
Furcal
Nomar
Kent
Ethier
Kemp
Betemit
Martin
Maybe swap Martin and Betemit? (I have Martin as a #8 because of how fond Grady was of him in that spot)
Jon- How can you be below average but make it up for it in volume? Help me understand b/c I'm probably not getting it.
I am still waiting for somebody to come out and say, without sarcasm, that they are "shocked" that Colletti is a baseball traditionalist. I mean, I think we knew that when he was hired, or shortly thereafter, or every time he made a personnel move of any description in the last year.
Make that the second to last thing.
I hate to sound frustrated, but have you read what's been posted?
Lofton is better than Pierre right now, by any metric you can find, any worthwhile stat you can dig up.
Some teams, like the Yankees and Red Sox, can get away with wasting money like this. Other teams have to stick to budgets, and therefore have to be more judicious with their resources in order to field competitive teams.
The Dodgers should ostensibly be in that first group, but history has proven that they are squarely in the latter group. Albatross contracts like Dreifort, Ashby, Carlos Perez, et al are what doomed the Dodgers in the late 90s-early 00s. The team couldn't make needed upgrades because so much money was tied up in unproductive players.
90 - Not understanding your question either. I never said you could be below average but make up for it in volume.
.336/.383/.418
That's an OPS over .800 baby!
Have you seen him SO?
In fact, after the Drew opt-out (and Colletti's subsequent deal-breaking tirade) and this deal, I'm about as un-excited about the Dodgers as I've been in a very, very long time. Hopefully the bright spots can outshine the black hole in CF.
The money doesn't really bother me at all. Who knows the value of a dollar, anymore? Its the years. And more than that, its the player.
I don't want Juan Pierre playing CF for the Dodgers in 2007.
Nor in 2008.
Nor in 2009.
Got a crazy hunch about 2010.
2011, though, I don't like.
Not striking out is not a significant skill.
"He's another guy with great qualities as a human being, like Nomar," Colletti said.
-AP
If Colletti was GM of the Lakers, the only player on the roster right now would be a 43-year-old A.C. Green.
http://tinyurl.com/yaqnqz
I wonder if the picture of Juan included with this story makes people feel better or worse (is it possible?) about the impending transaction.
But we don't. As of now, our 3-5 guys aren't gonna do much homerun damage upwards of 20.
They should, however, hit for average.
It would seem to me, then, that the extra base Furcal and Pierre can steal/advance on the single is valuable at a risk, because the risk is necessary for us to score runs.
But we don't. As of now, our 3-5 guys aren't gonna do much homerun damage upwards of 20.
They should, however, hit for average.
It would seem to me, then, that the extra base Furcal and Pierre can steal/advance on the single is valuable at a risk, because the risk is necessary for us to score runs.
Some of us liked the Ted Tollner years. Liked them a lot!
Even better was the second John Robinson administration. Ahh.....
Sniff
Sniff
I'm can't help for blubberin'
And one always hopes that will play itself out differently, and it seemed like we had something going. And now it seems like whatever the case, nope, were going to do it just like everyone else does it.
And NBC and CBS and ABC go on their runs, they may win for a year or two then drop back and etc., and the years they win the executives will get credit for it and the years they lose they will get fired, and random chance will explain just about all of it anyway. And we seemed, with our young guys and Logan white and the other things going for is that we might beat that formula. I guess I just don't like dancing with lady luck.
I am well aware of the SABR sacred doctrine
I do not choose to fight this fight anymore...
I'll second Bob T's motion to pass.
SABR
http://www.sabr.org/
Sabermetrics example
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/statpages/glossary/
So let me clarify. I'm a secular guy, so I'll take a secualr approach, say literary theory.
If you read a text, you can apply all sorts of analyses to it, feminist, marxist, reader response. They can all uncover valuable information.
I'm not stressing old school over new school with regards to Pierre. I'm just saying, multiple readings are necessary to really assess his possible worth to the team: yes, he will make a lot of outs, and that it huge. But won't he also be in scoring position pretty routinely those times he does get on base. That is all.
I apologize for the sentiment evoked with "doctrine." I'll be less literary.
Pierre is not going to be our leadoff hitter, he is going to bat number 2. You want your #2 hitter to make contact and I don't see anyone better at that than Pierre. BTW, Pierre was very good in both 2003 and 2004, not that long ago.
Mentioning Repko (who will NEVER be a starter on any team) as a better option is just silly. Lofton just didn't and won't play in enough games. If we had Lofton 5 years ago, I would agree he would be the better option.
As long as this signing doesn't preclude us from getting another big bat and at least 1 front line starting pitcher, I don't see how this is bad.
BTW, check out my new Dodger Blog site at http://www.dodgerjunkie.com
Juan Pierre is an ideal player for this kind of lineup. He walks more than he strikes out (a very underrated characteristic!). He steals lots and lots of bases. If you have a lineup without a dominant power hitter, stolen bases are that much more valuable, because a runner on first is unlikely to score. Sure, Pierre gets thrown out a lot, but in this kind of lineup it doesn't matter as much.
He is basically Kenny Lofton, but 10 years younger. Pierre is in his prime right now, and will be in his prime for the first three years of his contract. After that, his salary will be even less of a drop in the bucket than it is now.
Colletti's Dodgers scored plenty of runs last year with Kenny Lofton in the lineup (and sieved plenty with him in the outfield). Because of that, I'm willing to give this signing the benefit of the doubt. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this signing is neither great nor horrible. It's just interesting.
The Juan Pierre signing will go down as a stroke of genius on the part of Ned.
How many of you blasted the Furcal signing a year ago? Looks pretty good now, wouldn't you say?
Ned's not done.
Watch and learn!
The good news that I see with Pierre is that it should force Grady to play Kemp, Either, Repko and Loney.
Home runs or OBP. Bombs or Chinese-water torture. Pierre provides neither.
Of course the Bill Plaschke wannabes will be saying that Pierre has heart or has character or has cool socks or has good work ethic. That's great, but why can Colletti find ONE guy who has those qualities AND can play ball? Can't we find someone who has both?
One contradition made by the Pro-Pierre crowd is that they discount people who use modern stats to evaluate players, and bash the use of stats. Then they say Pierre is good because he hits .290 or steals 50 bases or gets lots of hits (but no walks). Um, those last numbers are um, like stats, n'stuff, you know.
The reality is Pierre is a slightly better hitter than Izturis for a lot more money. OPS around 720. Bad walk rate. Yes he gets a lot of hits, but that's because he doesn't walk and gets 700 PAs.
So the Dodgers spent 45 million on a #8 hitter. Why not just go one more step and sign Zito for 75 million?
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.
Here's a scenario I'm looking forward to seeing over the next 2 years: Furcal leads off with a walk or single. Pierre in the 2-hole singles for runners at 1st and 3rd with nobody out.
I don't follow Jon's blog as often as I used to, so I don't know if this has been talked over to death, but Ned seems more like Cashman than Stoneman in the sense that prospects are trade bait for established veterans. True, the Dodger payroll doesn't rival the Yankee payroll, but it's not the Marlins payroll either. An Ethier - Pierre - Kemp outfield is something I could live with.
This lineup is being built to manufacture runs, not wait for the 3-run homer.
The fantasy where Pierre turns into an on-base machine continues to amuse.
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.