OF Drama in LA… Again
Following the 2007 season, the Los Angeles Dodgers seemingly had their outfield in order. Juan Pierre had signed a 5-yr/$55 mil deal prior to the season and was not about to sit on the bench. Flanking him would be prospects Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier. Ned Colletti then proceeded to sign Andruw Jones to a 2-yr/$36.2 mil contract, creating a logjam in the outfield and relegating someone to the bench in the process. With all of the money invested in Jones and Pierre, the odd man out had to come from Ethier and Kemp.
Jones produced a .234 wOBA and, despite a +3.7 UZR rating in centerfield, proving his worth to be -0.4 wins. He missed most of the season, opening up a spot for all three of Pierre, Ethier, and Kemp.
Manny Ramirez soon joined the team, once again creating a surplus of outfielders. Fans screamed for Pierre to sit on the bench and Ethier to receive plenty of playing time. Though Joe Torre did not immediately react to these please, he soon found it too difficult of a task to keep Ethier out of the lineup. Pierre became disgruntled, but Kemp and Ethier needed to play every day, and you do not acquire Manny Ramirez to sit on the bench.
Jones may have missed a good portion of the 2008 season, but he is still technically under contract. Pierre also has three more years remaining. Kemp and Ethier are pretty much guaranteed starting jobs next season, but who takes over the remaining outfield spot?
Manny Ramirez does not appear to be heading for as big a payday as he expected, meaning the initial 2-yr/$45 mil offer that the Dodgers withdrew may make the most sense. Should he re-sign with the Dodgers, Colletti will have the outfield that helped propel the team into the playoffs returning n tact. He will also have around $30 mil in outfielders sitting on the bench/not living up to their paycheck.
The most recent reports have Jones heading to the Mets. Unless the Dodgers are willing to take on a bad contract like the one belonging to Luis Castillo (of whom they have no interest), Colletti will have to pay the large majority of Jones’ salary. If Ramirez rejoins the team and Jones is dealt, then Juan Pierre may not be happy, but you could do much worse in the fourth outfielder department. The big issue there is that he will earn plenty of money to make contributions that do not necessarily merit that fee.
An even newer report has Adam Dunn talking to the Dodgers. I cannot imagine Colletti would sign both Dunn and Ramirez, meaning he will go for either one or the other. Both are all-hit/no-field corner outfielders. Their 2009 projections call for +3.5 wins for Manny and around +2.8 wins for Dunn. Dunn is several years younger than Ramirez and will cost less, as well. From an owner’s perspective, however, ManRam puts butts in the seats, and Dunn does not.
Regardless, Pierre could be very useful as a pinch-runner who stays in the game as a defensive replacement, occasionally garnering starts. For most Dodgers fans, it seems the ideal solution is to cut ties with both Pierre and Jones while bringing back Ramirez to play left-field. The Jones part of that solution may come to fruition very soon, but I would fully expect to see Pierre in Dodger-blue as a fourth outfielder come Spring Training 2009. Either way, Colletti definitely loves him some outfielders, as four are currently under contract already and two more have been heavily rumored to be signed.
Print This Post
Eric,
The one thing I think journalist/baseball people miss constantly in their columns is the concept of a sunk cost. And you may already understand this, as your other works have been great, but its point is missing in this particular post.
“With all of the money invested in Jones and Pierre, the odd man out had to come from Ethier and Kemp”
Why? I mean I realize the press/public would eat you up for paying a guy to sit. But that’s also why the press are writers and not baseball GMs. They don’t run your team. Baseball contracts at the Major league level are guaranteed. So once signed, no matter how much a guy plays he gets his base salary. His paycheck shouldn’t carry any weight in the decision on how much to play a guy. Only performance matters after players are signed. Jones’ and Pierre’s performances sitting. Letting a contract dictate playing time is ludicrous for a team trying to win.
“If Ramirez rejoins the team and Jones is dealt, then Juan Pierre may not be happy, but you could do much worse in the fourth outfielder department. The big issue there is that he will earn plenty of money to make contributions that do not necessarily merit that fee.”
Again, Pierre is making a lot of money. Granted. But the decision to pay him was made 2 years ago now. Roast him for signing the guy period. Don’t knock the wisdom of a GM who is on the hook for a big contract and some how realizes later that the player lacks skill and chooses not to play him, because the team would win more games if he sat. Try sending that message to your fan base: “We got these two young kids that, if we played them, we’d win the division. But since we’re paying a lot of money to two other guys that suck, we’re not going to play the kids. In all likelihood we’ll miss the playoffs. As your GM, I just wanted to come out and say that we’re going to continue to compound bad decisions with more bad decisions. That is all. Thank you.”
I’m certain that if you asked a Dodger fan would they want to make the playoffs, or see Juan Pierre play, they’d take the former. Even if it meant paying the guy the remaining $33m/3yrs to sit the bench.
I understand the concept of a sunk cost, but there are plenty of instances where GMs will “pressure” managers into playing the ones making the benjamins. This happens in baseball, BECAUSE contracts are guaranteed. I’m not saying it happens to every player or that players with poor contracts are forced to play all year, but you’re joking if you believe this never ever happns.
The first quote of mine you posted was not my take on the situation but what actually happened. With all of that money invested in Pierre/Jones, the team was not about to sit either of them right away, even though Kemp and Ethier should have received plenty of playing time.
The second quote you again took out of context, as I am not roasting Colletti for anything at all. I am simply saying that the big issue with keeping Pierre as a fourth outfielder is that he makes a lot of money. Not that it’s terrible to have him on the team. He is still a pretty solid fielder and a good baserunner.
If Colletti can unload Jones and keep Pierre as a poor investment but good fourth outfielder, great.
This post is not necessarily my opinion but rather what has actually happened. Fans wanted Ethier and Kemp in the lineup, and Torre stuck with Jones and Pierre for a while… there is no way to explain that other than they wanted to see for certain if their costs were sunk, or if their investments would rebound. If Jones had signed to a $5 mil/yr deal, he would have been benched after 3 weeks.
I’ve re-read what I wrote and I see your point. Originally, I hadn’t meant the roast line to be aimed at you specifically. And I never meant for the comment to become personal, I should know better. It does indeed read that way, poor editing on my part (I also missed a word “performances warranted sitting”). My criticisms were meant for the larger baseball writing community as a whole.
I don’t think I took anything out of context though as you failed to specify an alternative to the view. Which is why I commented in the first place. My point was simply that most fans and the press are fickle, they would overlook bad contracts if the team was winning. This is the reason they wouldn’t make good GMs, they put too much stock into $. People like yourself and the other writers here who are able to separate baseball decisions into their objective and subjective parts would certainly be more successful at it.
I don’t pretend for a second that this doesn’t happen. The mere fact that you took the time to write about it proves that it does. My thing is just that I hate seeing it and would like for more fans (and more GMs for that matter) to be educated in why focusing soley on how much people are paid is short sighted and foolish, assuming that the team’s goal is wins.
High performance generally causes high incomes. Causation is less clear in reverse.
Yeah, baseball would be a more fun environment if more understood that big money does not always necessitate playing time. Unfortunately, Colletti invested plenty of money into undeserving outfielders while already having two top-tiered prospects waiting in the wings. In other situations, this might not be a problem, but it created a quartet of outfielders on the roster who either deserved starting gigs (Ethier and Kemp) or were being paid as if they should start (Pierre, Jones).
As of right now, though, this “mistake” can be rectified by unloading Jones and simply relegating Pierre to the bench instead of trying to throw him out there all season to justify his worth.
I agree that fans would much rather have Manny, Kemp, Ethier, or even Dunn, Kemp, Ethier. It’s just a shame that Colletti had to sign Jones and Pierre to those contracts. They are sunk costs now, and I’m not criticizing him now, but it still creates a dilemma he needs to work himself out of.
If he signs Manny or Dunn, he is still on the hook for Pierre’s deal, and then will have to either pay Jones’ full salary or a very large portion of it to unload him. This will rectify the situation, but cost a lot in doing so.