So Everyone Agrees the Dodgers Moved Way Too Soon On Jamey Carroll, Right?

February 8, 2010 at 9:22 am | In Felipe Lopez, Jamey Carroll | 23 Comments

In this offseason which has mostly been noteworthy for the Dodgers’ almost complete lack of activity, one of the main complaints we’ve been hearing (okay, and saying) is that Jamey Carroll was the biggest new acquisition of the winter. That’s probably not a good thing just because, well, it’s Jamey Carroll. But is the problem with Carroll the fact that a backup infielder shouldn’t be the biggest grab by a contending team, or that the Dodgers cost themselves value by going after him so quickly?

This isn’t to denigrate Carroll, of course. He’s nice for what he is, a veteran with some on-base skills and positional flexibility. As I said at the time (despite barely being able to see straight), he’s got his virtues, though I did say I was unhappy with having to give him a second guaranteed year. It’s just that we all remember how nicely it turned out last year when Orlando Hudson and Randy Wolf were signed to below-market deals because they’d waited too long in a terrible market, and much the same situation appears to be happening again.

I’ve been thinking about this for weeks, but what really got me going it today was today’s list on MLBTradeRumors of their “Unsigned All-Star Team“, and seeing Felipe Lopez on that list.  Lopez isn’t as good as he thinks he is – he’s been riding that fluke 23 homer 2005 season in Cincinnati for quite a while now – but he’s also a useful player who’s probably going to come cheaply, and he’s a perfect fit for the Dodgers. Last year, Lopez signed in Milwaukee for $3.5 million (that’s right, less than Carroll is guaranteed, though of course not over two years), and though he was traded midseason for the third time in four years, put together quite a nice line of .310/.383/.427. Dig that OBP!

Granted, his career line doesn’t quite match up to that, at .269/.338/.400. That line needs to be taken with a grain of salt, though; it’s weighed down heavily by a slow start to his career in Toronto at ages 21 and 22 in 2001-02 (.293 OBP) and a season and a half on a dreadful Washington team (.320 OBP). Lopez was good in Cincinnati (.765 OPS), got dragged down in Washington, but then has been very good ever since he left the Nats. His 2008 turned around instantly as soon as he was dealt to St. Louis (man, players getting good once they leave Washington sure does seem to have some legs to it, doesn’t it, Ronnie Belliard and Marlon Anderson?) as he had a red-hot .964 OPS, and then as mentioned above was very good in 2009 between Milwaukee and Arizona.  Add in that he’s a switch-hitter while Carroll’s a righty – and don’t forget, the Dodgers are having a problem with too many righties on the bench – and there’s no question that Lopez is a more valuable bat than Carroll.

Lopez has the advantage in the field, as well. Like Carroll, he plays several infield positions and is slightly above-average at 2B, below-average at 3B, and has some limited experience in the outfield. But unlike Carroll, who can’t play shortstop, Lopez has played over 600 games there. He’s not great (-11.2 UZR/150 overall), but if Furcal stays healthy, he doesn’t need to be. (The obvious follow up question is, “what if Furcal doesn’t stay healthy,” in which case the Dodgers are screwed regardless). Wouldn’t you rather see Lopez manning short as Furcal’s backup than the unappealing options we’re currently faced with, like Nick Green and Angel Berroa?

So what we have here is the Dodgers choosing a 36-year-old guy who’s a lesser batter, can’t play shortstop, and hits from the wrong side of the plate over the 29-year-old guy who has a recent history of offensive success, can play shortstop, and is a switch-hitter. Look, if Blake DeWitt can’t handle the job, Carroll’s not going to be there to play every day – Ronnie Belliard is. Yet if Lopez were on hand, he would be able to play everyday, and serve as a middle-infield backup/lefty bench bat otherwise. Lopez has almost no lefty-righty platoon split in his career, so he’d be an ideal piece.

The only way this doesn’t make sense is if the Dodgers were convinced that Lopez would be unhappy if forced into a bench role. Yet here we are, two weeks before spring training starts, and Lopez is unemployed. What better situation would he have than trying to beat out the untested DeWitt? No, I think it’s clear that the Dodgers jumped on Carroll far too soon, without seeing what kind of bargains would be out there in February. It’s not like if they’d missed on Carroll, the season would be sunk for not having him, right?

Dodgers Sign Brian Giles 4 Years Too Late

February 7, 2010 at 8:42 am | In Brian Giles | 11 Comments

Is it just me, or have the Dodgers signed about three times as many veterans to minor-league deals as usual? I half expect to see Lenny Harris, Tim Teufel, and Paul O’Neill coming in next. The trend continues with today’s entry in “Who Can Be the Most Old and Busted?”, Brian Giles, reports Ken Gurnick at Dodgers.com.

As you’d probably expect, I don’t have particularly high hopes for Giles to stick. He’s 39, hit just .191 last season – when he wasn’t missing half the year with an arthritic right knee, because “arthritic” is always a word you want to hear when it comes to elderly outfielders – and is a lousy defender, ranking below-average in UZR at all three outfield spots over his career.

That said, 2009 was the first year of Giles’ career in which he had a below-average OPS, and his 2008 was actually pretty good – .306/.398/.456 in 653 plate appearances, so what the hell – toss him a few spring training at-bats and see if he can be the 5th outfielder/main lefty power bat. Since there’s no guarantee here, it’s probably worth the time to see. Not that I really think he has anything left.

What really interests me, though, is Gurnick’s mention of Ned Colletti’s previous interest in Giles:

Giles nearly was general manager Ned Colletti’s first acquisition after he took over the Dodgers in the winter of 2005, but the San Diego native re-signed with the Padres and Colletti turned to shortstop Rafael Furcal.

Oh, what could have been! Between 2006-08, Giles hit .280/.378/.423 in the batting graveyard of PetCo Park, but more importantly, if Colletti had spent big money on a free agent outfielder for 2006, it might have saved us all the pain of the Juan Pierre era.

Introducing the 2010 Maple Street Press Dodgers Annual

February 5, 2010 at 7:22 am | In MSTI media takeover | 9 Comments

Big news! I’ve been dying to talk about this for a while, and now I can: the 2010 Maple Street Press Dodgers Annual is headed to press. We’re talking 128 ad-free pages of nothing but Dodgers, including two articles and several player capsules written by yours truly.

But just having me in a book isn’t enough to sell it; just check out this murderer’s row of Dodger bloggers and authors, all edited and pulled together by Jon Weisman of Dodger Thoughts.

The annual, which will also be available on local newsstands at the start of March, offers 128 ad-free pages devoted to the Dodgers, including a review of the 2009 season, a thorough series of player profiles and articles previewing the coming year, a 25-page section on the farm system and another 25 pages of historical features.

Here are some of the highlights:

  • Amid Turmoil, Hope (2010 season preview), by Chad Moriyama of Memories of Kevin Malone
  • So Close, Again (2009 season in review), by Eric Stephen of True Blue L.A.
  • Manny Be Good? (What to expect from Ramirez in 2010), by Jay Jaffe of Baseball Prospectus
  • Disorder In McCourt (an analysis of the impact of the McCourts’ divorce) by Joshua Fisher of Dodger Divorce
  • State Of The Stadium, by Eric Stephen of True Blue L.A.
  • One Out Away (Jonathan Broxton looks to recover from another disappointing finish), by Mike Petriello of Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness
  • Critical Campaigns (James Loney and Russell Martin), by Mike Petriello of Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness
  • The Collected Colletti (a Q&A), by Josh Suchon of KABC AM 790
  • Aces Are Wild Cards (The last word on No. 1 starters), by Eric Enders, baseball historian
  • Prospect Park (Top 20 prospects in the Dodger farm system), by Dodger prospect expert Richard Bostan
  • Individually Packaged (how the Dodgers develop young arms), by Josh Suchon of KABC AM 790
  • No Minor Hopes (life in AAA), by Albuquerque Isotopes play-by-play announcer Robert Portnoy
  • One In A Trillion (a Vin Scully retrospective), by Dodger team historian Mark Langill
  • Unsung Heroes (key contributions from unexpected sources), by Bob Timmermann of The Griddle and One Through Forty-Two or Forty-Three
  • Sweep And Low (the end of the 1980 season), by Dodger Thoughts commenter BHSportsGuy
  • The Great Dividers (the 20 most controversial Dodgers of the 2000s), by Jon Weisman

Petriello also wrote the bulk of the player profiles, along with BHSportsGuy and another Dodger Thoughts commenter, CraigUnderdog.

All that, for just $12.99! You can order online here, or pick it up at bookstores throughout Southern California. I interviewed the very gracious Jay Jaffe for the Broxton piece, during which I found out he was involved as well, but as MOKM said, I had no idea of the depth and quality of the crew that Jon pulled together until I saw this list just now.

Maple Street has had annuals like these for other teams in previous years, and it’s exceedingly cool that the Dodgers have one now as well. Let’s hope it does well enough to make it a recurring project!

Jeff Weaver Returns, But Where Does He Fit?

February 3, 2010 at 8:44 am | In Jeff Weaver, Ramon Ortiz | 10 Comments

Jeff Weaver returns to the Dodgers on a minor-league deal, which in a vacuum, great! Weaver was a complete surprise and an invaluable piece of the bullpen last year, which is why he earned his well-deserved “A++” in our yearly review. I’m actually somewhat surprised that he couldn’t get even a sniff of a major-league deal after how useful he was last season, but good for us.

That said, I’m interested to see how the back end of the bullpen shakes out. If you bring in guys like Justin Miller, Francisco Felix, and Ramon Ortiz (who was also signed yesterday - he’s 37, hasn’t pitched in the bigs since 2007, and has a career ERA of nearly 5. Hooray?) and they don’t make the squad, big deal. You send them to the minors or you dump them, and no one gives it a second thought.

But in Weaver’s case I would think he wouldn’t be too eager to return on a non-guaranteed deal if he didn’t think he’d have a really good chance at making the team, after his nice 2009.  Not that I’m suggesting there’s any handshake agreements, but you’d have to think he’s higher on the NRI pole than the cast of thousands the team has brought in so far. The thing is, the Dodger bullpen seems pretty set. Most expect the team to carry seven relievers, and barring injury, the top five spots are almost certainly guaranteed to Jonathan Broxton, George Sherrill, Hong-Chih Kuo, Ronald Belisario, and Ramon Troncoso.

That leaves two spots, and I expect one to be filled by the loser of the fifth starter derby, particularly James McDonald. While Eric Stults is unlikely to work out of the pen and you could make a case for sending Charlie Haeger and Scott Elbert back to the minors, McDonald proved himself as a quality reliever in the second half last year – he makes the team regardless.

So that leaves one spot, and it’d be hard enough if it was just Weaver vs. the other 5th starters vs. two hundred has-beens and never wases. But don’t forget that there’s an added level of difficulty here, and that’s that the Dodgers took not one but two Rule 5 picks, Carlos Monasterios and Armando Zerpa. If they don’t make the MLB team (or end up on the DL), they have to be offered back to their original club. The Dodgers don’t have room for both of them, but they also wouldn’t have bothered to make the claim if they didn’t plan on giving them every chance to make the club.

So it’s not going to be a simple path for Weaver. Still, if the Dodgers pitching staff is in such good shape that they can’t bother to carry a guy who was productive for them last year, all the better for us. And hey, at least they’re following the advice I gave out at the end of his 2009 review:

For next year, I won’t mind at all if he moves on. If he’s so intent on being a Dodger that he’ll come back for a non-guaranteed invite, then by all means, but he’s not worth giving any real money to.

The Lesser of Three Evils

February 2, 2010 at 5:01 pm | In Alfredo Amezaga | 7 Comments

TrueBlueLA, citing Ken Rosenthal, confirms something we’ve been worried about since early December: the Dodgers have signed former Marlins utilityman Alfredo Amezaga to a minor-league contract worth “650K if he makes club plus potential for 800K more in bonuses”.

You’d be surprised, but I don’t hate this as much as you’d think I would. No, he’s not a good player (in parts of 8 seasons spanning nearly 1500 PA, his line is a sparkling .251/.311/.341) and I’m not all that thrilled to have to log into the administrator panel of the blog and add him to the “non roster invite” section you see over at the right.

It’s just that with all of the roster manipulations we’ve been considering since the unexpected signing of a right-handed outfielder in Reed Johnson, the mostly lousy Amezaga may actually save us from the entirely lousy Nick Green and the so-bad-I-may-renounce-my-fandom-if-he-sticks Angel Berroa.

Think about it this way: since the Dodgers don’t appear to have any faith in Chin-Lung Hu and Jamey Carroll can’t really handle the gig, one of this unholy Amezaga/Green/Berroa trio is going to have to make the team as Rafael Furcal’s backup. It’s a sorry situation, but it’s true and I think we all know this.

So, no, Amezaga can’t hit a lick, and we know this. Neither can Green (.239/.307/.352 in over 1100 MLB PA) or Berroa (I won’t sully this blog with his stats).

But he is a plus fielder at SS, 2B, and CF. Green is decent at best at SS, and Berroa, well, he’s basically the worst major leaguer in baseball history. Perhaps most importantly after the signing of Johnson, Amezaga is a switch-hitter, as opposed to the righties Green and Berroa. With a bench leaning heavily towards the right, having a lefty who can handle shortstop could be incredibly valuable. Not that he’s really much of a bat from either side, of course, but it’s still someone who can stand in the correct box with a bat in his hand.

I think it’s clear how desperate the situation is for this roster spot when I’m actually championing Alfredo Amezaga, but this is the pickle we find ourselves in, isn’t it? When you look at the other options… well, I can’t help but agree with TBLA:

Is Amezaga worth a roster spot? In a vacuum, probably not.  But, given that the choice is likely between him, Nick Green, or Angel Berroa, I’ll take Amezaga.

Reed Johnson Is Your New Backup Outfielder

February 1, 2010 at 7:21 pm | In Reed Johnson | 8 Comments

Dylan Hernandez answers my question from yesterday by tweeting that Reed Johnson has passed his physical, making his deal with the Dodgers official. No terms announced, but the Chicago Tribune reported earlier that the deal would be for about $800k, which sounds about right to me.

As I said yesterday when the rumors first came down, I don’t mind Johnson as a gloveman for Manny who can also spot for Ethier against lefties. It just remains to be seen whether what Johnson brings to the table makes up for what could be seen as the questionable decision to add yet another righty bat.

In my search for more information on Johnson, I polled via Twitter two of my favorite bloggers from his previous teams, Toronto and the Cubs.

DrunkJaysFans:

You should roll your eyes at everyone who’s going to love how scrappy he is despite the fact that he can’t hit RH pitching. Then you should point out that people only love him because he’s a white guy who plays like that.

Wrigleyville23:

indifferent. doesn’t hurt too much, doesn’t help at all. he’ll fall down making catches, which fans like.

Glowing endorsements? We’ll see.

Is Reed Johnson Your New Backup Outfielder?

January 31, 2010 at 3:13 pm | In Blake DeWitt, Doug Mientkiewicz, Reed Johnson | 6 Comments

Lots of activity on the rumor front today regarding free agent outfielder, Reed Johnson, with Ken Rosenthal first tweeting that the Dodgers are “close” and then adding that the deal may actually be already done. We’ve been talking a lot about backup outfielders around here lately, and you may have noticed that Johnson’s name didn’t come up in my post about available players earlier this week. That’d be because Johnson is a righty hitter, which goes against everything we’d been hearing that the Dodgers were looking for a lefty bat. That could have big repercussions on the rest of the roster, but more on that in a second.

Johnson is a 33-year-old native of Riverside who’s spent the last seven seasons in the bigs with the Blue Jays (five) and the Cubs (two). He’s got a reputation as having some speed, though he’s stolen just 35 bases in his career. Johnson had a career year as Toronto’s everyday left fielder in 2006 (.319/.390/.479) followed by a brutal year in 2007 (.236/.305/.320),  which led to his release by Toronto and two average-ish years in Chicago as a 4th outfielder (mainly in center) and defensive replacement.

For his career, Johnson has a .282/.344/.411 line, for a 95 OPS+. Despite being a guy with a reputation as a quality defender, UZR has him as below average in both center and right, though above average in left.

I’m somewhat unimpressed with Johnson on the whole, especially coming off a broken foot which ruined his 2009. That said, the Dodger outfield has two big needs. First, they need someone who can be a plus defender in left to spot for Manny, which Johnson clearly can. Second, though few people want to admit it, they need someone who can replace Andre Ethier against lefties, because Ethier is useless against fellow southpaws. Johnson fits that role perfectly – for this career, he’s lousy against righties (.707 OPS), but is just fine against lefties (.841 OPS). That split was even more pronounced in 2009. If you’ve got lefty-killers Manny and Kemp, and replace Ethier with Johnson, that’s an outfield lefties should be terrified of.

So assuming that the money isn’t big and the term is just one year, I’m okay with this idea. Sure, I’d like to see Xavier Paul just like the rest of you, but I understand that he might need playing time in the minors more than anything after how much time he missed in 2009 due to injuries.

The real question is, what does this do to the rest of the bench? Sure, it’s possible that a 5th outfielder like Paul or Jason Repko could be kept, but with Jamey Carroll and Casey Blake each having past outfield experience in a pinch, I find that unlikely. In particular for Repko, this seems to be a death blow, since Johnson does everything Repko does, and does it a little better. No, the real impact of Reed Johnson (should this signing actually occur, of course), is probably going to be felt by Blake DeWitt and Doug Mientkiewicz.

Going with Johnson rather than a lefty bat means the Dodger bench is likely to be extremely righty-heavy, as Johnson, Brad Ausmus, Carroll, and Ronnie Belliard all bat from that side. Assuming that Paul is unlikely to break camp with the team, the Dodgers will need at least one lefty bat, but much of this depends on DeWitt. If he breaks camp as the starting second baseman, then Mientkiewicz would seem to have the edge on the fifth and final bench role – however, that would then mean that the Dodgers are comfortable with Carroll and/or DeWitt as the backup shortstops. If DeWitt doesn’t win the job, he’s likely to go back to AAA rather than ride the bench. That would allow the Dodgers room to carry both Mientkiewicz and a backup shortstop like Nick Green or Chin-Lung Hu, but it would also sentence them to a Belliard/Carroll situation at second base.

Either way, it should be interesting to see how the bench shakes out. And due to his outstanding splits against lefties to spell Ethier, I’d be fine with seeing Johnson added to it.

A Preemptive Strike

January 29, 2010 at 4:04 pm | In Garrett Anderson | 6 Comments

Remember the other day, when I went through some options the Dodgers might be interested in for the role of lefty outfielder off the bench? One name I didn’t mention was the corpse of Garrett Anderson, because, well, why would I? I didn’t mention Marlon Anderson either, but he’s out there too.

I’d hoped to ignore that Garrett even exists, but both Yahoo’s Tim Brown and SI’s Jon Heyman are tweeting that the Dodgers are showing interest in him for a bench role. No one should be surprised that I think this is ridiculous, but it’s not for the reasons you think.

Well, not only the reasons you think. Yes, I don’t like him because he’s old (38 in June). Yes, I don’t like him because he’s coming off the worst year of his career despite having just moved to the easier league (.705 OPS, the third year in a row that decreased). Yes, I don’t like him because he is by all accounts a horrible fielder (-16.5 UZR/150 last year). Hey, a senior citizen who can’t hit or field? Sign me up?!

But what I like even less than the fact that Garrett Anderson is a terrible baseball player is the idea of Garrett Anderson. Let’s say he was where he was three or four years ago, when he was past his peak but still an average-ish hitter. That’s still valuable, but you’re not playing that guy over Manny, Kemp or Ethier, right? Nor was his glove so good that he’s really a huge upgrade over Manny in the late innings, agreed? And since he’s not much of a LF, you’re sure not going to put him into center or right to rest those guys either.

Because of the way the Dodger outfield is built, what you need more than anything is a speed type who can get on base and play above-average defense at all three positions. Juan Pierre wasn’t that guy because of his arm, and if Garrett Anderson from 2005 couldn’t be that guy, then Garrett Anderson of 2010 (the one who is well past his expiration date) sure as hell isn’t either.

Now, these are just rumors, so let’s not bash the team just yet. It’s just that bringing in a guy who doesn’t fit the needs at all, rather than giving a younger player like Xavier Paul or Jason Repko a chance, or even bringing in a young vet like Gabe Gross, makes no sense whatsoever.

Clearly, I don’t think this is going to happen, so don’t lose any sleep over it. I just want it out there in case it does. You never thought you’d hear me say this, but (since Heyman reported that the Dodgers and Angels could be in play), let’s go Angels!

You Can Never Have Too Many Guys Named “Timo”

January 28, 2010 at 11:02 am | In John Koronka, Timo Perez | 10 Comments

Ken Gurnick tweets that the Dodgers have signed two more veterans to nonroster contracts with invites to camp: outfielder Timo Perez and pitcher John Koronka.

You’ll get no complaint from me on these non-guaranteed contracts to guys who are likely to be AAA fodder at best; usually I wouldn’t even bother to mention them. (Though as Jay Jaffe correctly points out, they’re likely useful only as organ donors.) For the sake of completion and to help pass the long, dark winter, here’s who these guys are…

Timo Perez. 35 in April, a lefty outfielder who once got some regular playing time for the Mets in the early part of the decade. He hasn’t played in the big leagues since 2007 with the Tigers, and he’s got a career line of .269/.308/.382. He wasn’t even in any team’s system last year, putting up good numbers for Veracruz in the Mexican League. However, what’s most intriguing about him is the sponsorship his baseball-reference page has:

The 2000 WS Met OF is a testament to how great a manager Bobby Valentine was. He got the Mets to a World Series with this man as his leadoff hitter. Timo Perez’s non-hustle in game 1 set the tone for a 00’s decade of futility. Why Timo, why?

Look at that – I found something interesting to say about Timo Perez. Who knew?

John Koronka. He’ll turn 30 this year, he’s a lefty, and holy hell am I having a hard time saying anything nice about him. In parts of 4 seasons with 3 teams, he’s got a career 6.25 ERA. The only time he really had an extended stint in the bigs was in 2006 with Texas, when he started 23 games, but put up a 5.69 ERA and a 1.536 WHIP. Both marks are the best season marks of his career. He doesn’t strike people out (4.4 K/9) and he doesn’t avoid walks (3.8 BB/9).

It’s not like he’s found more success in the minors, either. A career 4.41 ERA isn’t great, and his 2009 was brutal – in 30 games (23 starts) for Florida’s AAA team, he was 4-10 with a 4.83 ERA and 1.570 WHIP, allowing more than a homer per game.

Man, he sounds unqualified to even try out for the Isotopes. How is he worth the time, exactly?

So Who’s Next?

January 26, 2010 at 7:11 pm | In Alfredo Amezaga, Endy Chavez, Gabe Gross, Randy Winn | 12 Comments

Nearly lost in all of the excitement over today’s confounding signing of Ronnie Belliard (though Dylan Hernandez says it isn’t guaranteed) and somewhat disappointing signing of Brad Ausmus was this tweet from Ken Gurnick:

The Dodgers are still looking to add a left-handed hitting outfielder to the bench.

You can read a lot into this. Most likely, it means that Blake DeWitt just earned himself a trip back to AAA, because having Ronnie Belliard and Jamey Carroll on the bench makes no sense, so if that forces DeWitt down to the minors then the Dodgers don’t have a lefty bat off the bench. It could also mean that Jason Repko and Xavier Paul have almost no shot at making the roster, since it’s likely the Dodgers carry just one backup outfielder.

But what I’m mostly interested in right now is, who? Let’s assume that we’re talking about free agents, since teams are unlikely to want to dump a power-hitting lefty outfielder, and the Dodgers probably wouldn’t want to trade for one anyway.

TrueBlueLA (jokingly, I hope and assume) offers up the names of the corpses of Garrett Anderson and Jim Edmonds, who is choosing between two unnamed teams. Otherwise, looking at the list of available outfielders… let’s just say, it’s not pretty. The most prominent lefty outfielder still available is Johnny Damon, who’s certainly not going to accept a pure backup role or the limited funds the Dodgers have left. Other viable lefty options include…

Randy Winn. Winn’s actually a switch-hitter, which is nice. He’s also an original Devil Ray (!) who’s 35 and coming off his worst season in a decade (.671 OPS), which is much less nice. Still, he’s a pretty fantastic outfielder (20.1 and 16.6 in UZR/150 the last two years) and he’s been a solid hitter for years, before his 2009 downturn. I actually wouldn’t hate this, assuming it was a one-year deal at the right price. Wednesday update: Winn signed with the Yankees.

Endy Chavez. Chavez, when healthy, is one of the – if not the best – fielding outfielders in the game. Seriously, look at his UZR numbers at FanGraphs and bow to his awesomeness. Unfortunately, he’s not much of a hitter (OPS+ the last three years of 84, 69, and 80) and he blew out his left knee last July. At 32, it’s hard to say what the knee injury will do to his defense, and if he can’t be an outstanding glove, then he’s not worth having at all. Pass.

Gabe Gross. Now here’s an interesting one, pointed out to me by Twitter follower TheJonLee. Gross is 30, just got non-tendered by Tampa, and hit just .227 last year. So why should we care? FanGraphs just ran an article about the lack of interest he’s received this offseason. Here’s the relevant passage:

And yet, even in this down season, Gross still was worth a pro-rated 1.5 wins per 600 plate appearances. CHONE and Marcel both expect for him to return to roughly average with the bat, and even accounting for regression on defense, Gross is a good bet for another 1.5 WAR/150 G season.

Eventually, some team will land a great asset in Gross, as no raise he gets will approach the $5M-$7M value that he is likely to provide. It’s only a matter of time until we find out which team that is.

Like the first two names, Gross is an excellent defender, so if his bat does bounce back, he could be very valuable. I’m not sure I like him more than Winn, just due to Winn’s track record.

Alfredo Amezaga. This is the scariest name on the list, if only because we know the Dodgers have previously shown interest in him. Remember what I said at the time?

What, going after any old 32-year-old who can’t hit isn’t enough, we need to find one who’s coming off major experimental knee surgery? To say that Amezaga isn’t an offensive threat is understating the situation; in parts of 8 seasons spanning nearly 1500 PA, his line is a sparkling .251/.311/.341. Do we really think Chin-Lung Hu couldn’t put up that line in the bigs?

Amezaga’s terrible bat and recent injury scare the hell out of me. Now, the one benefit with him is not only is he a plus defender in the outfield, he’s also got experience at shortstop. If you carry Amezaga, you can save a roster spot and you probably don’t need to suffer through Nick Green. On the other hand, is that worth having his lousy bat rather than someone with more potential, like Winn or Gross?

I’m not sure I’d prefer any of these guys to the lefty outfielder the Dodgers already have – Xavier Paul. But I could see the argument for Winn, Gross, or – I suppose – Amezaga. Thoughts?

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.