Did You Want A.J. Pierzynski As Your Catcher?
January 30, 2011 at 9:05 am | Posted in A.J. Pierzynski, Rod Barajas | 47 CommentsI’m not sure this is exactly news – I’m pretty sure we’d heard something similar to this a while ago – but I don’t remember discussing it here previously. Let’s ponder the alternate universe that could have been had the events described in today’s Chicago Tribune played out:
A few days later, as Pierzynski was waiting for Dodgers owner Frank McCourt to approve language in a contract proposal, Sox assistant general manager Rick Hahn and agent Steve Hilliard reached agreement on a two-year, $8 million deal before Pierzynski could tell the Dodgers he would accept their offer.
That allowed the Sox to turn from Olivo, who had them on his short list. He ended up with a two-year, $7 million contract with the Mariners less than a week after Pierzynski returned to the Sox.
“It all came together in a 15-minute span,” Pierzynski said. “I was pretty much resigned to the fact I wasn’t coming back. (h/t MLBTR)
In the same way that Aubrey Huff was reportedly almost the new Dodger first baseman (or left fielder), A.J. Pierzynski was almost the new Dodger catcher, thus satifisfying the continued lust for aging ex-Giant veterans.
I’m mostly kidding about the Giant part – Pierzysnki played just one of his thirteen MLB seasons in San Francisco, coming over from Minnesota in one of the worst trades in baseball history – but certainly not the aging veteran part, as he’s 34 and coming off of a .300 OBP season. My initial thoughts at reading this were, well, let’s just say not ones of happiness.
So while it’s no secret that I wasn’t thrilled with giving Rod Barajas $3.25m for next season, does it turn out that since his was for less money, seemingly coming off a better year, that Barajas’ deal was actually the lesser of two evils? Let’s find out, and let me preface this by saying the fact that Pierzynski has a reputation throughout the game as an instigator is irrelevant to whether he’s a good ballplayer, and besides, that’s generally the type you despise on other teams but love on your own.
Let’s start on offense, where Pierzynski’s career worst 2010 (.688 OPS, 83 OPS+) doesn’t quite stack up to Barajas’ .731 and 97. But there’s mitigating factors there; Barajas had nearly 170 fewer PA, and his line is largely fueled by his completely unsustainable fluky debut as a Dodger. At the time he was dumped by the Mets, his OPS was .677, good for an 82 OPS+, or basically identical to Pierzynski. To avoid the vagaries of one fluky stretch, let’s look back over the last three years:
Barajas: 1176 PA, .237/.277/.418 83 OPS+ b-ref oWAR: 2.4
Pierzysnki: 1512 PA, .284/.315/.410 88 OPS+ b-ref oWAR: 4.2
Pierzynski has clearly been the more effective batter, in a greater sample size, over the last three seasons. Not much argument there. Defense, as we know, is much harder to quantify, but even moreso among catchers. FanGraphs has each of them as essentially average over 2008-10; baseball-reference rates Barajas as slightly above-average, with Pierzynski slightly below, though neither to such extents that it’s really meaningful. Even less meaningful to me are caught stealing numbers, highly dependent as they are on pitchers, but since I know someone will ask, Barajas was at 34%, 34%, and 15% the last three years. (Worth noting that the first two years each came in Toronto, while the last year was split between the Mets and Dodgers). Pierzynski comes in at 18%, 23%, and 26%, which again doesn’t really tell you anything.
I’ve never thought much of A.J. Pierzysnki, and I have to admit I’m somewhat surprised to say that this exercise has convinced me that he’s clearly the better choice than Barajas, without even noting that he’s more than a year younger. Of course, it’s not exactly a high bar to set – Barajas is pretty lousy – and that doesn’t mean that Pierzysnki is all that great himself.
On a one-year deal, I don’t think there’s any question who you’d rather. But Pierzysnki ended up getting two years, and more than twice the guaranteed money. It’s not as though the Dodgers have a young catcher ready for 2012, though, so assuming the Dodgers would have signed Dioner Navarro as a backup regardless, who would you have rather seen as the starter? The lefty-swinging Pierzysnki, historically better but coming off a poor year, for two years? Or the righty Barajas, historically awful, coming off of a fluky Dodger debut, for just one? Or forget Navarro entirely and try to hook up two of the only six A.J.’s in MLB history on the same position on the same club?
47 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a Reply
How Many McCourt Sins?
MSTI on the web
MSTI Library
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Despite being so easy to dislike, Pierzynski has had a better career than Barajas. However, the wear and tear of catching many more innings than Barajas make Pierzynski a gamble on a multi-year deal. Pierzynski has been a pretty decent hitter his entire career, but his OBP is horrid because he doesn’t draw walks.
I’d have liked AJ and Barajas with the one-year $1.2M contract Barajas deserved.
And, wow! That was one of the all time one sided deals…AJ & cash for Boof Bonser, Francisco Liriano, and Joe Nathan.
Comment by SamAdams— January 30, 2011 #
Why spend big bucks on either guy? Ellis could step in and be an average defender and suck with the bat for cheap.
All in all, after another lousy offseason of valuing the “veteran presence” over everything else, I’m out as a Dodgers fan until Ned is gone. No more ticket packages, no more Dodger dogs. I’m going to root for a team with a GM that values players the way I do. Dodger fan my entire life, Thanks Ned.
Comment by @BrocNessMonster— January 30, 2011 #
Broc, I could come in and suck with the bat, too, for cheap. Pierzynski does put the bat on the ball but hits a lot of them on the ground. Plus his OBA last season was a very Barajas-like .292. Pierzynski has been fairly consistent but, like you say Mike, with the excessive AB’s over the years, the end could come quickly. I also think that Barajas will give you better “D” behind the plate. All this because Ned Colletti couldn’t go to bed without getting a starting catcher. Like some of the greatest baseball bloggers in the country say on this very site, “Good things come for those who wait.” And hard to believe that Barajas is making almost 60% more then Manny Ramirez. Some things just shouldn’t be!
Comment by Pete Sweeney— January 30, 2011 #
But you can’t play league average defense.
Comment by @BrocNessMonster— January 30, 2011 #
Great call by you!
Comment by Pete Sweeney— January 30, 2011 #
I have no feeling about Pierzynski vs Barajas either way. They’re both starting catchers in the major leagues and each has had some success. They’re both overpayed so I will lean to the guy with less years. The Dodgers may be happy in the end that they didn’t employ Pierzynski not always the most clubhouse friendly guy who’s made his share of enemies along the way. The Dodgers may revel in the relative quiet of Rod Barajas! I also have a feeling that the team may also enjoy Barajas’ 20 HR potential. A guy that’s averaged 17 homers and 63 rbi’s the last 3 seasons. Yes he has a paltry .239 career average which matches the weight that Pedro Alvarez has put on this off-season. But his 36 homers the past 2 seasons are 6th most at the demanding position he plays. And they don’t call them the tools of ignorance for nothing. And, by the way, he does look like the before picture of Pablo Sandoval!
Comment by Abner Clarke— January 31, 2011 #
Saying Barajas is making 60% more than Manny is committing the same fallacy as saying that Matt Guerrier is making infinitely more than Sandy Koufax.
Comment by Bip— January 31, 2011 #
Peter, when you say some of the greatest and best baseball bloggers in the country, you could be talking about every gentleman and lady that writes on this site. I wish some would blog on one of my sites. But I’m not here to raid the refrigerator, I’m here to talk about Rod Barajas. And, believe me, Barajas has raided a few refrigerators in his day. Next o the word “catcher” in the dictionary, is a picture of Rod Barajas. I mean, this guy looks like a catcher. In fact it’s hard to tell when he has the mask on! He reminds me of a rich man’s Sal Fasano, another guy that was born to wear a catcher’s mask. And, preferably, to keep it on. If Barajas was asked to catch all 162 games in the season he would do so. It’s the way he was bought up and while doing it, he’d lose 3 1/2 inches in height. He’s also a guy that runs like he’s in an eternal 3-legged race. You know, when you tie your ankle together with another guy back in grammar school! It’s just that Barajas has never untied his! The one thing I mentioned on this site (and you could look it up) and I’ll mention on mine is that Barajas should be made only to swing the bat after strike one. Yes, he’ll more than likely be batting in the 8th spot but the Dodgers need Barajas to do better than the .291, .343 (in only 122 AB), .284, .261, and .270 OBA over the past 5 years. I would also implore Juan Uribe to take the same tack. In one of the 7 fantasy leagues I play in, and the only mixed league, I noticed my 2 starting C’s last year were Pierzynski and Barajas (Pudge Rodriguez was the only other C on my roster). That draft takes a month and starts next week. I’ll be throwing both back but will try to get Barajas back. The Dodgers will be glad that they did too!
Comment by george hubschman— January 31, 2011 #
You make a great point about the professionalism of the bloggers on this site. I wish, George, that you would follow in their footsteps. But you’ve always been a “do as I do not as I say” kind of guy. I like the idea of Barajas taking until he get strike one. But, don’t you think that pitchers will figure that out by the 7th inning of the first game played. I mean this is a guy that’s been known to swing at a pitch from the on-deck circle. But he is a gamer and a contract rate of over 80% the last 5 years. I don’t know why more managers, or any for that matter, have some of their free swingers take pitches. Keep that take sign on. A good example would be a guy like Jeff Francoeur. But before you get all gushy over Barajas, George, look at the last number on his stat line as you peruse his career stats! A .239 career average. In comparison Juan Uribe is Ichiro Suzuki. Here’s one for you. Hank Blalock is unsigned. What about him as a LH hitting 3B?
Comment by Pete Sweeney— January 31, 2011 #
I just can’t figure out Hank Blalock. He put together some good years for the Rangers averaging 29 homers from ’03-’05. He added 25 more for them in 2009 while batting .234. He’s only 30 years old but doesn’t look to have a job heading into the 2011 season. It seems that he could help a team as a platoon player. With Mark Teixeira back in the early/mid 2000′s, they were supposed to lead the Rangers to the promised land. The Rangers went to their first World Series in 2010 but Teixeira and Blalock were no where to be found. Injuries have played a part in Blalock’s fall to the dark side! 22 HR and 71 RBI in 466 AB in ’07-’08 set him back. But he did hit .285 during that troubled time. Of course Blalock was released by the Rays at the end of June 2010 having batted 63 times with a HR, 7 RBI, and 8 R. I just never thought that at the age of 30, he’d be looking for a job. His Triple-A numbers with the Rays were fruitful, a .349 BA in 109 AB with 4 HR, 24 RBI, 18 R, and a .910 OPS. I was sure that his foray into the minors would be a good impetus toward a season of bounty with the Rays. And he was handed the keys to the kingdom, the starting DH job vs RHP. I really don’t know what happened to him. His last full season in 2009, as I’ve point out, he batted .234 in 462 AB with 25 HR, 66 RBI, 62 R, a 108/26 K/BB, and a .734 OPS. He may catch on with another AL team in need of a DH but I wouldn’t hold my breath. I don’t know if his brand of fielding would play to an N.L. venue.
Comment by Abner Clarke— January 31, 2011 #
What we need to do is put something in a time capsule and, in 100 years when we’re all long gone, exhume this box or crate or whatever we put it in, and show it to the baseball fans of the future. And I’ve come up with the perfect idea, Peter. To show the “footage” of Rod Barajas’ only career triple, an anomaly that took place in 2004 with Texas. I’d like to add the Bengie Molina SB from this years’ playoffs, the 4th of his career. And I’d like to have someone film the reaction of the fans watching. Because they would be saying to themselves, “What the hell is this we’re watching?” Not a terrible idea of Blalock, Pete, and the Dodgers have signed worse this off-season, that’s for sure. But if they’re going to go with the rare LH hitting 3B, a al Eddie Matthews, George Brett, or Wade Boogs, I’d rather see them go with Eric Chavez. Yes, he’s Blalock equal with the bat but he’s Blalock’s master with the glove. And there’s nothing sweeter than some great play down at the hot corner. Yes, I remember the World Series where Brooks Robinson was the master down there. Fielding is something that they can’t take away form you! Darrell Evans wasn’t a bad one either!
Comment by george hubschman— January 31, 2011 #
Maybe this is depressing, but we could import the ownership and management currently in place in Pittsburg, and I still wouldn’t say what you said. To me, it defeats the purpose of rooting for a team if there is anything that can discourage you from rooting for them. Seeing the Dodgers win is worth nothing if I haven’t suffered through their losses (and have I suffered! I was born the year after ’88, so I still don’t know what it’s like for my team to win the title.)
Comment by Bip— January 31, 2011 #
I´m going to give Rod the benefit of the doubt just ´cause he has opened to the media about liking LA. Besides defensively I don´t think LAD needs a J. Posada like C. Rod will be fine…
Comment by D.O´Meany— January 30, 2011 #
I’d gladly take the Dodgers overpaying Barajas than them signing Pierzynski.
Comment by Dustin Nosler— January 30, 2011 #
I hear a lot of “hell no” to AJP, both here and on Twitter, and it’s not that I necessarily disagree, I just haven’t yet heard good reasons why. “Because he’s a jerk” does not apply.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— January 30, 2011 #
When AJ was with the Giants, it was reported that he had a physical confrontation during which he kneed then Giants trainer Stan Conte in the groin. Wonder how that reunion would have gone. I have always assumed that the fight was at least part of the reason the Giants released him after one season. Along with his other run-ins with teammates, that is why there is much animosity towards him.
As a catcher he’s just okay, probably a step better than our three options for this year. His 2011 contract pays him $2M, but then $6M in 2012, when he will be a likely liability.
Comment by SamAdams— January 30, 2011 #
1. Pierzynski would have received a multi-year deal for more money than Barajas.
2. Barajas is historically better at throwing out runners — 32 percent to 25 percent. It’s reasonable to assume Barajas’ 2010 was an aberration.
3. Barajas’ power potential out of the No. 8 spot is more intriguing than Pierzynski’s declining on-base skills (.316 OBP over the last seven years). Barajas doesn’t get on base, but I think popping the occasional HR is more beneficial than a Pierzynski single or walk out of the No. 8 spot.
Just a few things I thought of.
Comment by Dustin Nosler— January 30, 2011 #
1) Yes, that’s fair – and he did.
2) I don’t put much stock into CS%, because it’s so dependent on the pitching staff holding runners on. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Barajas had the exact same number for 2 years in Toronto, then fell by more than half with a new team.
3) AJP does have a higher SLG% than Barajas over the last three years.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— January 30, 2011 #
Valid points.
I’d rather the Dodgers have just gone with Ellis and anyone else cheap. It’s not like Pierzynski, Barajas and Navarro are game-changers on either side of the ball. Might as well get similar production for peanuts.
But this is nothing new for Colletti. He just had to have his veteran goodness.
Comment by Dustin Nosler— January 30, 2011 #
Totally agree with you on that.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— January 30, 2011 #
+1 and +1 and to me if a guy is reported as being a big enough of a douche then it would matter in who i sign.
Comment by DodgersKings323— February 1, 2011 #
When two guys are pretty even performance wise (or both so bad that it doesn’t really matter), “Because he’s a jerk” totally applies.
I also wonder if “because he’s a jerk” applies to catchers slightly more than other positions, since catchers have to have a good relationship with pitchers in order to call a successful game. Obviously, great performance would trump that, but we’re not talking about great performance here, we’re talking about over-paying below average old guys.
Comment by Dave— February 1, 2011 #
I’ll take Barajas simply because of the power numbers. I don’t like that either one is in their mid 30′s, but for one year Barajas is my preference. $3.25 million is way too much, but what’s done is done.
Then again, having two AJ’s (Ellis and Pierzynski) as possible catchers on the roster would have been interesting.
Comment by Evan Bladh— January 30, 2011 #
I think that 2 years/$8mil for AJP is a much less obscene deal than the one that Barajas got. AJP can cause some problems but usually not for the team he is playing on. We can’t be sure if his bat really is in decline but the catching market was (and is) thin and he would have fit the role of starting catcher. I am partial to the White Sox but, as objectively as I can say it, AJP at $4mil a year isn’t a bad deal. Barajas’ still looks that way.
Comment by Oral Kershyster— January 30, 2011 #
How come no one has mentioned Olivo as a choice? He’s a solid defensive catcher, has the best OBP out of the other 4 catchers mentioned and prolly could have been had for 3mil.
Comment by juan— January 30, 2011 #
Or how about Russell Martin for that matter for a team that needs good on base percentage?
Comment by Rusty— January 30, 2011 #
Russell who?
Comment by Bip— January 31, 2011 #
Miguel Olivo’s career OBP is .283, pretty much the same as Barajas….last year he “ballooned” to .315, but it was quite an increase over his career numbers.
Comment by Jon#7#22— January 30, 2011 #
I think Ellis should get a chance to prove himself, and I have no problem with big rod as a backup. Pierzynski would have been fine for that role too. and as for navarro I beleive he should be at some kind of fat camp.
Comment by format— January 31, 2011 #
You have no problem with 3.25 million dollars for a backup? I sure as hell have a problem with that.
Comment by Dave— February 1, 2011 #
and what would you have done? I didnt say I liked the terms of contract, just the idea of big rod returning as a backup. there was no one else. who9 would you rather have fatty navarro?
Comment by format— February 1, 2011 #
Oh, you’re saying Rod as a backup, but with a backup type contract… THAT I can agree with. I misunderstood, sorry.
Comment by Dave— February 2, 2011 #
Looking at how this team is constructed, my guess is the pitching coaches, and the pitching staff, might have made the choice of Barajas. Let’s face it, there is not much difference offensively between all these guys and the Dodgers are a team that is going to try to outpitch the NL West and hope that Furcal, Kemp, Loney and Ethier have better years.
I did notice that a few of the Fantasy sites are predicting much better years for Kemp and Ethier. How the heck either of them get 100 ribies is beyond me. Who are they going to drive in 100 times? This looks like an OB challenged team. Hope I am wrong about that.
Comment by Rory— January 31, 2011 #
This article is another way of saying the same thing – The Dodgers were idiots for letting Russell Martin go.
Comment by Alireza— January 31, 2011 #
No, I don’t agree with that.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— January 31, 2011 #
At over $4 million per, this is the one move by Colletti I can be behind. Martin, like James Loney this year, would’ve been highly overpaid for his production. Sure, Barajas is well overpaid, but Ned spent the dividend on relief pitchers which is another example that he doesn’t get it. Simply put, unless Barajas channels Joe Mauer, Uribe channels Chase Utley and James Loney stops being a hole in the lineup, we are going to be nearly as offensively challenged as the ’65 Dodgers.
Comment by grabarkewitz— January 31, 2011 #
Martin knows the staff better than any catcher possibly can, especially Billingsley, Kuroda and Broxton. He is a significantly better defensive player than Barajas and a better offensive player as well, especially in an area this team has gone from having a surplus of to a dearth, OBP. He also showed a willingness to get better, as shown by all the work he and Ausmus did.
Also, I still contend that Mattingley’s coaching played a huge part in his offensive decline.
Comment by Alireza— January 31, 2011 #
I’m with ya, the money saved wasn’t really put to good use so who cares if we spent a little more for J.Mart. I vote george hubschman for best new poster!
Comment by DodgersKings323— February 1, 2011 #
Don’t say that about George. He already has a big head. But, honestly and unequivocally, no one in the country knows more about baseball, both real and fantasy then George Hubschman. If you ever get a chance, DodgerKings, check out rotoimbeciles.com. You won’t stop laughing at the blogging that goes on in those forums. George has one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel, so give the guy a read. I played in 2 fantasy leagues with him last year with some of the best fantasy minds in the country and George wired both leagues right from April! I have a feeling also that the Dodger fans will really enjoy Juan Uribe flash the leather. He’s that good!
Comment by Pete Sweeney— February 1, 2011 #
Pete, thanks for the accolades but I’m not dead yet! And remind me that when I do die, if Ned Colletti isn’t available, I would like you to do the eulogy at my funeral. Just cut and paste what you just said, that will be fine. I don’t require much in the way of kudos. He was a good family fan, something lie that will suffice! Free form blogging, like old-time FM radio, is becoming a thing of the past. That’s what makes a site like this one a great one. In all my years of doing what I do, I’ve never seen a more passionate and knowledgeable fan base as this site! The bloggers here should be proud of themselves and this team. In my months here, I’ve grown to become a Dodger fan and wish them nothing but the best. You make a good point about the defense of Uribe. I got to see him in this year’s play-offs and he makes the tough play look easy. Dodger fans will have a lot to look forward to once the season begins. I’ll tell you something else, you will grow to appreciate the lunch-pail mentality of a guy like Barajas. He leaves it on the field every game and I still think, albeit the money is high, that it was a good signing. I would have liked the timing to be better, though! But that’s nitpicking. I would also like to see Casey Blake go out with a bang. As a late bloomer we only saw glimpses of what he could do! And let’s give Loney another chance. Maybe he comes into camp with a renewed vigor because with Mattingly, these guys could flourish. And the division is always there for the taking. We’ll need the starting pitching, i.e Billingsley and Garland, to keep the team in games as well! And Ted Lilly will be fine, he’s consistent and may get a little better with age.
Comment by george hubschman— February 1, 2011 #
I don’t want to go through this again, Alireza, because it’s been discussed ad nauseum, but you do seem to be ignoring the fact that Martin is coming off of knee and hip injuries, and that no one knows how much he’ll be able to play.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— February 1, 2011 #
While that’s true Mike, don’t you think on a Yankee team, in that Yankee lineup, he will improve?
The Dodgers, from the top down, appear to be a dysfunctional group. At least last year they were. Martin was injured, yes, but as the undeclared captain of that bunch, maybe he felt pressure to do too much. He won’t have that kind of pressure in Gnu Yourk. I think James has him about right…. 130 games – .266 with .367 OBP and 68 runs scored, and a positive defensive WAR. If so, all of those numbers will beat whoever our starter is. Yeah, Martin costs more, but the Yankees don’t care.
Comment by Rory— February 1, 2011 #
Didn`t you all read about how Russy didn`t give us a hundred percent last season and how his head wasn`t in it for whatever reason..Thanks for the memories and don`t let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya! Also, Russy, please feel free to continue grounding into inning ending rally killing double plays while screaming obscenities every time you play the Dodgers..It will be just like old times!!
Comment by DannyB— February 2, 2011 #
It’s revolting enough that McCourt’s getting in the sack with News Corp. Pierzynki would have been too much. What a horse’s ass.
Comment by aprilglaspie— February 1, 2011 #
[...] atrocious outfield defense and considered what things may have looked like if the near-misses for aging vets Aubrey Huff , Michael Young, and A.J. Pierzynski hadn’t been misses at all. We’ve [...]
Pingback by Six Reasons for Optimism in 2011 « Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— February 14, 2011 #
[...] atrocious outfield defense and considered what things may have looked like if the near-misses for aging vets Aubrey Huff , Michael Young, and A.J. Pierzynski hadn’t been misses at all. We’ve fretted that [...]
Pingback by None of This Should Have Come As A Surprise « Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— June 20, 2011 #
[...] atrocious outfield defense and considered what things may have looked like if the near-misses for aging vets Aubrey Huff , Michael Young, and AJ Pierzynski hadn’t been misses at all. We’ve fretted that [...]
Pingback by MSTI’s 2011 in Review: Management « Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— November 25, 2011 #