The MSTI 15-Step Plan for 2012
October 31, 2011 at 9:00 am | Posted in Erik Bedard, Jamey Carroll, Javy Guerra, Logan Morrison, Pedro Baez, Prince Fielder, Rich Harden, Vicente Padilla, Wilson Betemit | 103 CommentsIt’s time for another edition of the yearly plan, in which I put on my GM hat and try to piece together a competitive 2012 club using realistic payroll and player restrictions. Before we start, I have to be honest: this was so much harder to do than it’s ever been. In previous years, I’ve looked forward to putting on the GM hat and thinking up interesting and realistic ideas to improve the next year’s team, but doing it this time was a struggle. Though the uncertain budget thanks to the McCourt mess is part of it, an even bigger problem is that there’s just not much out there. The free agent list is sparse, and while there’s values to be had in the trade market, the Dodgers have little of interest that they can move without opening up a new hole.
I thought about all kinds of possibilities. Perhaps the #5 starter hole could be filled by buying low (extremely low) on previously-successful veterans who have fallen out of favor and would be heavily subsidized, like Derek Lowe or John Lackey (before it was announced he’d miss 2012). Maybe there was some way to get the Red Sox to give up Jed Lowrie or Will Middlebrooks to help stabilize second or third base. Perhaps a package including Chad Billingsley could be sent to Kansas City for Alex Gordon, though the Royals are unlikely to be interested in such a deal and that would just open up another rotation hole anyway. Maybe 2005 Jeff Kent could rise from the dead and return to the Dodgers, because the second base market is a total mess. Is it worth believing that Aaron Hill or Kelly Johnson can come back from down years to reclaim past glory at the keystone? Or maybe you could go cheap elsewhere and pray that Aramis Ramirez, nearing his mid-30s, is worth the ~$40m he’s likely to get to play third base?
In the end, little of it made sense, at least in any way that would be realistic for the other team, because I like to think this blog isn’t the home of “I’ll trade you Mike MacDougal for Ian Kinsler!” type solutions. The Dodgers are boxed in by criminal ownership, too much dead money owed to long-departed players, ballooning payments to poor investments like Juan Uribe & Matt Guerrier, and outside alternatives that are less than ideal. Perhaps Ned Colletti wasn’t that far off when he suggested that he was generally okay with the current roster, because he had done this work already and knew that there was unlikely to be much movement.
Then again, perhaps he’s just not being creative.
******
The first question, of course, is how much do the Dodgers have to spend on payroll in 2012? It’s a question that’s almost impossible to answer right now, a problem Colletti has as much admitted to. In 2011, they spent about $98m on players, plus about $17m in “dead” money, for a total of ~$115m. Without revealing how much, this Tony Jackson interview with Ned Colletti claims that “all indications are it will be higher than the roughly $98 million it was this year.” Let’s guess that means an extra $5m, so that’ll put us to a $120m cap including the dead money. I’ve seen the arguments that the longer the ownership dispute drags on, the more likely it is that the payroll decreases by tens of millions of dollars, but I’m not buying it; it’s in no one’s best interest for the value of the Dodgers to go down any further than it already has, and MLB has been consistent about claiming it will be “business as usual” for the Dodgers this winter – whatever that means.
Of course, that doesn’t really mean there’s $120m available to spend. The Dodgers still have about $21m in deferred money committed to the dearly departed, including Manny Ramirez ($8m), Juan Pierre ($3m), Andruw Jones ($3.375m), Rafael Furcal ($3m), and Hiroki Kuroda ($2m), and also including the already-exercised buyouts of Casey Blake ($1.25m) and Jon Garland ($1.5m). So that $120m figure is already down to $99m.
Dead money: $120m – $21m = $99m
Then there’s the money already committed to members of the 2012 club, and here’s where the back-loaded contracts of Juan Uribe ($8m) & Matt Guerrier ($4.75m) really come back to bite us in the ass, making them look even more brutal than the day they were signed. While Ted Lilly at least finished 2011 strong, his salary increases from $7.5m to $12m in 2012, a whole more than I really want to pay him. That, plus the $9m owed to Chad Billingsley, eats up $33.7m of the $99m, leaving us with $65.3m to play with.
Committed money: $99m – $33.7m = $65.3m
But we’re not done yet, because several key members of the core are without contracts yet under team control in 2012. It’s sometimes difficult to guess what will come out of arbitration hearings, so for now we’ll go with Eric Stephen of TrueBlueLA‘s guesses that Clayton Kershaw will get $8m, Andre Ethier will get $12m, and Matt Kemp will get $13m. (The TBLA payroll sheet is an invaluable resource not just for this piece, but all year long.) I hate the idea of giving Ethier that much, but now, when his value is at a low, is no time to trade him. We’ll see about changing those numbers later, and there are definitely other arbitration decisions to be made, but the $33m we just said goodbye to means that with just seven spots on the roster set, we’ve already got $87.7m spoken for, leaving $32.3m to fill out 18 other spots. See how quickly $100m can go?
Arbitration money: $65.3m – $33m = $32.3m
Finally, let’s dedicate about $3m in minimum salary contracts to team-controlled 0-3 players who are almost certain to be on the roster next year – A.J. Ellis, Dee Gordon, Jerry Sands, Javy Guerra, Kenley Jansen, Josh Lindblom, Blake Hawksworth and Scott Elbert. Now we have fifteen spots at a cost of $90.9m, leaving us with $29.3m.
Controlled money: $32.3m – $3m = $29.3m
$29.3m, ten holes. What do you do? Here’s one man’s blueprint…
******
1) Sign OF Matt Kemp to a long-term deal.
This should be obvious and in no way arguable. It’s the absolute #1 priority of the winter, no matter what else happens. You can argue how much and over how many years – that’s a conversation for another time - but don’t forget that he’s still under team control for 2012, so the Dodgers retain some leverage. We’ll assume that whatever deal he gets is somewhat backloaded and settle on $12m for next year, more than he made in 2011 but less than he’d probably get in arbitration, which should be fine considering he’ll have the security of a long-term deal.
$29.3m +$1m = $30.3m (since I already accounted for him as $13m above)
2) Sign 1B Prince Fielder to a six-year, $140m deal.
I went back and forth on this one – a lot. I even wrote about the likelihood of Fielder or Albert Pujols arriving a few weeks ago and concluded that it was neither likely or advisable, simply because I don’t like the idea of tying up so much money into one player, especially when that’s going to need to happen for Kemp and Kershaw as well. Even just theoretically talking about it makes me a bit uncomfortable, because it’s so risky. If you want to make the argument that this money is best spent elsewhere, I’m more than open to it.
In the end, I settled on going for it in this exercise because the other options were simply so unattractive. Believe me, I had a whole lot of iterations of this article where I was trying to believe in James Loney and then working on other ways to upgrade. Since it’s hard to see any way to improve at 2B or 3B, your hopes for the infield were to either have to count on Loney to repeat the last six weeks of his season after four years of mediocrity, or overpay for a veteran like Derrek Lee or Lyle Overbay who is unlikely to be much better. There’s a big argument to be made that one year of Loney at $6m is a steal if he hits like he did to finish the season; there’s an even bigger argument to be made that if he doesn’t, you’re once again saddled with an infield that has almost no power whatsoever. If you’re going to try to contend in 2012, and I would argue that having Kemp & Kershaw means you are, then you need to make a move – in addition to the desperately needed positive PR that such a signing would bring.
Besides, it’s the perfect time to go after a Fielder because the traditional big spenders likely won’t be around to drive up the price. The Yankees and Red Sox are each heavily invested at first base and have bigger needs, especially in pitching. The Phillies are about to start a (hilarious) $125m extension with Ryan Howard; even though he’s hurt, their replacement there would be short-term, and the Cardinals will likely just retain Pujols. The Angels probably won’t jump in considering they already have both Mark Trumbo and Kendrys Morales on hand; the Rangers could be a fit but probably need to focus on pitching. You could definitely see the Cubs being interested, though it’s hard to know what their winter of transition will bring; the Braves definitely need a bat but seem happy with Freddie Freeman at first base. The best possibilities are probably Washington and Baltimore, but the Nats already have Michael Morse and Adam LaRoche under contract for first base and have been burned by the first year of Jayson Werth‘s massive deal; the O’s don’t even have a GM yet and probably have bigger concerns than first base. That’s not to say that Prince won’t get paid, because he will, just that it’s not likely to be the $200m+ figure I’ve seen thrown around.
In addition, Fielder’s relative youth (he’ll still be just 27 on Opening Day of 2012) means that the back-end of a six-year deal would be his age 32-33 seasons, not 35-36. That’s still young enough that you’ll be purchasing most of his prime, not most of his decline, and that’s a big deal considering the concerns about his body type. While I’m admittedly loathe to give up first round picks for free agents, Fielder at least has the potential to be the kind of franchise changer that could make it worth it (and yes, I’m looking at you, Orlando Hudson). Whether the 6/$140m is close or not – I really just made it up without an overwhelming amount of research, so it could be something like 7/$160m instead - it’ll clearly be backloaded, so we’ll start with $13.5m in 2012 as we wait a year or two for other obligations and the ownership crisis to clear. While there’s certainly a very good argument to be made that adding another huge long-term contract to a team that will need to pay Kemp and Kershaw is dangerous, there’s a lot of money coming off the books after 2013, when Lilly, Uribe, and Guerrier (combining to make about ~$25m that year) all figure to be gone, in addition to being free of further payments to Manny. That’s on top of the money you get back assuming that Ethier is no longer with the team after 2012.
$30.3m - $13.5m = $16.8m
3) Trade RP Javy Guerra, SP Chris Withrow, and 2B Ivan DeJesus to Florida for LF/1B Logan Morrison.
This is another one I went back and forth on a lot, initially considering Morrison for first base rather than left field. Then, after getting Fielder, I figured, what the hell – why not try for both? Morrison’s spat with Marlins management is well-known, leading to a brief demotion this summer, and with reports that ownership is ready to take more control over player decisions, it’s not hard to see them wanting to be rid of the outspoken Twitter hero as soon as they can. That makes him an appealing buy-low target, since as he enters his age-24 season, he’s coming off a 2010 in which he had a .390 OBP and a 2011 in which he hit 23 homers. (The obvious comeback there is, “well, he hasn’t done both at the same time, since he hit just 2 homers in 2010 and had a .330 OBP in 2011.” Both true, however his age and his minor league track record suggest otherwise, especially considering that much of his power loss in 2010 can be put on a broken wrist, an injury notorious for sapping power for at least a year, and his 2011 BABIP was quite low before ending the year with a fantastic September.)
Of course, “buy low” does not mean “trade garbage or expensive contracts to Florida”, because he’s low-priced and productive, and so that’s why I’m taking the possibly unpopular route of trading last season’s surprise rookie closer, Guerra. It’s not that I don’t like Guerra, because he was an out of nowhere success story, but if you’re making a trade, you need to deal from depth – and nowhere do the Dodgers have more depth than in young, righty relievers. Besides, Guerra’s high on my list for regression in 2012; his .261 BABIP was on the low side this year, his 4.07 xFIP was a lot less impressive than his 2.31 ERA, and his minor league history doesn’t shout superstar. That’s not to say that he can’t succeed or that I’m desperate to be rid of him, because that’s not true – just that saves are almost always overrated in the marketplace and it might be the best use of Guerra’s value to trade him at the peak of his perceived attractiveness, especially when the Dodgers have Kenley Jansen able to step in and several other young relievers ready to come up.
On the Florida side, they have a big hole in the bullpen thanks to the identity fraud scandal of Leo Nunez (or Juan Carlos Oviedo, Armen Tanzarian, Theodore Donald Karabotsos, or whatever he’s calling himself these days), and the Fish have never been big players in the market, so five more cost-controlled years of Guerra should be appealing. They also get a lottery ticket in Withrow, showing signs of life with 9.1 K/9 in AA last year, though still struggling with his control, and DeJesus, who seems to have little future in Los Angeles but shouldn’t be written off completely since he’s still only 24 and shows good on-base skills in the minors. (As always, the prospects could be replaced by anyone of similar value – it doesn’t have to be exactly these guys – but you get the idea. If they prefer Brian Cavazos-Galvez or Ethan Martin or Kyle Russell or someone instead, fine.)
$16.8m – $0m = $16.8m (Morrison would take Guerra’s 0-3 slot for a similar salary)
4) Don’t try to trade Andre Ethier – at least not now.
Believe me, there’s plenty of good reasons to move Ethier. He’s a bit overrated. He’s cranky. He’s coming off surgery. He can’t hit lefties. He’s not a great defender. When he’s a free agent after 2012, he’s a lower priority than Kemp and Kershaw, and not someone I want to sign to an expensive long-term deal as he enters his decline phase. I totally agree with all of this. However, now’s not the right time to do it. For all of those reasons plus the ~$12m cost for one year before losing him to free agency, I really don’t think the return is out there that we’d want. Even if teams would take the one year of Ethier for that price with all of the issues, it’s unlikely that anyone would give a top prospect in return.
Besides, I expect big things from Ethier in 2012. He’ll be healthy for the first time in a while, and headed into a contract year he should be especially motivated – and Ethier is exactly the type of “chip on my shoulder” player who really responds to that sort of thing. If he’s playing well and the Dodgers are out of it in July, you might be able to get a good prospect in return then (like the Mets getting Zack Wheeler for Carlos Beltran). If the Dodgers are still in it, you ride it out, try to win, and then collect two draft picks when he leaves.
$16.8m – $0m = $16.8m
5) Sign 3B/UT Wilson Betemit to a one-year, $1.5m deal.
Unfortunately, Uribe is going to be the starting third baseman in 2012. There’s just no way around it. Even if we didn’t have Fielder eating up a huge part of the hypothetical payroll, third base is just a black hole on the market, unless you want to overpay Ramirez or risk a ton of prospects on David Wright. Since Uribe’s going to get paid, he’s going to be the man, but you also can’t risk not having an alternative in case he repeats his 2011.
That’s a tough spot to fill. No one who thinks he’s a full-time starter is going to come to LA for a small contract and the possibility of riding the bench, but most of the available bench types are like Aaron Miles, stopgaps who provide little value. That brings us to Betemit, who I advocated acquiring in the 2011 plan. All he ended up doing was hit .285/.343/.452 for Kansas City and Detroit, albeit with subpar defense. But that’s kind of a perfect fit, isn’t it? Uribe may or may not be able to hit, but even in his lost 2011 he was a solid defender, and Betemit provides the yin to that yang. Besides, the switch-hitting Betemit has a massive platoon split (vs RHP, .865 OPS in 2011, .817 career; vs LHP, .607 OPS in 2011, .684 career) which makes him an intriguing bench piece and/or part-time replacement for Uribe. In emergencies, he can play first and second as well, nice flexibility even if it’s hopefully not needed. Betemit made $1m last year, so let’s give him a slight raise. (An alternative here is Eric Chavez, who I liked last season, if he chooses to play in 2012.)
$16.8m – $1.5m = $15.3m
6) Bring back C Rod Barajas on a one-year, $1.5m deal.
Let’s start with this: you absolutely cannot enter the season with A.J. Ellis & Tim Federowicz as your backstop duo, no matter what Ned Colletti says. Federowicz isn’t ready now (if he will be at all) and needs to play regularly at AAA. Even if you’re a bigger fan of him than I am, you still can’t get by with only two catchers who have combined for less than a full season of MLB play.
Now, I thought about Ramon Hernandez here, though I eventually decided against him because he’s a Type A free agent and may get a two-year deal. I thought about Ryan Doumit to add some switch-hitting pop, but was turned off by his atrocious defense and possible salary demands since he made over $6m last year. In the end, there’s no available difference maker who is really likely to matter, so even though I don’t really want to, we’ll take advantage of Barajas’ stated preference to remain a Dodger and let him do so at a discounted rate. It’s not sexy, and he’s not all that good, but he’s at least got power and the state of catching is so poor that a Barajas/Ellis duo could actually be slightly above average. On this team, Ellis starts 4-5 days a week, not Barajas.
$15.3m – $1.5m = $13.8m
7) Bring back 2B Jamey Carroll for two years and $4m.
This actually scares the hell out of me, and I don’t really like doing it, much as I like Carroll. He’s got absolutely zero power and he’ll be 38 in February; to be honest, I hate everything about this. That said, the second base market is absolutely god awful. My version of the Dodgers can neither afford nor count on Hill or Johnson, and Carroll at least offers on-base skills and decent enough defense. Along with Sellers, he’s also a fallback position in case Gordon flails or is injured; I don’t want to give Carroll two years, yet that’s probably what the market will demand. Ideally, he could get through one more year as a solid OBP guy, and then a better 2B option emerges for 2013, allowing Carroll to spend the second year as the utility guy he really ought to be.
$13.8m – $2m = $11.8m
8) Hedge your bets with Jerry Sands.
You’ve probably noticed that I’ve acquired a first baseman and a left fielder, which doesn’t leave a spot for Sands, who finished 2011 so well. In reality, when the Dodgers don’t get a player at either position, I’m more than fine with Sands getting first crack at left field. That said, he’s not enough of a slam-dunk prospect that you simply hand him the job with no backup plan better than a Tony Gwynn, so in this scenario he’ll be able to get playing time in both outfield corners, since Morrison and Ethier are both lefties (even moreso if Morrison is needed to fill in at first base from time to time), and as the main bat off the bench. If he continues to prove himself worthy, you let him step in for Ethier in right field when Andre is traded in July or moves on after 2012. Or, if that makes you uncomfortable, you let him play every day in AAA until injuries pile up.
$11.8m – $0m = $11.8m
9) Round out the bench with minimum-salary deals for IF Justin Sellers and OF Jamie Hoffmann.
Here’s where the big deal for Fielder bites you a little bit, because you no longer have the flexibility to carry much more than minimum salary types on the bottom of the roster. I would really have liked to have gone out and found some intriguing buy-low types like David DeJesus here; unfortunately, it’s just not feasible now. I’ve been pessimistic of Sellers’ ability to hit at the big league level, but he has a solid glove at both middle infield positions, and entering his age-26 season, he’s not enough of a prospect to worry about needing to play every day. Hoffmann is someone I’d like to do better than, yet he’ll be useful because this roster would desperately need a plus defender, and I’d prefer Hoffmann over Gwynn because he hits righty, which is preferable when you’ve got two starting lefty corner outfielders.
$11.8m – $0.8m = $11m
10) Bring back SP Hiroki Kuroda for one year and $9m ($2m deferred).
This is a bit risky, because Kuroda will be 37 years old in February and was slowed by neck pain for the last few weeks of the season. But he’s also coming off the best year of his career, and the Dodgers have a special gift here in that he’s almost certain to favor them over any other team (assuming he chooses to come back, of course). There’s also no one on the market likely to give the type of production we’ve seen from Kuroda for just a one-year deal, either, so if he’s willing to return, we should be happy to have him for one more season.
$11m – $7m = $4m
11) Sign SP Erik Bedard to a one-year, $2m deal, with the opportunity to add a good deal of incentives.
Bedard is almost never healthy for a full season (missed 2010, hasn’t thrown more than 129 innings since 2007), yet is almost always effective when he is. We saw that again this year, where he missed 45 days with two separate injuries (both to his knee, rather than his arm) but put up a 3.62 ERA that was matched by the advanced stats and a 125/48 K/BB for Seattle and Boston, making $1m while doing so.
As he reaches his age-33 season, and with his history, it’s unlikely that anyone is offering him big guaranteed money this winter, so he could be available for a low base price plus incentives. (It’s also possible that I’m completely low-balling this.)
If we accept the fact that he absolutely will miss some time and don’t get disappointent when it happens, I’d rather spend $2m guaranteed to get ~15 good starts from him and ~10 starts from fill-ins rather than ~30 mediocre starts from the 6th-8th starters.
$4m – $2m = $2m
12) Sign SP Rich Harden to a one-year, $1m deal.
I can hear the hesitation now. “Harden is constantly hurt, to the point where a proposed deal that would have sent him to Boston this summer fell apart over concerns about his medicals. He threw just 174.2 innings over the last two seasons combined, and his ERAs the last two years have been 5.58 and 5.12. Why in the hell would you want him?”
Well, I always like a lottery ticket, and as Harden enters his age-30 season, he seems like a perfect candidate to fill the relief ace/spot starter role that Vicente Padilla was supposed to have in 2011. Despite Harden’s ugly ERA last year, his xFIP was merely 3.68, with a 91/31 K/BB in 82.2 innings. His home run rate is admittedly troubling, but hey, we’re talking about a guy on a $1m deal here. If Bedard & Harden can combine for 25-30 decent starts for $3m plus incentives at the back of your rotation, that’s value even if they combine for 100 days on the disabled list. And if they both blow up? Well, at least you took the chance on talent over assured mediocrity, and it’s only $3m.
$2m – $1m = $1m
13) Buy a coach-class ticket to non-tender city for Loney and Hong-Chih Kuo.
Loney made this a pretty tough call with his hot end to 2011, and let me say that in the real world, the one in which the Dodgers aren’t really going to get Prince Fielder, I think he’s going to be tendered a contract to give him one more chance to prove his worth. Though I’d be positive that he’d succeed if he landed somewhere else, there’s no room for a $6m pinch-hitter on this club. (Obviously, trading him would be preferable to non-tendering, though I’m not sure any other club is taking that $6m gamble either.)
Kuo is the longest-tenured Dodger and I’d hate to see him go, but his 2011 struggles, long injury history, and yet another elbow surgery last week mean that risking a raise on his $2.73m salary in arbitration is foolish. If he does want to play and doesn’t want to risk turning his arm over to a new training staff who doesn’t know him well, he might be willing to come back on a reduced contract; you could argue that he should get Harden’s $1m allotted above, or you might even get lucky and get him back on a non-guaranteed deal.
14) Say goodbye to 2011 free agents Juan Rivera, Casey Blake, Tony Gwynn, Jay Gibbons, Aaron Miles, Eugenio Velez, Jon Garland, Dana Eveland, Vicente Padilla, Mike MacDougal, and Jonathan Broxton.
Let’s caveat that by saying that if you can get any of these guys back (except Velez, who should be extradited from the country) on a minor-league deal to fight for a job in camp, then by all means do so – particularly Padilla, who has always been surprisingly effective as a Dodger when healthy. I’m guessing that’s unlikely to happen for most of them, who will merit at least a small major-league deal. In reality, I expect that Rivera, MacDougal, and Miles will all return, but there’s just no room for them on my hypothetical team.
15) Turn Pedro Baez into a pitcher. Come on already.
Yeah, I said this last season too, arguing that Baez’ rocket arm wasn’t going to be enough to get him to the bigs as a third baseman, especially considering that despite being old for the competition in the offensively-oriented California League, he managed just a .306 OBP and six homers in 2010. So what did he do this year to follow it up? He played in just 32 AA games, hitting .210/.278/.381, and missed the entire season after May with an injury. (Which, to be honest, I have not been able to identify.) I’m not saying it’s any sort of guarantee that such a conversion works out like it did for Jansen, but it basically is a guarantee that Baez never becomes a big leaguer as a third baseman. It’s worth a shot for both sides.
******
So what does this leave us with? A lineup that could look like this…
2B Carroll-R
LF Morrison-L
CF Kemp-R
1B Fielder-L
RF Ethier-L
3B Uribe-R
C Ellis-R
SS Gordon-S
BN: Barajas-R, Betemit-S, Sellers-R, Sands-R, Hoffmann-R
Though I know the real team would never actually let Carroll lead off and put Gordon 8th, that’s where I’m putting them due to their respective OBP skills. It’s amazing how much Fielder and Morrison lengthen that lineup, isn’t it, and how much better does that look than last year when we were forced to depend on Uribe, Dioner Navarro, Casey Blake, Marcus Thames, and Jay Gibbons? While the bench is less than sexy, that’s what you have to live with if you dedicate so much payroll to one or two expensive players. However, Sellers and Hoffmann are each excellent defenders, and could really come in handy replacing Gordon/Carroll and Morrison/Ethier for defensive purposes in the late innings. Betemit & Barajas would provide offense, if used correctly, and protection. At AAA, you’d still likely have Federowicz, Russ Mitchell, Trent Oeltjen, Alex Castellanos, Scott Van Slyke and whatever NRIs you pick up (Andy LaRoche, anyone?) along with others for depth.
Then your pitching staff would look like this…
1) Kershaw
2) Kuroda
3) Billingsley
4) Lilly
5) Bedard
CL Jansen
R Lindblom
R Guerrier
R Hawksworth
R Harden
L Elbert
NRI / Kuo / Padilla / Troncoso
I’d be a whole lot more comfortable with another ace in that rotation, but I guess that’s what happens when you give $33m to Ted Lilly. If and when Bedard breaks down, you could either move up Harden or bring up Nathan Eovaldi, John Ely, or your yearly veteran non-roster guy like Dana Eveland – if not Eveland himself. (I kind of like Dontrelle Willis as an NRI; look past his W/L record for Cincinnati and he actually had a decent year.) Later in the year, a younger starter like Allen Webster could be a factor, or even Rubby De La Rosa depending on the progress of his recovery. The bullpen could look forward to possibilities like Shawn Tolleson, Cole St. Clair, Steve Ames, and whatever random veteran NRI shows up in camp.
******
So that’s it. I’ve been staring at this for weeks and I’m still not sure I’m happy with it. Is it foolish to think that signing Fielder is even possible? Perhaps. Am I unintentionally low-balling what Bedard or Betemit might actually get, because I don’t want to give them more? Maybe so, and I didn’t get Kershaw signed long-term (though I suppose you could also do that and structure it so that it doesn’t affect 2012 that much). Either way, this is a team that could be built, in theory, for something close to what the Dodgers can spend, and it’d likely be a lot more competitive and interesting than what they have now. Compare this to some of the fantastic plans you all thought up over the weekend, and then let’s not try to be too disappointed when the big moves in reality are to bring back Rivera and sign Yuniesky Betancourt.
Open Thread: 2012 Rosterbation
October 29, 2011 at 6:07 pm | Posted in 2012 | 133 Comments
Now that the 2011 season is officially over, I’ll finally post my 2012 plan on Monday, which I’ve been going back and forth on for weeks. (Last year, I think I posted it before the reviews even started.) I’m putting that out there partly to motivate myself to actually finish and publish it, because as you can imagine, this year’s has been incredibly difficult, and that’s not just because of the ownership situation – the free agent market just looks to be deeply barren beyond the obvious big two first basemen. I can’t even say it was fun to do, but I’ve done it, and you’ll get a look at it on Monday.
But before we get to that, here’s a fun weekend exercise: what would you do if given the chance to play GM? Taking into account 2012 money committed to players like Ted Lilly, Chad Billingsley, Matt Guerrier, & Juan Uribe, minimum salaries for eight likely young players like Dee Gordon, Kenley Jansen & friends, dead money to those long gone, and expected arbitration hits for Matt Kemp, Clayton Kershaw, and Andre Ethier, the Dodgers could have something like $30m remaining to spend on ten holes. That’s a team with three starting pitchers, no first baseman (you’ll notice I didn’t include James Loney in the arbitration list, because that decision is up to you), no second baseman, and question marks at third base, left field, and behind the plate.
So have a try in the comments. Sign free agents. Make trades to fill holes. Sign contract extensions to reallocate 2012 dollars. There’s only one rule – it’s got to be at least somewhat based in reality. The payroll isn’t suddenly going to be $200m. Trent Oeltjen isn’t getting traded for Robinson Cano. Albert Pujols isn’t signing for two years and $5m. And for crying out loud, Loney isn’t playing third base. The goal is to come up with a 25-man roster that’s within reasonable budgetary limits, which I’m setting at $100m not including dead money.
Whomever gets closest to my actual plan wins the usual prize of absolutely nothing. Have at it.
A Look Back At Matt Guerrier’s Contract
October 28, 2011 at 11:30 am | Posted in Matt Guerrier | 19 Comments
As I go through the pitching staff for the 2011 Review series, I’m usually writing a few days ahead of what’s being posted, just because it takes so much work to go back through the full season of posts for each player. Though you probably won’t be seeing Matt Guerrier‘s review (grouped with Jonathan Broxton and Blake Hawksworth) until next week, this morning I started writing it, and it’s filled with basically what you’d expect it would be – “not bad, generally decent, wildly overpaid, hate his contract.” No surprises there.
But what I’d forgotten about until I started doing the research was that not only did we dislike the Guerrier contract simply because of the time-tested rule of “multi-year deals to non-elite relievers never, ever work out well” – which remains true - but because other free agent relievers like Grant Balfour, Kyle Farnsworth, Brian Fuentes, and Jon Rauch ended up signing elsewhere for less years and money, and in most cases they were pitchers we considered better than Guerrier at the time:
All four signed deals that were less in total value than the Dodgers gave to Guerrier earlier this offseason. You can make the argument that all four are better pitchers, too.
No, really.
Guerrier’s the only one who hasn’t managed a FIP below 4 in either of the last two years, and he’s also got the highest tERA (which is similar to FIP, but includes weights based on batted ball types) as well. He’s next to last as far as K/BB ratio goes to Fuentes; however, Fuentes was superior in OPS allowed in 2010 (.607 to .625) and is also absolute murder on lefties, which is exactly the need I was contemplating in my post about lefty relievers.
If you have to sign a reliever, and you hand out the most years and dollars amongst a group of rough comparables, shouldn’t you be confident that you got the best of the group? And if not the “best”, at least not “possibly the worst”?
Now that we’ve got a year of data, we can check back and see how accurate that assumption was. But then, why stop at four names I somewhat randomly chose to compare Guerrier to before the offseason was even over when we can look back upon the entire collection?
In the winter of 2010-11, 32 relievers signed MLB deals that took them to a new team, with the average contract length being 1.6 years for $3.08m per year. (Once I remove Rafael Soriano from that, which I’m going to do because his insane 3/$35m contract is a massive outlier that completely skews the results, almost certainly came down from ownership and not Brian Cashman, and was hated by most smart Yankee fans at the time, those averages drop to 1.59 years and $2.8m per.) Of the remaining 31, only three other than Guerrier received three-year deals (Joaquin Benoit in Detroit, Scott Downs in Anaheim, Jesse Crain in Chicago), and only those three exceeded the $12m total that Guerrier recieved (though Bobby Jenks matched it on a two-year deal in Boston).
For Guerrier’s contract to have made any sort of sense, he’d need to have given a performance that ranked him among the top 10-15% of the 31 relievers from last year we’re looking at. (I will grant this is somewhat unfair because Guerrier still has two more years left to prove himself, but that’s sort of the point; if an equal or superior reliever could have been had on a one- or two-year deal, it makes his deal look even worse.)
So let’s peruse FanGraphs for Guerrier’s ranking among those peers in some of the stats more relevant to relievers, and no, there’s no mention of holds or saves here.
K/BB
Best: J.J. Putz, 5.08
Worst: Sean Green, 1.17
22nd of 31: Guerrier, 2.00
Swinging Strike %
Best: Benoit, 13.7%
Worst: Arthur Rhodes, 6.2%
4th of 31: Guerrier, 11.8%
LOB%
Best: Balfour, 89%
Worst: Green, 60%
30th of 31: Guerrier, 67.6%
FIP
Best: Putz, 2.54
Worst: Rhodes, 5.90
12th of 31: Guerrier, 3.43
tERA
Best: Putz, 2.40
Worst: Jeremy Accardo, 5.82
7th of 31: Guerrier, 3.28
WPA
Best: Putz, 3.51
Worst: D.J. Carrasco, -1.16
28th of 31: Guerrier, -0.96
Shutdowns (definition)
Best: Putz, 35
Worst: Green/J.C. Romero, 1
15th of 31: Guerrier, 17
Meltdowns (definition)
Best: Jose Contreras, 1
Worst: Guerrier, 18
As you can see, Guerrier ranks all over the place. He missed a surprising amount of bats for someone without that kind of reputation, which is nice, as was his decent placement in the advanced run metrics. Of course, being one of the worst at LOB% and the absolute worst at “meltdowns” (if you didn’t read the definition, it’s when a reliever makes his team at least 6% more likely to lose) isn’t exactly what you hoped for when spending the money.
And that’s really the entire point, isn’t it? Guerrier had his uses, and he’s deserving of a place in the Dodger bullpen – no one’s arguing that he needs to be dumped or shipped off immediately, that he was some sort of Juan Uribe in the relief corps. But as I continue to struggle with my 2012 plan (which I’m probably on iteration #76 of right now), the backloaded ~$4.7m for Guerrier sticks out, particularly when he’s likely no better than the 4th best reliever in the bullpen.
Considering how many relievers were as successful or moreso than Guerrier for less years, dollars, or both, it’s safe to say that this is one we should all wish we had back, perhaps even more so than we initally felt when he first signed it. Now let’s just try to not repeat that mistake this year, could we?
MSTI’s 2011 in Review: Starting Pitchers, Part 2
October 27, 2011 at 10:35 am | Posted in Chad Billingsley, Dana Eveland, Rubby de la Rosa | 21 Comments
Chad Billingsley (C-)
4.21 ERA, 3.83 FIP, 7.3 K/9, 4.0 BB/9
Billingsley just never makes it easy on us, does he? When he signed a new contract just before Opening Day that ties him to the Dodgers through 2014, most of us roundly applauded it as being a reasonable deal for both sides which give the Dodgers some degree of stability in their starting rotation. Through the first half of the season,that seemed to be working out well for all involved, as Billingsley threw out mostly consistent starts with a few outstanding ones (11 Ks over 8 scoreless against St. Louis in April, for example), though the medicore Dodger offense meant he was rarely repaid with victories, picking up just two in his first ten starts. That meant I was dropping lines like this on a consistent basis:
(Obligatory: 11 K’s, 8 shutout innings, and no win. This is why he’s going to end up 13-11 and people are going to say he was just okay this year.)
Billingsley began June with a bit of a rough patch, failing to go more than five innings in any of his first three starts, allowing four, six, and seven earned runs, though he still got a W in the first one because he homered, doubled, and walked. He turned it around by allowing just four earned runs over his next four outings – just about the time A.J. Ellis started catching more of his starts, though I’m loathe to put too much credit there – and by the time our midseason reviews rolled around, we were relatively happy with him:
Chad Billingsley (B) (8-7, 3.87 ERA, 3.41 FIP)
Over at Baseball Prospectus this morning, Geoff Young of DuckSnorts offers the opinion that Billingsley “should be a star, but isn’t”. And that’s true. 26-year-old Billingsley is walking more and striking out less than 23-year-old Billingsley did in 2008. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, because he’s still a very valuable asset and the extension he signed over the winter was welcomed, but he’s also not going to be a Kershaw-level star like we’d once hoped he would be. Again, that’s not to get on Billingsley, it’s just seemingly who he’s going to be – a durable #2 or 3 type who will be consistently inconsistent (3 starts this year of at least 8 IP and 1 ER or less, 3 starts allowing 5 ER or more). That’s not a star, but it is a quality pitcher we should be happy to have.
But in his first start after the break, he allowed five runs in San Francisco. He bounced back by striking out 10 Nationals in next start, yet he bottomed out by not striking out a single hitter on August 10 against Philadelphia as the Dodgers blew a huge lead to lose, 9-8:
As for the bad news, let’s start at the top: Chad Billingsley never had it today. You’ll almost certainly read stories about how Billingsley “can’t pitch with a lead”, but that’s BS: he threw 30 pitches while struggling through the first inning, before the Dodgers even came to the plate. This is the fourth time in Billingsley’s career that he’s failed to strike out a single batter, and the first time this year, but it continues a disturbing trend: he’s struck out just six over his last three starts, after whiffing 10 Nationals on July 24.
While seven runs should always, always be enough for a starting pitcher, it’s also not like Billingsley got a whole lot of support from his defense. In the top of the fourth, he had two outs and Michael Martinez up; Martinez grounded to first, where it went off of Loney’s glove and putting Martinez on second. Worley, the next batter, singled home Martinez for the third Philly run. Should Billingsley have been able to retire the opposing pitcher? Absolutely he should have, but he’s also out of the inning if Loney fields the ball.
The same situation happened in the fifth, as with one out and two on, Billingsley got Hunter Pence to hit a soft grounder to Casey Blake at third – the kind of ball that turns into an inning-ending double play 99 times out of 100. The ball kicked off of Blake’s glove into the outfield, and rather than getting out of the inning without any damage, Billingsley saw a run score on the error and then another when Kuo got Ryan Howard to ground out. None of this absolves Billingsley; nor should it be forgotten.
His seasonal inconsistency wasn’t limited to various starts, however; he would show it even within games, such as in his next time out on August 16:
All that being said, let’s not ignore the performance from Chad Billingsley, who got off to a rough start by allowing five baserunners in the first two innings (one, granted, on a Juan Rivera error), generally throwing a lot of pitches, and looking for all the world like he wouldn’t last beyond 3.2 innings. He then turned it around to retire nine in a row in the third, fourth, and fifth innings, ending up allowing just one run over seven innings. Coming off last week’s “99 pitches, no strikeouts, and unable to hold a 6-0 lead in 4.1 innings” disaster against the Phillies, being able to come back from an uneven start to keep the club in the game against a tough opponent was a pretty nice accomplishment.
And then again in his next start, on August 21:
Of course, all this focus on Loney obscures the bizarre day Chad Billingsley put forth in picking up his tenth loss of the season. With the bullpen in shambles, Billingsley absolutely, positively had to put up innings, something which has traditionally been tough for him in Colorado. When he allowed a Mark Ellis single and a Carlos Gonzalez homer within the first three batters of the game, you could almost hear the wheels turning to get Loney out to the bullpen. But Billingsley got Troy Tulowitzki and Jason Giambi to end the first, and then faced just one batter over the minimum through the next five innings. In fact, Billingsley went 7.2 innings, and allowed just one hit after the first frame; unfortunately, it was a Seth Smith homer to right, following a walk to Giambi, in the 7th inning. The non-Loney Dodgers managed just four hits against the corpse of Kevin Millwood, and that’s how Chad Billingsley allowed just three hits while going into the 8th inning in Colorado, yet still came away with the loss.
And that’s how it went. Billingsley managed to end the season by not allowing more than three earned runs in four of his final five starts, which is good, but never managed to look good doing it. With his velocity down and his strikeout rate heading in the wrong direction, many of us wondered if he was injured – he claimed it was “mechanical issues” – and even Don Mattingly called him out to continue to improve following the season.
Yet as unsatisfying as it all seemed, Billingsley’s 3.83 FIP ranked comfortably alongside names like Jon Lester, Derek Holland, Ryan Dempster, Shaun Marcum, and Hiroki Kuroda. I don’t know if Billingsley will ever be more than he is – if he can’t curb the declining whiff rate, he might even be less – yet nor was this season the disaster that many will think.
Billingsley remains a conundrum, consistently inconsistent.
Rubby De La Rosa (A-)
3.71 ERA, 3.87 FIP, 8.9 K/9, 4.6 BB/9
Remember, while Rubby De La Rosa was the 2010 Dodger minor league pitcher of the year, he also had all of 8 AA games under his belt entering the season, so needless to say, we weren’t expecting a whole lot from him. But de la Rosa got off to such a good start in Chattanooga (52/19 K/BB in 40 innings) that he started to seem like a viable option as the injuries mounted in Los Angeles, to the point that we actually wondered why Scott Elbert got the call over him in May.
At the time, Ned Colletti claimed that RDLR would be the next man up if a starter was needed, but that he was not likely to be recalled to work out of the bullpen. Less than two weeks later, RDLR was indeed called up to join the relievers, reminding us once again that the public comments of any GM (not just Colletti) are never to be trusted. RDLR’s debut, May 24 in Houston, was notable because it featured Javy Guerra‘s first save and Jerry Sands‘ first grand slam. But let’s not forget how we felt about RDLR that night, when asking who had the best evening:
Rubby De La Rosa, who not only was recalled to make his major league debut, but held a one run lead in the 8th by blowing away the heart of the Houston order in Hunter Pence, Carlos Lee, and Brett Wallace?
RDLR made his first three appearances out of the bullpen, allowing just four of the 18 batters he faced to reach base, before being asked to join the rotation with a start in Philadelphia on June 7, which just so happened to also be the debut of Dee Gordon. As you might remember, we were excited:
Tonight in Philadelphia, Rubby De La Rosa will make his first MLB start. (As Joe Block notes, it’ll be just his 24th professional start since arriving in America.) Dee Gordon will likely make his first start at shortstop, though that’s not confirmed yet. (Update: now confirmed. He’s leading off, and Jerry Sands is in there too.)It’s a momentous day for both, and I’m trying to remember the last time we’ve looked forward to a Dodger game with such high anticipation. Ignoring Opening Day or other special events, when was the last otherwise nondescript regular season Dodger game that drew such interest? I suppose we have to mention Clayton Kershaw‘s debut in 2008 – “Like Christmas in May“, as I referred to it at the time. There’s also Manny Ramirez‘ Dodger debut later that year, or his return from suspension in May 2009. Other than that, though? Seeing Gordon and de la Rosa appear at the same time has to rank pretty high. This is all totally unscientific, of course, so tell me where this ranks for you.
His starting debut wasn’t the smoothest thing in the world, since he walked five of the first eleven Phillies and missed the plate with 11 of his first 19 pitches, but with some good luck and good defense he managed to make it through five innings allowing just one earned run. He continued that pattern of wildness over his first four starts, striking out 22 in 20.2 innings, yet also walking 15 and allowing 14 earned runs.
On June 29, something seemed to click, and sure, that “something” may very well have been the atrocious Minnesota offense:
The first batter Rubby De La Rosa faced in the bottom of the first inning of today’s matinee in Minnesota, Ben Revere, hit a triple to the right-center gap. The next batter, Tsuyoshi Nishioka, grounded out to score Revere and put the Twins up 1-0… and that was it. In what was unquestionably the most effective outing of his young career, de la Rosa pitched 6 2/3 shutout innings following Nishioka’s out (7 innings total), scattering just six hits over the day. Most impressively, de la Rosa issued just two free passes. It was both the first time in his career that he went more than six innings or walked less than three, and he did it against an American League lineup. (Yes, I know, the Twins are one of the worst offensive teams in the AL, but still.) Even better, he improved as the game went on. After escaping from danger in the second after allowing three men to reach, he set down 16 of the 20 remaining Twins he saw – one of which was an intentional walk to Revere.
Of course, he still collected a loss, as the Dodger offense was shut out. RDLR then walked just one Met on July 4, followed that up with six one-hit scoreless innings against San Diego on July 9, and then didn’t walk a single Giant on July 19. In the midst of that stretch, we started wondering about how many innings the Dodgers should let the young starter collect; two weeks later, we’d learn it didn’t matter.
On July 31, the Dodgers played a day game against Arizona, a game that few paid attention to as it came in the midst of the trading deadline craziness and the fallout of the Trayvon Robinson / Tim Federowicz deal. De la Rosa left after four innings, complaining of elbow tightness. We immediately thought the worst, and a few days later it was confirmed that he’d need Tommy John surgery and would likely miss most or all of 2012. At the time, we looked into whether this could have been avoided, and concluded that it probably couldn’t have been.
A few weeks ago, I looked at how far the club would let de la Rosa go, considering he was nearing his career high for innings pitched. At 100.2 combined this year, he didn’t even match 2010′s 110.1, though there’s evidence that MLB innings are more stressful than MiLB frames. Either way, I find it hard to blame the Dodgers for their handling of the young pitcher. He threw 100 pitches or more just three times, and only once did he go above 113; even on Sunday, he was still hitting the upper 90s and got six of the twelve outs he managed via strikeouts. Though we probably will never know for sure, the injury likely happened during de la Rosa’s tough outing on Sunday, and there wasn’t really anything that anyone could have done about it. Young pitchers get hurt, unfortunately. It happens.
The silver lining, if there is one, is that Tommy John surgery is nearly routine at this point, with an overwhelming success rate. Just to cherry-pick two recent examples from Washington, Jordan Zimmermann had his procedure in early August of 2009, returned to the bigs in late August of 2010, and has been one of the club’s best starters this year; Stephen Strasburg went under the knife in late August of 2010, and has reportedly been hitting 95 in bullpen sessions with a small chance that he sees MLB time in September. Nothing is guaranteed, but it’s in no way the death of a career like it was for decades, or even the risky procedure it was up until the last 10 years or so.
Remember, the Dodgers hadn’t yet started their second-half rebound yet and had just lost Kenley Jansen to his cardiac concerns, so this seemed like an unnecessary kick in the pants from the baseball gods. While it’s likely that RDLR returns intact, his loss opens up another hole in the 2012 rotation.
Dana Eveland (B)
3.03 ERA, 3.19 FIP, 4.85 K/9, 1.89 BB/9
As I probably said one too many times in September, “Dana Eveland… doing Dana Eveland things.” You remember how we felt when he was signed to a minor-league deal last November, right?
Eveland’s not, you know, good. His fastball doesn’t top 90 often, and if he was that valuable he wouldn’t have ended up on 19 different teams before his age-27 year. Still, it’s a no-risk deal, and the Dodgers have had good success with guys like Chan Ho Park, Jeff Weaver, and Aaron Sele in the past on signings like that. For the low, low price of almost nothing, they’ve managed to bring in a guy who’s entering his prime, has seen action in 95 major league games, and does a good job of keeping the ball in the park (0.65 HR/9) and on the ground (50%). More than likely, he’s ticketed for depth in AAA rather than the rotation, but it’s depth worth having, and a deal worth making.
And that’s exactly what happened. After hurting himself on the first day of big league camp, Eveland had a decent enough year in AAA, getting named to the PCL All-Star team and eventually getting called up when rosters expanded to start the September 1 rainout makeup in Pittsburgh. With de la Rosa injured, John Ely ineffective in ABQ, and Nathan Eovaldi at his innings limit, Eveland stuck around to make five starts of varying quality in September, the first four coming against the offensive powerhouses of San Francisco and Pittsburgh. When I say “varying quality”, I mean it, since the first two were excellent (1 ER over 15 IP), the next two were brutal (9 ER in 9 IP), and his final was solid (5.2 shutout innings in Arizona).
Eveland’s not unfamiliar with getting off to good starts, of course, because his first three starts for the 2010 Blue Jays comprised 4 ER over 18.2 IP. He then followed that up with 28 ER over 26 IP in his next six starts, leading to him losing his job. But that’s really what you expect from a guy like Eveland, isn’t it? There’s a reason he’s bounced around on four teams in the last three seasons, unable to even stick with the Pirates, and that’s because he’s got flashes of talent sandwiched around a whole lot of just not being good enough, as reflected in his career marks of striking out too few (5.94 K/9) and walking too many (4.50 BB/9). You always need guys like that to come up and eat up a few starts every season, and that’s fine. But it’s not fine to start your season off with Eveland or someone like him in the rotation, because if he’s one of your five best options, you’re in big trouble when you inevitably need to use your 6th, 7th, and 8th best options.
******
Next! Ted Lilly gave up a stolen base while you were reading this! Hiroki Kuroda loves the Dodgers to a disturbingly large extent! And John Ely looks for Ely-mania at the salad bar of the local Albuquerque Sizzler! It’s starting pitchers, part 3!
So There’s Good News & Bad News
October 26, 2011 at 3:54 pm | Posted in Frank McCourt, Hong-Chih Kuo | 26 CommentsGood news, maybe, from Bill Shaikin:
MLB, McCourt trying to see if there is a deal to be made. McCourt would agree to sell. Long way to go.
This would jive with Molly Knight’s report from earlier today that Frank McCourt was in New York, since that’s where the MLB offices are. It might also explain this morning’s news that the major bankruptcy court hearing originally scheduled for October 31 has been pushed back to November 29 – it would seem that either one side or both signaled to the court that settlement was enough of a possibility that more time would be worthwhile.
Of course, Shaikin is absolutely correct that there’s a long way to go, and I would caution everyone not to expect any sort of imminent deal. But if this report is correct, it does signal that McCourt is at least willing to discuss the possibility of selling the team, an idea he’s always refused to entertain. If that’s the case – and remember, this is all hypothetical, since we don’t have all the facts – I would imagine this means that he’s the one who is backing down, not MLB. All the cards do seem to be stacked against him, and as the odds continue to get lower that he’ll actually win the case, it would be in his best interests to settle. That goes for MLB as well, of course; even if they’re confident they’ll win the case, there’s a lot of dirty laundry there I’m sure they’d rather keep hidden.
So while that’s possibly a reason for optimism, there’s also really, really bad news, from Steve Dilbeck:
Hong-Chih Kuo is headed to elbow surgery, again.
Kuo was examined Wednesday by Dodgers physician Neal ElAttrache, who found a “loose body” of enough significance in his left elbow that arthroscopic surgery has been scheduled for Friday.
That would be elbow operation No. 5 for Kuo.
This one is hardly as significant as the two Tommy Johns that were included in those four previous surgeries, but total number is staggering.
ElAttrache estimates this procedure will prevent Kuo from throwing for the next six to eight weeks, which would put him past the Dec. 12 deadline when teams must tender contracts to players –- like Kuo –- who are eligible for arbitration.
Kuo almost certainly wasn’t going to get tendered a contract anyway, so this might actually work in the Dodgers’ favor, since it makes it more likely that no one else will give him a guaranteed deal and that he might be willing to return to the medical staff that knows him so well for a minimum, or even a minor-league, contract.
Of course, that’s not what I’m focusing on right now, because mostly I just feel so bad for Kuo. His injury struggles have been well-documented, and few stories were more gratifying in 2010 than his absolute domination out of the bullpen. After his tough 2011, he mentioned he might not want to come back, and we’ve heard him say in the past that he might retire rather than undergo another surgery. Since he was originally planning on pitching next week in Taiwan against a team of major leaguers – it was his reported arm soreness while training for that which led to the cancelation of his trip and the examination that resulted in today’s diagnosis – I’m guessing that is no longer the case, and Dylan Hernandez reports that Kuo’s agent says he will do his best to return in 2012.
We don’t know yet if that will be with the Dodgers, but I have to say, I hope it is. I just don’t know how you can root against Kuo after all he’s been through.
Clayton Kershaw Is About to Get Expensive
October 26, 2011 at 6:38 am | Posted in Clayton Kershaw | 15 Comments
Clayton Kershaw, as you may have heard, is awesome. He’s probably going to win the NL Cy Young next month, and as he enters his first year of arbitration eligibility, his salary is likely to skyrocket from ~$500k to something like $8m.
If Kershaw continues producing anything like he did in 2011 – a fair bet considering he’s still only 23 – the dollars it’s going to take to pay him each year are only going to keep getting higher, as Tim Dierkes of MLB Trade Rumors points out in his Dodgers offseason outlook:
We’ve seen top pitchers extended for about $30MM, but Kershaw might need $35MM just for his three arbitration years, and that might be a discount over going year-to-year. I think we’d be entering the $100MM range for a six year deal, which is incredible given that three of those would be arbitration years.
While any sort of big contract for a pitcher always comes with risk, I don’t think there’s anyone who would argue that Kershaw isn’t worth at least that and more, so he’ll get it eventually, and we’ll all be happy when he does. Except, as we see these numbers grow and grow, we start to wonder what might have been if he’d been signed to a long-term deal a year ago. The argument, we’ve always heard, is that there was no rush to sign a player who was still in his pre-arbitration years, and while it’s rare, it’s not unprecedented – the Rays signed Evan Longoria to such a deal after just a week in the bigs. If all of the team options are exercised, Longoria will make approximately $44m over the first nine years of his career, an enormous steal for Tampa Bay.
So how much might the Dodgers have cost themselves by not locking up Kershaw before his breakout year? We looked at just that topic in August of 2010, comparing Kershaw’s situation to other young pitchers with similar service time who had recently signed long-term deals – Jon Lester, Ricky Romero, and Yovani Gallardo. As it turned out, all three signed nearly identical deals, for $30m over five years, coming with one pre-arbitration year left.
$30m over 5 years seems to be the going rate for this caliber of pitcher at this point in his career, and if you want to toss in a bit more because Kershaw is younger, that’d be fine by me too. If nothing is done, he’ll make less than a million dollars in 2011. That’s a steal. But then he’ll be eligible for arbitration, and if he keeps on his current career path the yearly arbitration raises are going to get expensive and unpredictable. What if 2011 is his true breakout year, where he goes 21-6 with 212 K? We’ll be begging for the days when he might have been had for only $6m/year. So while I’m sure the responses here are going to be “sure, but the Dodgers are poor” (and it’s not that you’re wrong, it’s just that I’m trying to pretend we’re fans of a real baseball team for once), this is a deal that would save the Dodgers money in the long run.
Damn, a little low on the Ks, but apparently I nearly nailed the W/L almost exactly about 14 months ago. Anyway, the Dodgers clearly didn’t sign Kershaw, and that’s a big loss, because who wouldn’t be thrilled to know that he was under contract for four more years right now at reasonable prices? Thus far they have been content with going year-to-year with him; that’s about $8m this year, and who knows what it could be for 2013 and ’14, his final two years of arbitration eligibility. As Dierkes notes, if he was signed for all three arbitration years this winter, it could be 3/$35, and since he considers that a discount over year-to-year, it might be about $40m if he keeps going through arbitration. And that doesn’t even buy out any free agent years.
It’s a two-way street, of course. It’s possible that the Dodgers reached out with interest in this type of deal and Kershaw wasn’t receptive, reasoning he’d rather pass up the security that would come with signing young while assuming the risk that would come with obtaining every last dollar – we just don’t know. In addition, there’s always the uncertainty that comes with the McCourt ownership situation, so it’s possible that Ned Colletti’s hands were just tied.
Regardless of the reasons, it’s clear that failing to follow the lead of other progressive organizations and locking up a young star early is going to cost the Dodgers tens of millions of dollars. Considering that Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier are both two years closer to free agency and thus more urgent (if not, in Ethier’s case at least, more prudent) it’s unlikely this gets resolved this winter either. So you can look forward to seeing this article again a year from now, as I ponder Kershaw’s imminent $15m 2013 arbitration salary on the heels of his 24-8, 237 K 2012.
Differing Opinions On Jerry Sands in 2012
October 25, 2011 at 1:08 pm | Posted in Jerry Sands | 27 Comments
There’s been a lot of Jerry Sands talk around the internet in the last week, and while Sands hasn’t done anything particularly noteworthy, I suppose that’s an expected side effect of there being absolutely zero on-field Dodger news for at least another week. (Off-field, on the other hand…)
Last week, when I looked at Sands’ 2011 in review, I noted that he was a changed player in his return stint as a Dodger, which is hardly out of the ordinary. Matt Kemp and Clayton Kershaw each went back to the farm after making their initial debuts, and like Sands, Dee Gordon looked much more comfortable his second time around this year. (I also pointed out how terrifying his AAA home/road splits were and prayed that he could avoid the dreaded ABQ effect.)
ESPN’s Keith Law then fielded a question about Sands in his weekly chat last Thursday:
Robbie (Silver Spring, MD)
What’s a reasonable expectation from Jerry Sands next year? .260/.330/.430 sound about right?Klaw
Maybe lower OBP, more SLG, with below-average defense. That’s not an everyday player.
Law’s outlook seems pessimistic, though I will admit that Law is someone I respect greatly and one of the rare ESPN analysts who manages to have a rational, informed viewpoint on the game and prospects in particular. Law seems to be ballparking .260/.320/.440 (ish) for Sands, and I’d like to think that he can do better – at least in the OBP department.
Today, Chad Moriyama digs deeper into the changes Sands made while back in ABQ, comparing swing mechanics from his two stints with the Dodgers, and concluding that Sands made noticable improvements in holding his hands higher, opening up his stance, and distributing his weight. It’s well worth a click to read the entire piece and see the swing comparisons, but here’s Chad’s takeaway:
I’m not at all familiar with whoever reconstructed the swing of Jerry Sands, but in my opinion, whoever did it knew exactly what they were doing and should take credit for it.
While I listed the advantages of the adjustments above, the changes themselves are not what impressed me, but rather it was what they fixed that was important.
I think what’s most important when making adjustments to the swing of a professional player is not trying to fit everybody’s swing into an ideal, but rather sculpting what they already have and making it efficient.
From what I’ve seen, that’s exactly what these changes do, as they ask Sands to learn to layoff fastballs up and then both allow him to expand on a strength (down) and create a solution for weaknesses (in, breaking balls).
To say I’m impressed by the changes that have taken place is an understatement.
That’s high praise. So what should we expect from Sands next year? I’ve never thought he’d be a star, but I do tend to agree with Chad, because the Sands we saw in September was noticably different than the one we saw in May. That said, we should know better to put too much stock into three weeks of play against expanded roster opponents, and I don’t love that Law doesn’t like him. (Roberto at Vin Scully is My Homeboy gets in on the Sands-mania with video of him playing winter ball in the Dominican, so you can get an even more recent look at his swing.)
Unfortunately for the Dodgers, Sands really has to be ready. This is a team that’s probably going to be counting on James Loney again and doesn’t really have a left field solution, unless you’re really excited about bringing back Juan Rivera and Tony Gwynn. He doesn’t need to hit 30 homers – and he won’t – but is it unreasonable to ask for a .340 OBP, 15 homers, plenty of doubles, and average defense in left field? I’d like to think that it isn’t too much to ask, and for the Dodgers’ sake, it better not be.
MSTI’s 2011 in Review: Starting Pitchers, Part 1
October 24, 2011 at 8:12 am | Posted in Clayton Kershaw, Jon Garland, Nathan Eovaldi | 42 CommentsToday we start the pitching reviews, and the rotation is split into three sections. With the exception of the fact that Clayton Kershaw is awesome and obviously will be first, they’re done in no order whatsoever other than to have both regular and fill-in starters in each piece. While it may make sense to have Part 1 be Kershaw, Chad Billingsley, and Hiroki Kuroda, no one wants to see a Part 3 that is entirely John Ely, Dana Eveland, and Jon Garland, right?
Clayton Kershaw (A+2)
2.28 ERA, 2.47 FIP, 9.57 K/9, 2.08 BB/9
Remember, I’m basing these grades on expectations, and we had sky-high expectations for Kershaw entering the season. He still gets a great grade, because he met those expectations and then shattered them. If you don’t remember just how highly we thought of him even before the season, recall that he was #1 on my list of “Six Reasons for Optimism in 2011“:
1) Clayton Kershaw. You hardly need me to revisit all the ways in which Kershaw is awesome; I did just that already in his 2010 Season in Review piece. He had a two-month stretch last season in which he was basically the best pitcher in baseball, and while that’s probably a bit too much to hang on his head right now, you can certainly make the argument that he’s already one of the best lefty starters in baseball. Forget what you hear about him still needing to do this or that to be an “ace”; if he made no further progressions, he’d still be worthy of being at the top of nearly any team’s rotation.
Yet, there’s still so much more there. Last year he made a marked improvement in his major weakness by walking 10 fewer batters despite pitching 30 more innings than in 2009. Don’t forget, he’s not even 23 yet. I’ve been arguing that he turned potential into performance last year, but the greater accolades haven’t quite come yet because of his mediocre (and pointless) win-loss record. This is the year that the greater baseball world recognizes Kershaw in his rightful place as one of the dominant starters in the game.
I’d say that last sentence paid off pretty well, right? We got off to a good start when Don Mattingly named Kershaw the Opening Day starter on the first day of camp, and after a relatively quiet spring Kershaw proved Mattingly right by dominating Tim Lincecum on March 31:
Earlier today, I noted that I had picked Clayton Kershaw to finish 1st in the NL Cy Young Award voting over at Baseball Prospectus. I’m now concerned that I didn’t pick him quite high enough, because Kershaw was absolutely sublime in tonight’s season opener, to the point where San Francisco starter Tim Lincecum allowed just one unearned run over seven innings himself, yet there was still no question about who was the most dominant starter on the mound tonight.
Kershaw scattered just four hits over seven scoreless innings, but even that doesn’t tell the true tale. One of those hits should have been an error on a botched toss from James Loney to Kershaw, and one was a bloop that fell just out of Loney’s reach. But while Kershaw was outstanding all around, it’s not just the few hits he allowed that impressed me most, and it’s not the nine strikeouts he put up. It’s not even how bad he made a handful of Giants look, particularly when he offered his curve. It’s the fact that he walked just one and made it through seven innings with fewer than 100 pitches. In years past, it might have taken him 120 pitches to get that far; in starts that aren’t his first of the season, you’d expect to see him continue into the 8th and 9th.
Need more proof of Kershaw’s progression? This was the 11th time in his career that he pitched at least seven innings without allowing more than one walk. Though he’s been in the bigs since mid-2008, seven of the previous ten came after June 27, 2010 – i.e., in the last half a season. We’ve long known that Kershaw had all the talent in the world, but there’s now a clear pattern of him harnessing the wildness and becoming one of the most dominant pitchers in the bigs. Mark my words, this is the year he gets the respect from the general public he deserves. Oh, and he turned 23 two weeks ago.
“Beating up on Lincecum and the Giants” proved to be a general theme of the season, as Kershaw won five of his six starts against San Francisco, allowing five earned runs in 42 innings along with a 49/8 K/BB ratio. By the end of April, Kershaw was off to a decent enough start, yet he was only 2-3, with both of his victories coming in games where he didn’t allow the opposition a single run. With the Dodger offense looking as dreadful as it was, we were cringing in anticipation of Kershaw having a fantastic year yet being denied the attention he deserved because he’d end up with a record like 14-12.
But Kershaw wasn’t about to let that happen. Seemingly every other start, I was including a note about how he’d just tossed out one of the better starts of his career by Game Score (an admittedly imperfect stat, but useful enough for quick-and-dirty comparisons). For the record, his top three career starts by that metric, and six of his best ten, came in 2011. In May, he had perhaps his best month of the season, picking up his second career shutout, going 4-0 and holding the opposition to a paltry .203/.247/.264 line, along with a fantastic 46/9 K/BB.
By June, we were so impressed that I was simply titling articles with names like ”Clayton Kershaw, Ace” and noting that he was pitching in at the plate, too:
Clayton Kershaw was a one-man wrecking crew, taking matters into his own hands to toss his second shutout of the season, made all the more impressive due to the fact that it was an all-righty American League Detroit lineup. The Tigers managed just two hits, none by heavy hitters Miguel Cabrera, Victor Martinez, or Magglio Ordonez. Kershaw had no need for the bullpen, completing the game on 112 pitches while retiring the final 13 batters he faced – including three swinging strikeouts in the ninth.
But Kershaw wasn’t finished there. Yes, Juan Uribe gave him the only run he’d need with a solo homer in the second inning (sidenote: Ha, Brad Penny. Ha.) and Dioner Navarro doubled in a second run in the sixth. With two on and the bases loaded in the eighth, Kershaw came to the plate. We’ve seen Don Mattingly hit for Kershaw a few times in these situations, even earlier in the game, and it usually hasn’t worked out either on the offensive end or in the relievers who followed. Mattingly let Kershaw hit; he poked a single to right, scoring two, and that was that. Kershaw’s actually been better at the plate (.294/.333/.294 .627) than the real professional hitters who he’s faced (.211./270/.299 .569). He also now leads the league in strikeouts with 117.
Even better, take a look at the list of top five Game Scores in MLB this season. Two of the best five games in the league belong to our own Clayton Kershaw. The next time someone tells you he’s “on his way to being one of the best pitchers in baseball,” stop them immediately. He’s already there.
So it was no surprise we were giddy about him in July when the midseason reviews came around:
Clayton Kershaw (A+) (9-4, 3.03 ERA, 2.45 FIP)
Is A+ even high enough? I’m not sure it is, though we certainly expected great things from him. Think about this: his HR/9 rate and H/9 rate are unchanged from last year, but he’s managed to do that while lowering his walk rate (again!) and increasing his strikeout rate. He’s leading the league in whiffs, and he has two shutouts among his three complete games. He’s 23. He’s lefty. He’s an All-Star.Don’t let anyone tell you that he’s progressing towards being an ace, or one day he could be one of the best. Clayton Kershaw is, right now, one of the 10 best pitchers in baseball. The scary part? He could still get better.
Terrifyingly enough for everyone else, he did get better:
| I | Split | W | L | GS | CG | SHO | IP | R | BB | SO | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st Half | 9 | 4 | 3.03 | 19 | 3 | 2 | 130.2 | 45 | 35 | 147 | 1.048 | 10.1 | 4.20 | |
| 2nd Half | 12 | 1 | 1.31 | 14 | 2 | 0 | 102.2 | 21 | 19 | 101 | 0.886 | 8.9 | 5.32 |
A 101/19 K/BB? Who does that? In his second start after the break, he dominated the Giants again, then beat the Rockies and threw a complete game at the Padres, before having a rocky (for him) outing in Arizona on August 7, allowing four earned runs to collect his fifth loss of the season.
And then things got real. Just check out the ludicrous tear he went on after that Arizona game:
| Rk | Date | Opp | Rslt | Inngs | Dec | IP | H | ER | BB | SO | HR | Pit | GSc | 2B |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25 | Aug 13 | HOU | W,6-1 | GS-8 | W(14-5) | 8.0 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 112 | 74 | 2 |
| 26 | Aug 18 | MIL | W,5-1 | GS-8 | W(15-5) | 8.0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 104 | 78 | 2 |
| 27 | Aug 23 | STL | W,13-2 | GS-6 | W(16-5) | 6.0 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 108 | 66 | 1 |
| 28 | Aug 29 | SDP | W,4-1 | CG | W(17-5) | 9.0 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 118 | 74 | 2 |
| 29 | Sep 4 | ATL | L,3-4 | GS-7 | 7.0 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 115 | 61 | 1 | |
| 30 | Sep 9 | SFG | W,2-1 | GS-8 | W(18-5) | 8.0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 111 | 82 | 0 |
| 31 | Sep 14 | ARI | W,3-2 | GS-6 | W(19-5) | 5.0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 63 | 70 | 1 |
| 32 | Sep 20 | SFG | W,2-1 | GS-8 | W(20-5) | 7.1 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 115 | 66 | 1 |
| 33 | Sep 25 | SDP | W,6-2 | GS-8 | W(21-5) | 7.1 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 93 | 67 | 1 |
| 233.1 | 174 | 59 | 54 | 248 | 15 |
That’s an absolutely insane run, and in the only game he didn’t win there – September 4 against the Braves – all he did was strike out ten without allowing a walk, being victimized somewhat by an Aaron Miles throwing error. At the end of August, we were already beginning to fantasize about his Cy Young prospects, while Kershaw gained notoriety for getting tossed out of a game for plunking Arizona’s Gerardo Parra:
The truth is probably somewhere in between, with my opinion leaning towards “Kershaw probably meant to send a message, not hit him, and Parra just stood there,” but to be honest, I don’t really care too much. I’m sure Bill Plaschke is furiously fapping away his latest story about how Kershaw has earned respect – you know, because everyone thought he was a joke before for only contending for the Cy Young at 23 – but it really doesn’t matter. If there is one unquestionable bad guy, it’s home plate umpire Welke, who wildly overreacted by immediately tossing Kershaw on a questionable call. (Update: when I wrote the line about Plaschke, he had not published an article this morning, and I was mostly joking. But just a few minutes ago, up went his piece, calling out Kershaw’s “toughness” and “leadership”. Predictable Bill is predictable.)
Kershaw avoided a suspension and continued on his run. On September 20, we acknowledged that even though pitcher wins are stupid, watching him go for his 20th was still meaningful; on the 21st, we again looked at his Cy chances if he won the “Triple Crown”, and when he ended his season by beating the Padres on the 25th, we had nothing but praise:
Clayton Kershaw reached the halfway mark of his 23rd year about 2 weeks ago, and with today’s 6-2 victory over San Diego, he’s merely just finished off what is arguably the best non-Koufax season in the long history of the Brooklyn & Los Angeles Dodgers.
21-5, 2.28 ERA, which is the lowest ERA in all of baseball. 248 strikeouts, the most by any lefty Dodger pitcher other than Koufax in team history, the sixth-highest total overall, and enough for a 2011 National League K crown (assuming Cliff Lee doesn’t whiff 17 in his final start, a number he has never reached.) At 23, it’s the highest strikeout total for someone his age or younger since Dwight Gooden had 268 in 1985. And since June, he’s 14-2, propelling him to an almost certain “pitching Triple Crown”, as much as it makes me cringe to type that phrase.
We can argue about whether those numbers all matter (spoiler alert: they don’t) but those numbers, more than WAR, FIP, or ERA+, are the ones that are going to get engraved in the public memory when you think about Kershaw’s outstanding 2011 season – in the same way people immediately can spout “23-8, 2.26″ when asked about Orel Hershiser’s 1988.
It remains to be seen if he wins the Cy Young Award – I’m leaning towards “he will” – but his progression to one of the most elite pitchers in baseball is undeniable. Or if you prefer it in graphical form, how about this collection of charts borrowed from a recent FanGraphs article?

Kershaw could have not improved at all from 2010, and still been one of the better pitchers around. Instead, he improved in nearly every area of the game, and it’s not hyperbole to say that there’s not a single pitcher in baseball I would trade him straight up for. And he’s still not even 24 yet, just now entering his first arbitration hearing. That’ll probably push his salary from ~$500k to ~$7m for 2012, which is still a bargain for the value he provides, but after Matt Kemp is (hopefully) locked up, getting Kershaw signed long-term has to be a top priority. Until that happens, we can at least count our blessings that we’re lucky enough to be present at the start of what could very well be a historic career.
Jon Garland (D-)
4.33 ERA, 4.65 FIP, 4.7 K/9, 3.3 BB/9
When the Dodgers signed Jon Garland to round out the fifth spot in the rotation, it seemed like a great idea at the time, though not without worry for the $8m 2012 vesting option:
In a vacuum, this is a great move to fill out the rotation. Garland is certainly nothing spectacular, but his durability (9 straight years of at least 32 starts) and reliable average performance (FIP between 4.05 and 4.93 in each of those nine years) makes him one of the best #5 starters in the league. Seriously, #5 spots for most teams are average at best and dreadful at worst; there’s not too many clubs who can say that they can do better than Garland there.
“Durability.” “Reliability.” “Innings eater.” Those were the keywords you’d constantly hear tossed around regarding Garland, which made sense for a team that never found a #5 starter in 2010, and it made a whole lot of sense… for about three days:
Hey, today just keeps getting better and better! Jon Garland was just on Jim Bowden’s XM radio show. Bowden tweets:
Jon Garland just told us that teams wouldn’t offer him a multi-year deal because of MRI’s and Physicians opinions that he would break-down
I didn’t hear this live, so it’s possible something was lost in the translation, but it’s an eye-opener. On one hand, this seems highly unlikely, because Garland is known for his durability – and because what player would admit that?! On the other hand, it’s not like Ned Colletti’s never knowingly signed an injured pitcher before.
And for all the durability… Garland made it all the way to March 9 before straining his oblique and missing the rest of camp, starting the season on the disabled list. When he returned, he provided nine starts of varying quality before hitting the disabled list again, this time with shoulder inflammation that eventually required season-ending surgery in July.
So much for durability, right? On the other hand, Garland never came close to earning that $8m option for 2012, which is probably the best possible outcome. If he’s healthy after surgery, I’d take him back (at a far, far reduced one-year salary) to give him a shot as a back-end rotation type.
Nathan Eovaldi (A-)
3.63 ERA, 4.35 FIP, 6.0 K/9, 5.2 BB/9
I have to be honest: I gave Nathan Eovaldi just about no consideration for most of the season, and that’s why he gets a solid grade despite uneven performance. He literally didn’t enter my mind until his recall was imminent, and why should he have? He didn’t even rank on most top prospect lists entering the season, a reflection of the fact that he had a decent-but-not-great 2010, allowing 9.9 hits per nine and striking out just 6.6 per nine across three rookie-league and A-ball teams. That’s not to say he was a non-prospect, just not someone who demanded more interest than up-and-comers like Rubby De La Rosa, Zach Lee, and Allen Webster or highly-drafted disappointments Chris Withrow and Ethan Martin. The first time I even ever brought him up here was on July 14, and even that was just a brief mention as part of a look at who might be used to replace de la Rosa should he reach his innings limit.
But de la Rosa succumbed to injury before that was an issue, and with a solid season at AA Chattanooga under his belt, Eovaldi was indeed recalled to join the rotation in early August, forcing me to write a “let’s get to know Nathan Eovaldi” post for my own benefit as much as yours. Eovaldi’s first impression was generally a successful one, allowing two earned runs or fewer in his first four starts and in five of his six overall. However, while his contributions were certainly welcome, I had to voice some concerns after his fourth start:
That’s a pretty impressive start to a career, and the hope Eovaldi has provided has been well-timed in the aftermath of Rubby De La Rosa‘s elbow surgery. While that’s wonderful, there’s also some worry about how much of this is smoke-and-mirrors; after striking out seven in his debut in Arizona, he’s now struck out three, two, and one over his last three outings, totaling just six whiffs in 17 innings over the last three games. (Yes, the box score says he had two strikeouts tonight, but one was a foul bunt for strike three by Carpenter.) That’s a .232 BABIP, and that kind of success without missing bats is generally unsustainable. That’s not to take anything away from Eovaldi, of course, who should be thrilled with the way his season has gone; just a reminder to take the “OMG he has a 2.05 ERA” comments you’ll surely hear with the requisite grain of salt.
We began to see that course correction in his next start, when he allowed six hits and five runs over four innings to the Rockies, in the fact that he didn’t strike out a single batter in any of his four relief appearances to end the season after being removed from the rotation, and in the fact that his FIP is quite a bit higher than his ERA shows.
Still, as debuts go, Eovaldi’s was very good, hence the quality grade. He’s being talked up as a possible rotation option out of camp in 2012, but I’d consider that to be a worst-case scenario. Remember, teams never use only five starters, so that means you’re almost certainly going to need some starts from someone worse than your presumed fifth starter. I’d prefer Eovaldi be the guy stepping in to help out as needed, rather than someone you’re counting on from the start. It’s hardly the worst thing in the world for him to get more seasoning in the minors in preparation for a full-time gig later in the year or in 2013.
******
Next! Chad Billingsley continues to frustrate! Dana Eveland gets sent over from central casting to fill the role of ”Fungible Veteran Starter #X72!” And Rubby De La Rosa is so rudely taken away! It’s starting pitchers, part 2!
MSTI’s 2011 in Review: Right Field
October 21, 2011 at 11:20 am | Posted in Andre Ethier, Juan Rivera, Trent Oeltjen | 20 Comments
Andre Ethier (C-)
.292/.368/.421 .789 11hr 1.3 WAR
Andre Ethier started out his season with some completely unnecessary public comments, complaining about his contract status the day before the season started and wondering if he might actually get non-tendered. (Spoiler alert: no.) He ended his season with another round of public controversy, claiming that the Dodgers were forcing him to play on an injured knee before quickly backpedaling, and then undergoing knee surgery anyway. In between making a fool of himself in the papers, he came within one game of setting a franchise record with a 30-game hitting streak, yet ultimately ended up with a less-than-satisfying season as his power deserted him.
Really, most of the season was a disappointment after his outstanding April, wasn’t it? I say that in something of a positive way; other than his lousy August and September, this is a generally good season from an average outfielder. But we expect so much more from Ethier that just being “generally good” isn’t really good enough.
| Split | PA | H | 2B | HR | BB | SO | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| April/March | 121 | 41 | 10 | 3 | 13 | 21 | .380 | .446 | .556 | 1.002 | .452 |
| May | 102 | 23 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 17 | .261 | .363 | .352 | .715 | .304 |
| June | 110 | 30 | 8 | 2 | 7 | 24 | .300 | .345 | .440 | .785 | .368 |
| July | 100 | 23 | 5 | 3 | 9 | 20 | .261 | .340 | .420 | .760 | .303 |
| August | 99 | 22 | 4 | 1 | 12 | 17 | .253 | .343 | .333 | .677 | .304 |
| Sept/Oct | 19 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | .188 | .316 | .250 | .566 | .250 |
Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
The hope here is that much of this can be explained by injury, and I’m not just talking about the knee problem that ended his season early. In early May, Ethier missed a game with soreness in his throwing elbow, an issue that appeared to be altering his throwing mechanics even a week later. Two weeks after that, he crashed into the right field wall in Chicago, suffering what was termed at the time “a right elbow contusion, lower right back contusion and sprained left big toe”, costing him much of the next week. But it didn’t completely ruin his game, because going through the archives I can see that even in to June and July I would be continuously pointing out things like “Kemp & Ethier went 6-9, everyone else went 3-32″, performance (along, likely, with the well-publicized hitting streak) that got him added to the All-Star team as a injury replacement for Shane Victorino.
Even still, I wasn’t quite sure what to make of his first half:
Andre Ethier (B+) (.311/.383/.463 9hr 1.9 WAR)
Ethier, without question, represented one of the more difficult grades to give out. 30 game hitting streak? Yes, please. .383 OBP? Delicious. While his OPS is nearly 40 points off his 2008 career high, the lower offensive environment this year means that it’s good for a career-best 141 OPS+, so hooray for that. No, he’s not hitting lefties (.242/.282/.368), but he never hits lefties, so that’s not much of a surprise. All in all, it’s been a very solid year from one of the two main offensive threats this club has.Yet… it feels like something is missing. Prior to his two-homer day yesterday, he’d hit just seven dingers, and his SLG is down for the third year in a row. It’s certainly not enough of a problem to criticize him, hence the good grade, and perhaps yesterday’s outburst was the start of something new. I just can’t help shaking the feeling that is very unpopular among the casual fans who love him so much: Ethier is a very good player, but not a superstar. We’ll need to keep that in mind when his contract is up. I don’t want to get too down on him, though: right now, he’s the second best player on this team, and that in itself is quite valuable.
Yet as the knee began to bother him more, his performance on the field suffered, hitting just .252/.339/.333 after the break, before squawking about it to T.J. Simers and finally going under the knife. To be honest, this all makes me think he’s going to have a big year in 2012, since he’ll (presumably) be healthy after two years of troublesome-but-not-debilitating injuries and headed into a contract year, he’s likely to have a large chip on his shoulder. You know, larger, than the usual one. But can we please, please get him a righty handcuff? I’ve been beating this drum for years, and it never seems to happen; once again, Ethier’s numbers against righties in 2011 (.321/.410/.468) were far ahead of his stats against lefties (.220/.258/.305), just like they are every year. Ethier won’t like being benched against lefties, but to be honest, I don’t care: playing him against LHP is simply giving away outs.
Juan Rivera (A)
.274/.333/.406 .739 5hr 0.7 WAR
This, I admit, may not be the most flattering photo I’ve used in this series. But Rivera is crushing a dinger in this shot, and I wanted to use at least one guy wearing a Brooklyn throwback.
These days, there’s not a whole lot of moves that come as a complete and total surprise with no rumors preceding it, but the acquisition of Rivera from Toronto certainly falls under that category. At the time, expectations were small, since he wasn’t doing a ton with Toronto before being DFA’d; he was merely expected to be slightly better than Marcus Thames and be a righty partner for James Loney at first base:
First off, let’s not worry too much about the player to be named – Rivera was DFA’d himself on July 3 and would have cleared waivers in another day or so, so it’s not like the Jays had a whole lot of leverage there. On the field, this seems like a tiny upgrade; Rivera wasn’t doing a whole lot for Toronto at .243/.305/.360, but it’s still better than Thames for the Dodgers at .197/.243/.333 – when Thames was even healthy enough to play. Against LHP, Rivera was doing what Thames was supposed to do, hitting .327/.400/.509 in 65 PA. And while Thames is an atrocious fielder, Rivera has been a plus defender at times in the past, even playing 40 games in center field throughout his career (though he hasn’t started there since 2006). That’s probably no longer the case at 33, but at least there’s some positive history there. He’s also got some experience at first base, which is more valuable than you think, because with Casey Blake on the shelf, the Dodgers don’t have a viable righty option to pair with James Loney. Rivera should be expected to now play 1B against most lefties.
In the short term, this deal probably makes the team better than they were this morning. Not by much, perhaps, but that’s good enough.
Well, that was one of the bigger understatements of the year, because Rivera was outstanding after coming to the Dodgers, in large part helping to fuel the second-half turnaround. Well, let’s clarify that: a 105 OPS+ is nice but not stellar, yet his .274/.333/.406 line is outstanding compared to the garbage he was replacing, and coming at essentially zero cost he provided a good deal of value. So good on Ned Colletti for upgrading from Thames, and good on Rivera for showing he still has some life in him.
What’s next, though? I find that people forget that Toronto completely gave up on him halfway through the year, and it’s not like Toronto is run by people who can’t identify value; he also hit just .221/.297/.308 after August 25 and offered little value in the field. Yet the narrative reads that he’s an “RBI machine” and a “savior” of the season, so don’t be at all surprised if he’s back in 2012, even though the track record of return engagements from midseason veteran acquisitions is mixed at best in the Colletti era. For the right price, that could be fine; he’s still effective against lefties, with a large platoon split, and with Ethier and James Loney around being completely unable to hit southpaws there’s definitely a need in Los Angeles for that kind of role. He’ll just need to take quite a paycut from his 2011 salary of $5.25m (I wouldn’t go above $2m at most), accept a one-year deal, and not be looked at as an every day player.
Trent Oeltjen (inc.)
.197/.322/.324 .646 2hr 0.4 WAR
It dawns on me that for the second year in a row, Oeltjen gets a glamour shot rather than an action one. This is not simply because I’m enraptured by his Aussie charm, but because “sitting around rather than playing” is basically the best way to sum up Oeltjen’s 2011, where he was on the team continuously from June 9 through the end of the season but made just about no lasting impact.
Of course, that’s what happenens when you’re given just three starts over the final 69 games of the season, isn’t it? The difference was clear; in 12 starts (not the greatest sample size, I will admit), he hit .256/.380/.462, while in 49 games as a pinch-hitter and defensive replacement, he hit .125/.243/.156. That’s a problem he needs to sort out if he plans on having much of a career, since it’s certainly not like any team is going to just hand him a starting job, though it’s possible there’s a little more there than we’ve seen. Oeltjen still has options remaining and I imagine his 2012 will look much like his 2011, with time spent both at AAA and the bigs, filling out some team’s roster.
******
Next! Clayton Kershaw is a god! Jon Garland‘s durability only goes so far! And Nathan Eovaldi arrives ahead of schedule! It’s starting pitchers, part 1!
MSTI’s 2011 in Review: Center Field
October 20, 2011 at 8:59 am | Posted in Matt Kemp | 24 CommentsThis is the one you’ve been waiting for, friends. No moaning about overpaid veterans or underperforming rookies, no noting that the position as a whole finished in the bottom 10% of baseball for OPS… this is just pure, uncut greatness. Enjoy.
Matt Kemp (MV-F’ing-P)
.324/.399/.586 .986 39hr 40sb 10.0 WAR
Since Matt Kemp is the only center fielder we’re going to be talking about today – he did play 1380 of the team’s 1432 defensive innings, after all – this is going to be a long one, and I’m going to start by tooting my own horn a little bit, since I was one of the seemingly few who was all but guaranteeing that Kemp would have a big year, even as far back as last season.
“We Should Probably Leave Matt Kemp Alone”, October 3, 2010:
No one doubts the talent is there, and Ned Colletti claims he has no plans to move him. His clashes with the current coaching staff have been well-documented – though he seems to have a good relationship with Don Mattingly – and if there’s anyone who looks to benefit from the post-Torre era, it might just be Kemp, my early choice for the “No, Chad Billingsley’s career wasn’t dead after one bad year either, now was it?” award next year.
“Six Reasons for Optimism in 2011″, February 14, 2011:
So why am I high on Kemp? It’s because all of the signs are pointing in the right direction. Remember, even though I’m not going to defend his 2010 production, you’d think by the way people talked about him that he hit like Garret Anderson. This is still a guy who set a career high in homers and had an OPS above league-average. If that’s his “disaster” year, that’s still a guy who’s pretty special. Besides, any and all excuses are now gone. Think that his troubles last year were due to work ethic issues? He’s taken responsibility. Think that he spent too much time with Rhianna? I don’t agree, but they’re split up now. Think that he didn’t get along with Joe Torre? He’s got a good relationship with Don Mattingly. Think that his issues with the rest of the coaching staff last year were reflected on the field? As you’ll see in a second, that staff has largely turned over. Instead of cranky Bob Schaefer and Larry Bowa, he has baserunning guru Davey Lopes.
Again, not defending Kemp’s reaction, but it’s hard to ignore that after his scorching April last year, he headed downhill at just about the time Ned Colletti oddly called him out in April. Then, as it became clear that Torre & crew wouldn’t be back in 2011, he ended the year by homering in five games in a row. That’s got to be a pretty nice taste in your mouth as you head into the offseason.
Kemp’s in his age-26 year this season, and in addition to playing for a contract, he’s got to know that many view this as a make-or-break season for him after his turbulent 2010. I think we all know that regardless of the moves the club has made this offseason, 2011 largely depends on Kemp’s resurgence. I won’t pretend I’m not at all biased here, but I’m squarely in his corner as far as expecting a breakout 2011.
“Matt Kemp Is Going to Destroy Worlds”, March 24, 2011:
I do want to take this opportunity to reiterate something optimistic that I’ve been saying all winter: Matt Kemp is going to have a monster year.
I realize it’s spring, and that everyone has a nice, rosy outlook this time of the year. That’s fine, and it’ll take more than some spring dingers and saying the right things to prove Kemp right. But the signs are all there for a massive year – no one’s questioned his talent, but now he’s motivated to prove himself, with distractions gone and the right instruction in place.
Matt Kemp is still just 26. The two-year contract he signed after 2009 is up this year. He’s got a lot to prove – and mark my words, he’s going to do it.
After getting on base four times in the season opener, it took Kemp all of one additional game on April 1 to show us that this was going to be a season worth watching:
But the story – beyond the continually inept San Francisco defense – continues to be Matt Kemp, who doubled in the first run of the game in the 3rd, made a sliding catch in the 8th, and basically manufactured the second Dodger run in the 6th inning all by himself. With the Dodgers up 1-0, he led off with a single. Marcus Thames followed by grounding out to Pablo Sandoval at third base; when Sandoval threw Thames out at first, Kemp shocked the stadium by rounding second and heading straight to third, putting himself in position to score on James Loney‘s sacrifice fly.
In previous years, it was the kind of play that would kick off a shitstorm of comments about foolish decisions on Kemp’s part. This year? When he made it safely to third, I tweeted that whatever Davey Lopes was being paid, it needed to be tripled, and I’m pretty sure that nothing I’ve ever said in that medium has ever generated such an overwhelmingly positive response. Kemp has now been on base six of his eight times up this year, and while we should be cautious not to overreact after just two games, he’s looked better than we could have ever imagined. Hey, anyone miss Joe Torre and Bob Schaefer and Larry Bowa? Yeah, me neither.
Kemp hit .368/.443/.613 in April with six homers – only his third best month by OPS, by the way – and while I’ll try to keep this article under a billion words by not noting every single post in which he was mentioned, I can’t help but share with you this item from April 17, a post titled after one of Vin Scully’s best calls of the season – “They Pitched To the One Guy Who Could Beat Them, And He Does“:
MATT F’ING KEMP, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
——
Now down a run in the bottom of the 9th, Andre Ethier started it off with a double off of lefty Trever Miller, which by itself is an extraordinary event that shouldn’t be forgotten, though it probably will. With Ethier on second and Tony LaRussa coming out to wave in Ryan Franklin, I said this:
No pressure, Kemp, but you either hit a walkoff homer here or the Dodgers lose. Just sayin’.
I was joking, but only kind of. Following Kemp were Loney and Uribe, who combined to go 1-6 with three whiffs, further pushing them up next to the McCourts on the public enemy lists of Dodger fans. After them, it was Rod Barajas, whose .188 is by far the best of the three.
So you can pitch to those three guys, none of whom are acting like major league hitters right now, or you can pitch to Kemp, who’s only hitting like Mickey Mantle times Roy Hobbs multiplied by Ted Williams with a splash of Darryl Strawberry in the softball episode of “The Simpsons” that gives this blog its name. I get that you don’t generally want to intentionally put the winning run on base, but I also don’t see how you can let Franklin – who, with today’s loss, has now tied the record for most blown saves in a team’s first 16 games – pitch to the hottest player in baseball, as opposed to three of the worst hitters in baseball.
Franklin’s final pitch ended up in the stands, and the Dodgers avoid the sweep as the legend of Matt Kemp continues to grow.
As usual, Vin Scully put it best:
“They pitched to the one guy who could beat them, and he does.”
And how. Matt Kemp, I think I love you.
Of course, as Kemp and Andre Ethier excelled in the early part of the season, the rest of the team stagnated around them. That wasn’t Kemp’s problem, though, and by early June we were already thinking about what kind of team records he might be in position to attack:
After yesterday‘s two homer, six RBI outburst, Matt Kemp is currently on pace for an absolutely ridiculous season. No, really; he’d end the year with a .318/.395/.576 line, 41 homers, 38 steals (8 times caught), and a 151/74 K/BB ratio. While it’s still early and there’s hardly any sort of guarantee that he reaches those totals, we’re beyond the silly season of two homers on Opening Day setting a pace of 324 for the year, and we have enough data to know that what we’re seeing from him is for real. (It’s at this point that I’ll happily remind that I spent most of last fall and winter predicting a huge breakout year from him, though I’ll admit this is even beyond what I’d hoped for.)
If Kemp continues this tear, these team records are within his reach:
* Best offensive season by a Dodger center fielder.
* Most homers in a season, non-crazy-offensive-environment-of-early-2000s division.
* Top five most valuable season in team history.
* RBI by a Los Angeles Dodger, non-Tommy Davis-unreal-fluke-year-division.
See that projected line in the quote above? He nailed it almost exactly. As June went on, I found myself unable to stop writing about Kemp, who had his best month at an absurd .375/.472/.795 (1.268) and nine homers, despite dealing with a minor leg injury.
“Even Matt Kemp Can’t Save This Mess”, June 9, 2011:
With the Dodgers up 4-0 five innings into the game, I started thinking about what I might want to write about tonight. Initially, this post was going to be titled “Matt Kemp Is A Shiny Golden God”, as he’d homered and tripled to drive in three of the four runs. (He’d later add a double, too.)
“The Legend of Matt Kemp Grows”, June 10, 2011:
About an hour before the first pitch, Matt Kemp was scratched with a sore left hamstring. For 8 1/3 innings, we watched along with him as the Dodger offense, robbed of their main threat, snoozed through another game. After Andre Ethier struck out to start the ninth, the Dodgers had made 25 outs and managed just three hits, two by Dee Gordon. Not that this impending loss was on the offense alone, of course; Chad Billingsley gave up thirteen hits, including seven singles and five runs in the sixth inning alone, and the Dodger defense was generously charged with only two errors.
With none on and one out in the ninth, down six runs, Don Mattingly sent Kemp to the plate. I’ll admit that at the time, I scoffed at the idea of risking Kemp’s health in a lost game, seemingly for the sake of maintaining his MLB-best consecutive games streak. If Kemp is lost for any period of time, a season that’s already in serious trouble – the Dodgers did enter the day in last place, after all – would be all but finished.
Kemp stepped to the plate, an otherwise meaningless at-bat in a long, trying season… and absolutely murdered a baseball. No, really; Kemp crushed this one beyond the left field bleachers. I’ve included a picture of Coors Field at the right here to illustrate just how massive of a blast it takes to do that, and he did it with a sore leg, coming off the bench cold, down six runs. When we look back upon Kemp’s 2011, quickly growing into a season for the ages, we’re going to remember a lot of moments. This is going to be near the top of the list.
A week later, I looked at how much it might cost to sign Kemp to a long-term deal. I settled on starting with 5/$80m, a number which I admit seems quite low now, but remember that at the time he’d had just two good months after his disappointing 2010, and 1.5 years of team control remaining. I think it’s clear that it’s $100m+ at this point.
Kemp’s July was his worst month of the year, at .274/.324/.453, though it wasn’t without its moments. He was voted as a starter into the All-Star Game, and he participated in the Home Run Derby. His midseason grade here was predictably giddy:
Matt Kemp (A+++) (.313/.398/.584 22hr 27sb 5.7 WAR)
I know you come here for informed baseball analysis and all (uh, I hope), and I could write 10,000 words on why Kemp is awesome. I will at some point, and 9,990 of those words will probably be about how I always said that he’d have a monstrous season this year, even as half the city was tearing him apart last year. There will be a time for that sort of insight, but for now, let’s leave it at this: 91 games into the season, Kemp has 5.7 WAR. That puts him on pace for about 9.9 WAR over the full season… a mark bettered by just two Dodgers in history. Yeah. His season is that good. Remember when everyone wanted to trade him, secure in the knowledge that he had neither the baseball IQ or work ethic to become a star? Yeah, me neither.
Kemp ended up with 10.0 rWAR on the dot, making his season the third most valuable in club history behind Jackie Robinson’s 1949 and Adrian Beltre‘s 2004. He continued his rampage against Arizona at the end of July, prompting me to post:
So much for that mini-slump Matt Kemp was supposedly stuck in during the early-to-mid part of July, right? Kemp entered tonight having reached base ten times over his previous five games, including three doubles, and then outdid himself in the 9-5 win over Arizona by driving in the first five runs on a single and a three-run homer – in addition to a nice diving catch in the top of the 7th. How ridiculous is Kemp right now? After the catch, Sports Illustrated‘s Jon Heyman actually tweeted that as far as he’s concerned, the best player in baseball right now is either Kemp or Toronto’s Jose Bautista, who’s sporting a line of something like .682/.951/2.933. High praise indeed, even if it’s probably not accurate, almost enough to not make you want to cry when reading Ramona Shelburne’s account of how Ned Colletti’s hands are tied by the McCourt mess in signing Kemp to the long-term deal he so clearly deserves.
Not only did Kemp not slow down, he got better as the NL MVP quickly turned into a two-man race between himself and Milwaukee’s Ryan Braun. On August 22nd, Don Mattingly moved Kemp up from cleanup to third for the first time all year. The move coincided with the start of the team’s longest winning streak, and as good as Kemp was hitting cleanup (.322/.394/.569), he was even better at #3 (.331/.418/.647). His heroics continued in late August, as he picked up his 100th RBI on his 31st dinger of the year, and on into September, which was behind only June as far as monthly OPS. Though we rooted for Kemp to win the Triple Crown, the batting crown just wasn’t to be, not that that’s in any way a black mark on Kemp; he finished the year with six homers in his last eleven games, including a particularly mammoth shot on September 26th, and clubbing his 39th on his next-to-last plate-appearance of the season. (Thanks, never made-up Washington rain out.)
While Kemp fell just short of the Triple Crown and is probably going to finish a close second to Braun for the MVP, his season was all we’d hoped it could be and more. Let me put it this way – I was totally positive that Kemp would have a big year, but even I didn’t see this coming. A big step forward, sure. A season that ranked among the all-time greats from the long history of this franchise, showing improvement in every single facet of the game, from offense to baserunning to defense? A bit beyond my expectations. For a season destroyed by off-field embarrassment and on-field misery, Kemp’s amazing performance was often the only thing that made this team watchable for the first four months, at least on the days Clayton Kershaw wasn’t pitching.
Well done, Matt. Well done. (You too, Davey.) Now let’s get you paid.
******
Next! What’s more painful, Ethier’s knee or his mouth? Juan Rivera, savior-ish! Trent Oeltjen, space-filler! It’s right field!
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.








