So How Good Does Matt Kemp’s Contract Look Now?
January 25, 2012 at 8:40 am | Posted in Matt Kemp | 58 Comments
Back in November, the Dodgers locked up outfielder Matt Kemp for the next eight years for the enormous sum of $160 million. At the time, not only was it by far the largest in Dodger history, it was the seventh-largest contract in baseball history and the largest in National League history. While we noted that the deal wasn’t entirely without risk – Kemp was just one year off a hugely disappointing 2010 and tying up that much money in any single player can easily turn sour – we were generally very happy with the outcome. As I said at the time, “if you’re going to make that gamble, making it on an athletic outfielder that you know well and who is just entering his prime is a much smarter choice than doing it on a player already into his 30s who is an uncertain commodity.” Kemp ended up finishing second in an MVP race that he probably should have won, even before Ryan Braun‘s testing issues became public, and the combination of few available free-agent bats likely to be had next winter and Kemp’s youth meaning that he’s only signed through 34 made the deal seem extremely appealing.
Besides, beyond the obvious baseball reasons for needing to retain Kemp, this was a move that had to be made from a pure public relations standpoint. After all the garbage Frank McCourt has put fans through over the last few years, and considering that the Dodgers haven’t had a homegrown star stick with the team in decades – the last two players who made it ten years with the club were the decidedly non-elite Eric Karros & Dave Hansen, who each left after 2002 – the idea of letting Kemp walk was probably more than this fractured fanbase would have been able to handle. If you had to overpay slightly to avoid that, then so be it.
All of which is to say, at the time the deal was signed just before Thanksgiving, we were all pretty happy with it, one of the few Dodger roster moves this winter which was met with something other than disdain.
Two months later, Kemp’s contract has been absolutely blown away by the mega-deals received by Albert Pujols (ten years & between $246m-268m from the Angels, depending on incentives and personal-services deals) and the nine years and $214m Prince Fielder collected from Detroit yesterday. Considering what Kemp brings to the table that neither Pujols or Fielder do, the fact that the Dodgers kept him for $54m less than Fielder and about $100m less than Pujols – over a shorter term than either – makes the Kemp deal look even better than it does the day it was signed.
Compare Kemp to Pujols. As much as I love Kemp, it’s crazy to argue that he’s a superior or even equal hitter to Pujols, who will probably be one of the five best to ever play the game when he’s done. I mean, Pujols hit .299/.366/.541 with 37 homers last year, and people were complaining it was a down year; the man is a beast. But Pujols, who turned 32 earlier this month, is nearly five years older than Kemp, and perhaps more, if you believe the constant (yet unverified) rumors that his age may not be accurate. He’s a very good baserunner, but of course doesn’t offer close to the speed Kemp provides on the bases. While he’s an excellent defensive first baseman, one of the best in the game, the mere fact that he’s limited to the least-important defensive position curtails his value. You can argue both the accuracy of WAR and how it rates Kemp on defense, it’s for that reason that only once has Pujols had a season that beats Kemp’s 2011 in rWAR, back in 2003 when he put up an obscene 10.9 mark that ranks as the 16th-best season since World War II.
Younger, $100m cheaper, more dangerous on the basepaths, playing a far more valuable defensive position, and not coming off his worst (though of course, still great) season? I think I know which deal I’d rather have.
What about Fielder, whose own youth – born just four months ahead of Kemp in 1984 – was a major selling point for him? Fielder is of course an offensive force, since his .981 OPS last year was nearly the equal of Kemp’s and because has surpassed that mark twice before. The obvious big problem with Fielder is that not only is he a first baseman, he’s a bad first baseman, ranking as perhaps the worst in the sport since he became a full-time player in 2006. While his youth is an asset, his body type most certainly is not; you could argue that on hitting alone, he’s maybe better than Kemp, but when you consider baserunning and the enormous defensive gap between the two, Kemp seems like a better bet for the future. Not only that, Fielder is getting a year more and comes with $54m in additional risk.
I liked Kemp’s deal a whole lot in November, and I like it even more now. That’s in large part because unlike Pujols and Fielder, Kemp had not yet reached free agency, when the ability to negotiate with other clubs would almost certainly have inflated his price. Great job by the Dodgers to get him secured now, before an entire season of questions about his status and an even bigger payday next winter.
58 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a Reply
How Many McCourt Sins?
MSTI on the web
MSTI Library
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
If in the next ten years MLB decides to resolve the DH discrepancy and somehow decides to get rid of it (very remote but the only right decision). God’s speed to any MLB executive driving through Detroit or Anaheim from 2015-2021.
Comment by RS— January 25, 2012 #
Re DH: It’s permanent. You forget the union, which would strike rather than let any owner monkey with it, as if any typically unimaginative AL owner would. And it’s permanently NOT going to ever be added to the NL, which likes its tradition as the only real baseball league for 136 years and counting. Fans of NL teams don’t like the DH. THEY would strike if the NL adopted it. It would turn the NL immediately into a carbon copy of boring plodding AL 3-run HR baseball. And no AL DH fan will ever change any NL fan’s mind by whining on about “strategy” and “pitchers bunting, how exciting is that”. NL fans don’t want their kind of cheap excitement. Our baseball is better cuz it’s smarter. Smart always trumps dumb. Angels baseball is relatively dull. If i were Mike Scioscia i’d have gone back to the NL a long time ago. He’s only using about 2/3 of his brain. The unused protion is probably atrophying. Poor Mike.
Comment by Native Angeleno— January 25, 2012 #
I am lapsed “Astros” fan – now Dodgers fan because of the DH issue. So I am totally on board with you. I love the NL way of baseball. But after watching the horror show of the Astro sale, I put absolutely nothing past baseball execs. My feeling is the constant interleague play is going to force the issue. It’s one thing to have vast rule differences for a couple of weeks, the All Star Game, and WS. But I think the daily interleague is the first step toward unified rules. And I shudder to think the rule will be – DH in both leagues. Again, hate it, hate it, hate it. I’ve become a Dodger fan over the whole fiasco. But I also feel totally scarred by the death of my childhood team this November.
Comment by RS— January 25, 2012 #
I’m a native Texan Dodger fan. Have been my whole life, and I’m getting up there in age. The Astros with a DH in the AL is a sacrilege, but then they may not be called the Astros much longer. Colt .45′s anyone?
Comment by SamAdams— January 25, 2012 #
I’m hoping for the Old English 40s.
Comment by @BrocNessMonster— January 25, 2012 #
As a native Houstonian here’s my list. For defining features: The Freeways, The Humidity, The No-Zoning, The Petrochemicals. For homage to our new owner: The (War) Profiteers, The Discriminators. For homage to our former name: The Asshats. For our predicament: The Seligs, The Roadkill, The Basement (where they will live for the next 10 years). For how badly we got played: The Nolans (Nolan Ryan pwned the Astros by getting them stuck with the Rangers in the West).
And for originality of Houston sports fans: The Houstonians
Comment by RS— January 25, 2012 #
I think that the NL is going to have a DH, and pretty soon at that. While I like the pitcher batting, I see good reasons for there to be a DH. I’ll be disappointed when it changes, but I’ll certainly live. What I don’t understand is giving up on my childhood team because it’s moving leagues or adding a DH. The only thing that would threaten my fandom is if they moved far away.
Comment by Bip— January 25, 2012 #
Well, Bip, I respect your opinion because you’ve written some interesting posts. I’ll posit the question this way, suppose the following thing about the Dodgers were changed: 1) The stadium., 2) The Uniforms three times, 3) The League, 4) The Name. Would you still follow the “Dodgers”? Dodgers fans revolted because they didn’t like the owner (frankly something I haven’t completely understood given that under his terrorist regime the team still went to the NLCS, twice!) But my view is to each their own. Turning over a new leaf. Giving my very young daughters a chance to follow a great franchise from the start.
Comment by RS— January 25, 2012 #
1) I’d feel the loss of Dodger Stadium, but my fandom would be unaffected. This is something I know will happen eventually.
2) I’d feel a little weird, but so many team have changed their uniforms so many times that I wouldn’t be that bothered.
3) This would definitely take some getting used to, but, again, as long at they’re the Los Angeles Dodgers, they’re my team, they’ll just be playing different teams primarily.
4) This is the other thing besides changing to a new city that would pose a significant problem for me. I guess the best way to put it is, I’m a fan of the Los Angeles Dodgers, so as long as the Los Angeles Dodgers exist, I’ll be ok, and if they don’t, then I have a decision to make. That’s as best as I can answer the question.
Comment by Bip— January 25, 2012 #
Ha, well you’re more open-minded and Zen than me. But you’re in luck because aside from dodger stadium, none of those other things will come to pass. Ever.
Comment by RS— January 25, 2012 #
You think that somehow, out of nowhere, for no reason, Dodger fans just decided to dislike McCourt?
Wow.
Comment by Bartick— January 27, 2012 #
Two fat firstbasemen? It’ll be fun to see who nets the most weight over the next two seasons. Kudos to the blue crew for not paying a kings ransom for someone who’s morbidly obese and likely to get worse over the next 9 years
Comment by Bleeddodgerblue— January 25, 2012 #
And by two I meant few
Comment by Bleeddodgerblue— January 25, 2012 #
I wouldn’t call Pujols fat…. Dude is a beast. I just don’t think locking up ANY 32 year old athlete for 10 years at huge money is a good idea.
Comment by Dave Pomerantz— January 25, 2012 #
Talking prince and miggy
Comment by Bleeddodgerblue— January 25, 2012 #
I don’t think either the Pujols-Fielder comparison or Pujols-Miggy comparisons are accurate.
These comparisons ignore that Fielder is not an elite player like Pujols and Miggy. Pujols’s worst years are equal to Fielder’s best. Pujols is something like twice as valuable as prime Fielder on average. Miggy may not get the HRs like Fielder, but he also has been a much more valuable player than Fielder on offense alone.
Then there’s the fact that Fielder is not your regular heavy-set player. Miggy is 250+, but he’s also 6’4. To take another oft-used comparison, Sabathia looks huge, but he’s 6’7. Fielder is a 5’11 guy who weighs almost as much as young Shaq.
Comment by GoDodgers— January 25, 2012 #
Well, now that makes a lot more sense… Sorry!
Comment by Dave Pomerantz— January 25, 2012 #
Could not agree more. Great article Mike!
Comment by Justin— January 25, 2012 #
Yep, well said Mike.
Comment by Jon#7#22— January 25, 2012 #
As I stated last time, I’m pretty happy with this contract. It almost guarantees that the NL MVP will be renamed “The Matt Kemp Award” for the next four years.
Comment by Brian Stuart— January 25, 2012 #
That’s pretty interesting. With Pujols & Fielder both gone and Braun’s reputation destroyed, the balance of power in the NL from that point of view has really shifted. There’s always Votto, of course, and you never know when Mike Stanton or Jason Heyward really breakout to become superduperstars, but there’s definitely an easier path for Kemp now.
Comment by Mike— January 25, 2012 #
Ya Stanton came by my school this week and he hit a home run onto the street from home plate. Thats well over 500 feet, the guy is a monster. I expect him to really break out this year and hit 45 bombs. I really think he is going to be the second best NL player for the next 8 years along with Kemp. As for Heyward, I dont know I honestly expect more from Freeman going forward. Also have you realized that the NL has lost its top 3 first baseman in the last two years. Pujols, Gonzalez, and Fielder are all AL players now. I we are now left with Votto, and then no one really else except Ryan Howard and he strikes out 6 times a game. Its a sad day when I think of James Loney as a top 5 first baseman in the NL.
Comment by Jimmy— January 25, 2012 #
At the time i thought Dave Stewart suffered a stroke. In the New Age of what will regularly be gimongous contracts, Kemp’s contract was a steal. Watch him pout justifiably in 5 years he’s the lowest-paid great player in the league. He’ll want a re-do and extension, and i hope he gets it. Kershaw’s first mature contract will DWARF Kemp’s. As the miffs keep piling up for Matt, like the MVP vote which will someday be seen as a can-you-believe-this trivia question, Matt will have a burr under his saddle that made him say not long ago he still has a lot more to prove.
Comment by Native Angeleno— January 25, 2012 #
I dunno… 20 mil per year is a LOT of dough, and in 5 years, it’s still gonna be A LOT of dough. Kershaw won’t dwarf Kemp’s contract in annual value, though it might be longer (I hope!) because he’s younger. He’ll make a little more per year, and he should – he looks like he’s going to be an all-time great.
Comment by Dave Pomerantz— January 25, 2012 #
I hope Kershaw sets the record for longest contract ever in terms of years. 12-13 I think would be good, lock him up through his age 36 or so season.
Comment by Joseph— January 25, 2012 #
If Kershaw got a bigger contract than Kemp, then that would give Kershaw the biggest contract ever awarded to a pitcher BY FAR. Kershaw’s contract will be for fewer years than Kemp’s, and probably for about the same annual value or a little less. Pitchers just don’t get 8+ year deals.
Comment by Bip— January 25, 2012 #
We should snapshot this thread because I bet the Dodgers will be the “fools” paying big bucks for a 30yr old 1B in Votto.
Comment by Shane— January 25, 2012 #
Speaking of Fielder, think the Dodgers might trade for him?
Comment by Brandon— January 25, 2012 #
Ha.
By the way, seeing your email address reminds me that I read a story on Bpro today about Bill Caudill in 1986.
Comment by Mike— January 25, 2012 #
It was a historic year for the Caudills (no relation, though)
Comment by Brandon— January 25, 2012 #
It looks great, until and unless he signals dissatisfaction and a desire to re-negotiate. For that to happen, he ought to have led us to at least one WS title with him carrying around an MVP for real!
Comment by John Young— January 25, 2012 #
Kemp=Athletic Outfielder
Fielder=Athletic Sumo Wrestler
Sorry, that’s the way I see them!
Comment by SamAdams— January 25, 2012 #
Btw, Mike, 20 minutes before you sent this out, I posted on BBWC that Fielder’s contract makes Bison’s look like a steal. Short post, so I’m sure we had the thought simultaneously.
Comment by SamAdams— January 25, 2012 #
Speaking of homegrown stars sticking with the club, imagine if Paul Konerko had never been traded and the Dodgers somehow held onto him all this while. He’d be the elder statesman/anchor of the club AND he’s still raking. Kemp-Ethier-Konerko anybody?
Comment by Casey— January 25, 2012 #
Thy looks like a good 3,4,5.Loney and prospect for konerko.
Comment by mike L— January 25, 2012 #
One other thing to add. Obviously, durability is an issue for any player, especially one with Prince Fielder’s physique. However, in the past 6 years, Prince Fielder has missed 13 games total. In the past 4 years, Matt Kemp has missed 11 games.
While, as each player gets older, the weight issue becomes more of a factor, but currently it has not been a factor for Prince Fielder.
Comment by Brian Stuart— January 25, 2012 #
This is totally fair, and I do think a lot of people have overlooked that. However, staying healthy from 24-27 is a whole lot different than doing so from 28-37.
Comment by Mike— January 25, 2012 #
I concur with that assessment. If I understand it correctly, Fielder does take extraordinary efforts to ensure he’s in physical shape. He’s just, like his father, a fat man.
Comment by Brian Stuart— January 25, 2012 #
Kemp isn’t going to miss a game for the rest of his career, Cal Ripken Jr’s record is going down, does the Iron Bison seem like a good nickname?
Comment by Joseph— January 25, 2012 #
“While, as each player gets older, the weight issue becomes more of a factor” That’s the concern right there.
Comment by Bip— January 25, 2012 #
Kemp’s contract was huge for him and the Dodgers I just wish this ownership thing could get settled so whoever gets the Team has enough time to put a competitive line-up on the field on a daily basis.
Comment by Toby— January 25, 2012 #
2010 = dating Rihana
2011 = not dating Rihana
There’s a rumor he’s dating her again, that is bad news.
Comment by Jesse— January 25, 2012 #
Come on, that is such an oversimplification.
Comment by Mike— January 25, 2012 #
That is bad news.gold digger.
Comment by mike L— January 25, 2012 #
Just kidding around, you can’t say that Rihana isnt bad news tho
Comment by Jesse— January 25, 2012 #
lol
Comment by DodgersKings323— January 25, 2012 #
Is Dave Parker a good comparable for Kemp?
Comment by WBB— January 25, 2012 #
Now if we just get rid of Uncle Frank and Uncle Ned, extend Kershaw it can be an A+ off-season!
Comment by DodgersKings323— January 25, 2012 #
It seems that baseball people still haven’t caught on to what makes players valuable. Fielder is definitely a better hitter than Kemp, assuming that Kemp is not going to hit just as well as he did in 2011 for the rest of his career. However, he’s not better by a large enough margin to overcome Kemp’s baserunning, position advantage, and slightly better defense at that position. However, they are both being paid basically as if the only criteria that affects their value is hitting.
-
I wonder what Kemp would have gotten had he made it to free agency and had more teams bidding for him. This is where his position may have really made a difference, if only by greatly increasing the number of teams that would have made a bid.
Comment by Bip— January 25, 2012 #
If Curtis Granderson makes to free agency next offseason we might have an answer to that. He is probably seeing $$$$ now that Kemp is off the market.
BTW anyone with comparison thoughts to Carl Crawford’s 7/142 year deal last year. One more year of Kemp for only 18 million; sounds good to me.
Comment by Blue Shoes— January 25, 2012 #
now there’s not that much competition for the NL MVP
Comment by GP— January 25, 2012 #
Jeff Francis to a minor league deal. I know you are going to write about it, but oh boy these late signings are going to make these Colletti signings look 10 times worse then we were even anticipating.
Comment by The Hatch— January 26, 2012 #
Absolutely. I would have loved to snag Kuroda, then sign Bedard and Francis … with Eovaldi and the young pitching behind him, we would have had a KILLER rotation all season.
Comment by Doppel— January 26, 2012 #
So, we made a legitimate play for FIelder, huh? Wow…
http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/33714192/34583652
Comment by Gibby's Limp— January 26, 2012 #
[...] MSTI: Mike Petriello asks how good Matt Kemp‘s contract looks in light of other long term deals. Pretty awesome, I’d say. [...]
Pingback by Chad Moriyama – Around The Web: Matt Kemp’s Contract, 2011 Pitcher Duels, And Minor League Rankings— January 26, 2012 #
[...] Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness says the Fielder deal makes Matt Kemp‘s contract look even better. [...]
Pingback by Baseball Blogs Weigh In: Prince, Zimmerman, Scutaro | Columbus Sports Radio— January 27, 2012 #
[...] Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness says a Fielder understanding creates Matt Kemp‘s agreement demeanour even better. [...]
Pingback by Baseball Blogs Weigh In: Prince, Zimmerman, Scutaro | My Blog— January 27, 2012 #
[...] thrilled with the offseason. The good will engendered by signing Kemp to an eight-year extension (which looks better by the day) hasn’t exactly overcome the disappointment of spending millions on backloaded two-year [...]
Pingback by Seven Reasons for Optimism in 2012 « Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— February 23, 2012 #