OK, I've Given It Some Thought...
And upon further review of the 5 year, $45 million outlay for Juan Pierre, my reaction can be described fairly accurately with the following sentiment (best conveyed in person so you could see my wrinkled brow and unenthusiastic facial expression, but I'm not into interweb self portraits): "Eh...".
The problem isn't so much Pierre himself- the guy is a very durable player who has some positives, namely solid BA, speed, and low strikeout totals, and some negatives, mostly in the form of unsatisfying OBPs, a weak arm in center, and absolutely zero ability to drive a ball- but the length of the deal and how it messes with what had been one of Ned Colletti's greatest assets in building the team: flexibility. (There's also the nagging question of whether or not bringing in Pierre actually addresses the needs of the team in a meaningful way. If you're into that sort of thing, of course.)
The Dodgers are (or were) a Swiss Army roster. A third baseman in Wilson Betemit who can easily slide over to second to replace an aging Jeff Kent and make room for Adam LaRoche, another FA, or a player acquired in a trade. Kent at second is on his way out. Nomar at first has a short deal and can, assuming he's appropriately covered in bubble wrap and every fan at the Ravine crosses his/her fingers, move to another position should the need and/or opportunity to improve the roster arise. Ethier in left can play right. Kemp, though he probably needs another year of seasoning is coming in center, or could be moved for a more established player. Right field? Well, that's a hole that needs filling, and still does, although sticking James Loney out there for a year or two is certainly an option.
The Dodgers have an opportunity to be very selective in how they use an increasing payroll to fill holes around the diamond, because they have in-house a ton of options. Juan Pierre for five seasons doesn't feel to me like a great use of that flexibility.
That's in part because I don't think he really fills a need for the team. Grady Little can probably get away with using Pierre and Furcal in the 1/2 spots at his discretion.* But while he'll catch more balls in center than Kenny Lofton, will he be that much better in the lineup than K-Lo was this season? Better, I think so. 5 years, $45 million better? Eh... For what Pierre will bring, I'd have been much happier seeing the Dodgers bring in Dave Roberts for a year or two and keep their options open. The team needs a threatening bat in the middle of the order. One (Soriano) has already signed with the Cubs, and there aren't too many more out there (Lee, perhaps Wells). Fine. Wait a year. There's always the temptation in baseball to do something. Guys are going left and right, we need to make a move, let's do something. That's how this feels to me. But it's better to not do anything, even if it hurts next season, rather than do something that could hurt for three or four.
Ned Colletti has done, in my mind, a great job as G.M. Not every move has worked, but he's been very proactive and unafraid to correct mistakes of his own or someone else's creation. I like that. But in this case, I think he may have looked at a thin FA and trade market and blinked. In return, the Dodgers have a player that isn't a bad guy to have, but doesn't really solve any of the issues the team is struggling with. In the meantime, he eats up payroll long term and removes some options on the ol' positional and acquisitional (is that a word?) chessboard.
Of course, all of this could go out the window if Colletti finds that bat. Maybe it's Lee, who could be plugged into left, pushing Ethier to right. Maybe it's Wells (moving Pierre to left, I would think, which would devalue his range). Maybe it's someone else. Who knows? But if it's just Pierre, I can't say I'm all that excited.
*Furcal strikes out more but, at least last year, had a higher OBP while Pierre doesn't strike out but doesn't walk, either. Pick your poison. I'd probably try to take advantage of Pierre's penchant for contact and bat him second with the notion you can hit and run more frequently without the hitter swinging through pitches. Plus, Furcal has some pop, which is nice in the leadoff spot and less necessary as a two-hitter. Although I think eventually Russell Martin will be a perfect two hitter, which means Pierre will have to either lead off, bumping Furcal to the three spot, or drop to the bottom of the order, and $9 mil is a lot for an eight hitter.
—BK
Subscribe to this Blog | What is RSS?
Has it even been confirmed that Pierre is a Dodger now, I keep reading all these articles but none have confirmed it. Anyway, I think Pierre is a good asset to the team. These prices are pretty ridiculous, but I guess that's the going price for a player like that...Another thing to consider is that the FA market is not all that great this offseason...I hope Colletti still adds a big bat to the line up, then I'll be happy....
Posted by: hugoj | November 21, 2006 at 01:42 PM
hugoj-
I believe he still has to pass a physical and some details may still be left to iron out. But as far as I can tell, unless something comes unhinged, it's basically a done deal.
It's not so much the price (again, not my money) but the length of the deal that I think is a problem. He seems like the wrong guy with whom to go five years deep, because while he has some positives, he doesn't have enough plusses to be worth that.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | November 21, 2006 at 01:46 PM
BK
I said it when I first commented on this impending move that 5 years is hard to swallow. But, the key will be if he has a "no trade" clause--which I haven't heard about yet. If he does, that stinks for us because, as you said, we will have lost flexibility. However, if he does not have a "no trade" clause, it changes things. Why? Although he probably will bat in the 2 hole for us, Pierre is a lead-off hitter who steals bases and plays a quality center field. If we decide to go another direction after the '07 or '08 season, he will be EASY to trade--a bargain. He'll be locked-up under contract for 3 or 4 years at a relatively reasonable price--teams in need of a lead-off hitter will be falling over themselves to get a player in his prime that won't be a free agent for several years. So to me, the "no trade" clause or lack of one is the key to this being a smart deal or not.
Posted by: dodgerskip | November 21, 2006 at 01:52 PM
Dodgerskip-
I'm not so sure he'll be so easy to move. If he has another year like his last couple. His OBPs in the last two years have been extremely low for a leadoff guy, and while he covers a lot of ground in center, his arm is below average. There could be a market for him, but I don't think it's a given.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | November 21, 2006 at 01:59 PM
I really think we shouldn't necessarily worry about a power-hitter right now (unless a perfect opportunity falls in our lap) but, instead, should be concentrating on the pitching staff. Forget the power hitter and sign two quality starters and a stud middle reliever. We will then be in a position to make a deal for the power bat we need--but only if we've locked up the pitching. Conceivably, we could go to spring training with the offense we have now and see how a Jason Werth looks (he says that he's finally feeling great and will be ready for spring training) or how Matt Kemp has matured. If either of these guys can go, they will easily match the Princess' .280 20 homer numbers--proably surpass them. If we get toward the end of spring training or a month or two into the season and we see that these guys aren't ready, we could package our surplus pitching (only if we have surplus pitching) and a prospect or two and still make a deal before the season even gets going.
Everybody seems obsessed with getting a power bat now. Yes, we need one, no doubt, but we really have about 6 months to look for the right deal. Why go out and make a stupid move in November when the best move may come in April or May? The race is not always to the swiftest--but to the most patient. Ned, BE PATIENT!!
Posted by: dodgerskip | November 21, 2006 at 02:05 PM
This trade is a disaster.
Please, please, please dont trade Kemp. The boat is not in yet on him, sure its possible his plate disciplin never gets better... but the upside is very very tempting. If he turns into the hitter he has the potential to be- he will be the kind of guy we can NEVER seem to sign, and havnt had around in a looong time. He needs a full year in AAA. But it really seems like its worth the "gamble" of keeping him around.
Posted by: john | November 21, 2006 at 02:07 PM
the no-trade clause issue makes or breaks this acquisition. but regardless, we still need pitching. id much rather see us pick up 2 solid pitchers than overpay for a mediocre bat. pitching is everything. pierre's value is gonna increase with each year, because prices are only gonna go up. maybe 1-2 years from now, his 9 mil a year will seem like a huge bargain.
Posted by: joeshmofromcocomo | November 21, 2006 at 02:09 PM
BK
Of course how he plays is obviously going to determine his future value. His numbers over the last 5 years (in which he has played in every game, WOW) have been pretty consistent. I don't think it would be hard for a big-market team to take on his contract for what he's locked-in at. And, as for the rest of the league, if we throw in some cash, I think they would take his contract and numbers as well. No, it's not the idea contract, and I think I would have given Repko, Werth, Anderson, etc. the first crack at the number 2 hole and an outfield spot, but I think that the odds are slim that Pierre will still be our center-fielder in 2010, so the whole "5 years" may not be as bad as it seems on the surface. Just trying to look on the bright side basically.
Posted by: dodgerskip | November 21, 2006 at 02:17 PM
Dodgerskip-
Hey, you could be right. He might be easier to move than I think (and if he plays really well, they may not want to). But to your previous post, I agree, patience is key. That's part of what I don't like about this deal. It feels impatient to me. Maybe it's because I don't have access to the larger picture, so to speak, and don't know exactly what the Colletti plan looks like or what he has in mind. But on the surface, that's part of why I'm not excited about this one. I don't think it's a disaster, but it just feels like an unnecessary commitment.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | November 21, 2006 at 02:20 PM
BK
I certainly agree with you on that. I did not get the same feeling when I heard about this trade as I did when I heard we had signed, Nomar and Lofton to 1 year deals and Mueller to a 2 year deal last off-season. We had to have bodies and these guys were risky, but good players who would "bridge" the gap to the youngsters--it felt right at the time and the moves mostly paid off. Pierre's contract doesn't feel like a bridge to the future, but the future itself--and I really don't like the view. But, maybe Senior Ned has a card(s) to play that will make this move make more sense.
Which leads to this question: Has anyone been able to characterize Ned's philosophy yet? I've looked at the market and tried to figure out who we're going to go after and I get blind-sided by a move like this one. Because for every Ethier for Milton "Behavin'" B(r)adley trade, there's a Lugo for top prospects, Jae Seo for Duaner Sanchez (boy could we have used him last year), and Navarro/Seo for Hendrickson/Hall fiascos. To me, while I feel more confident in Colletti than I did with DePo, I'm still not comfortable that we're going to make the smart move. Can someone ease my mind?
Posted by: dodgerskip | November 21, 2006 at 02:42 PM
dodgerskip:
I think you are on the same page as Colletti. I would imagine, hope more like it, that for a 5-year deal the Dodgers would get the right to trade him down the line. I would not imagine the market is that nuts yet. And in return for the ability to trade him the Dodgers are paying him more money. Seems perfectly reasonable and plausable to me.
As for why Colletti went and got Pierre. I see it as Colletti and Little got together and decided if they cannot get a big bat then get bit speed. Rabbits running around the bases every other inning or so will have a huge effect on the pitches the rest of the team see's during the games/season. The will me a LOT more fastballs closer to the strikezone. This should me more chances to make solid contact. Nomahhh has to be doing his happy dance at the potential of having both these guys a couple times/game. And al teast someone on base most of the time he comes to the plate.
Pierre is a hard worker and maybe some of the patience the Dodgers hitters have (and really most of them were pretty good during the season) but the patience can be taught as can learning to steal bases properly. Remember Pierre have likely never had real base-stealers to help him learn how to steal bases. I would imagine his stealing percentage would increase as will he ability to look at more pitches.
I just like the look and potential of having Pierre and Furcal at the top of the line-up. And I like Martin but the guy is a catcher, whatever speed he has will decrease as the season goes on and he'll just be a bottle-neck batting 2nd. I like him down in the order where all catchers belong... :D
Nice insight that Colletti is not done yet. This might be a prelude to a trade. I imagine much depends on what pitching the Dodgers can add.
Adding Maddux for 2-years would not be a mistake even if he falls apart next year. Adding him and as LoLo mentioned Schmidt and Pettite would make for a pretty solid rotation. But, it would not be a very durable rotation. Only Lowe and Schmidt would seem to get deep into games. And it's still not clear about Billz and Kuo. BTW, I think Kuo is trade bait for sure.
So, I give this signing a B-grade. I think it has potential. But it sure should not hurt the Dodgers. At least it's not Shieffield they got...How would A-rod's bat look in the lineup? Penny, Kuo & Kemp for A-rod, cash and some scrubs?
Posted by: grumpy3b | November 21, 2006 at 02:48 PM
Good call grumpy!!! I've been saying that since October! I might keep Kuo and throw in LaRoche or Betemit because the Yankees are likely to want a new 3B in the deal.
Posted by: Nils Andersen | November 21, 2006 at 03:06 PM
I agree with "The Skip". I mentioned that stuff in the last thread.
Here's the bottom line for me. We had 2 outfield holes to fill. These holes were going to be filled by a combination of these things:
Loney/Nomar - Paper-rock-scissors this decision. Either way they both will be playing out of position, and I’m not convinced I want Nomar running around out there, especially since he’s one of our two established “sluggers”.
Kemp – I would be comfortable with this if he was our 3rd outfielder. But with only one “stable” position filled? I don’t think so. Besides, I agree that he needs another year in AAA where he can get some at-bats.
Werth – I don’t give a damn what he is emailing to reporters about being healed and ready. He is a question mark, and as I said before, two question marks in the outfield is not a good thing.
Marlon – He did a great job coming over and taking over for a struggling Ethier. He was a huge factor in our success. But let’s face it; if Marlon played that well al of the time he would be a star. I’m certain he will come back down to reality next season, so I’m not so sure we should be relying on him to be a starter. Besides, his “D” isn’t anything to brag about.
Repko – Again, I don’t think he is better than a 4th outfielder, but I wouldn’t mind giving him a chance IF we were set with 2 outfielders (one power guy). That’s not the case, so we can’t have 3 weak hitting outfielders out there.
Ethier is our only returning OFielder that is a “sure” thing. Are we comfortable with our only “sure” thing being a second year player?
I’m not jumping with joy over Pierre. But I do think he is a solid pickup and I feel he doesn’t come with a HUGE mortgage compared to some of the other guys on the market. Unfortunately, Ned was forced to make a move, and in this market it is hard to find an “ideal” contract. And as I said before (and echoed by The Skip), if he has a no-trade clause we should be able to move him if needed. The guy has been consistent and healthy. Seven years is not a fluke.
I guess what I’m saying is given our circumstances I can live with this signing and I don't think it hinders us.
Posted by: LoLo | November 21, 2006 at 03:12 PM
grumpy-
I'm not against the trade--just the length of the contract when we have our own guys who could have stepped into this role is what puzzles me.
I am a National League fan. To me, the American League is akin to a slow pitch softball league. The National League style IS baseball (that's one of the reasons I was concerned about Little as a manager--could a guy that came from managing a bombs-away AL line-up juggle & shuffle all the cogs in an NL lineup--jury's still out--but, he's done better than I thought he would). That being said, I too love the thought of Furcal and Pierre at the top of the order--just like I did with Furcal and Lofton. The only reason that Princess got 100 RBI's last year is that with Furcal and Lofton in front of him, how could he not--a legit 3 hitter would have had at least 130 RBI's for us last year. Now with Furcal & Pierre, the key will be to turn them loose. Let them run, hit & run, bunt & run, double steal and basically wreak havoc out there. A nice thing about Pierre is that he doesn't strike out (bad thing is that he doesn't walk either) so Little better bat him 2nd and let him "pepper" the ball in the holes while Furcal is running. We can win playing "Little" ball--it's "National League" ball and it's how baseball should be played. But, will we truly embrace this philosophy or will we see Grady reluctant to double steal because "Nomar's up & Kent's on deck, what if someone get's thrown out?" Either we're going to turn 'em loose or we're not. I'm all for turning 'em loose--it'll be fun to watch.
Posted by: dodgerskip | November 21, 2006 at 03:19 PM
Eh... is absolutely right.
This signing does not change anything as far as 2007 goes. Colletti maintained his 'speedy CF batting 2nd in lineup' formula, and at the end of the day (talent-wise), Lofton=Roberts=Pierre=any other light hitting, base stealing, weak armed outfielder. The Dodgers still need a powerful bat in the middle of the lineup, but we may have to wait another season for one to emerge.
Grumpy, Furcal+Lofton were also 'two rabbits' at the top of the lineup last season. Nomar benefitted from the lineup last year, soI don't see how it's going to get any better for him. More importantly, Grady Little proved that he doesn't know what to do with a lineup based on speed and contact. Sure, they scored a lot, but the Dodgers also wasted a whole lot of opportunities by not aggressively running the bases with two of the fastest runners in the game. I don't see how Pierre replacing Lofton is going to change anything.
Like I said before, Colletti seems to be in damage control mode, but it looks like he's managed to plug most of the holes with Nomar and Pierre. He's still short a power bat, but that might be an impossible task this winter. I expect some big movement on the pitching front in the next few days though, and then the real fun begins.
As for the lineup placement, the #2 hitter should be the guy who is handier with a bat. Both Pierre and Furcal are going to get on base a lot, so whoever bats 2nd is going to get a bunch of sac bunt opportunities, so it should be the guy least likely to botch the attempt. I also like the idea of having speed in the 7 hole, backed up by a solid contact hitter like Martin batting 8th to take care of business before the pitcher.
Posted by: Makoto Ueno | November 21, 2006 at 03:38 PM
Bk,
I agree with the Skipper again for the most part. Why do we think the Dodgers absolutely need to have a POWER BAT to win. I don't argue the fact that a power bat would definitely help but lets not be so insistant that we get a Power Hitter, especially at the cost of giving away $136 million. That money could be spent better on a few quality players that can put the Dodgers into the World Series. We won last year with roughly the same bunch that are coming back this year. Our leading HR hitter hit 20 HR's and we still made the Playoffs. And that was with Nomar, Kent being injured and a bunch of rookies and new players coming in. It seems everyone is assuming that the injuries will be worse this year. What if Kent, Repko, Werth and Nomar stay healthy the whole year and what if Betemit and Kemp got to play a whole year with the Dodgers. Wouldn't the HR numbers surely go up? We have some power on this team, we just didn't receive it last year. We assume last year was the best case scenario, what if last year was the worst case scenario and now we rid of selfish J.D., get a (younger, better version) of Kenny Lofton in center in Juan Pierre, and pick up some more solid pitchers and let the players who went thru this year build on what they started with career years next year.
I for one am excited about Furcal and Pierre at the top of the order. Pierre doesn't walk alot but neither did Lofton. Pierre doesn't strike out a lot and when a speedster makes contact, it puts added pressure on the defense and he would be hard to double up. He would only be a momentum booster and not a rally killer like Lofton was. We questioned Ned when he signed FURCAL last year, saying that we had a shortstop in Cesar I. People questioned Ned that he paid way too much for Furcal who wasn't needed. I think he was the Dodgers MVP in 2006. Pierre might be that for the Dodgers in the coming year... let wait and see.
Posted by: Rob | November 21, 2006 at 04:21 PM
Grumpy3b,
I never really thought about it that way, but it totally makes sense. I like the idea you mentioned about adding speed on the bases, making pitchers throw more fastballs in the strike zone...I think this is the dodgers best bet since they're not likely going to add a big power hitter to their line up.....I really like that idea and I even like this trade more, given the combined speed Furcal and Pierre can bring..We all know the Dodgers haven't had decent base runners in a long time...If all else fails the games should be a little more exciting.......
Posted by: hugo | November 21, 2006 at 04:22 PM
Pierre was at one point a pretty good player. He hasn't been too good the last couple years. His #1 skill is speed, the decline of which probably explains his recent drop-off. His speed (and therefore his production) will only decline more as the years pass. He could very well be forced to retirement (no team willing to give him a roster spot) before this contract is over. All I have read is $44-$45M over 5 years, and the details are very slow to come out. I do pray the contract has something like 3 years guaranteed, and two club or mutual option years.
Posted by: Code D | November 21, 2006 at 04:35 PM
Grumpy3b
The biggest thing I like about your pitching plan is, you have one!! So far no rumblings from Mr. Colletti? Pitching is one area that makes me impatient.
Package
Posted by: Package | November 21, 2006 at 04:50 PM
WHAT THE ?!!!!
AHHH, SORRY FOLKS, MY MISTAKE FOR REPLYING SO MANY TIMES...SORRY, I APOLOGIZE...
Posted by: hugo | November 21, 2006 at 04:55 PM
Skipper,
Regarding easing your mind about Ned. I think he made some crazy (bad moves) trades but lets not take away from the man. He really knows what he is doing. Even his bad trades looked to be good at the time. Seo for Duaner. Seo looked really good in N.Y. as both a reliever and starter. That gave the Dodgers flexibility... who knew he would melt away under the California Sun. Then trading Seo for Hendrickson. When he realized his folly, he made a trade that looked really good. Hendrickson didn't have a good win-loss record but what Devil Ray pitcher does? He was a tall lefty who had a decent ERA and lefty's are hard to come by. Ned traded for Hendy's possible POTENTIAL. Who knew Hendy had no backbone. And finally LUGO? Why? We had Furcal, Betemit, and Martinez. Lugo would have been a great utility guy if he wasn't so self centered. How can you expect this guy to come out and really play when the Dodgers quite possibly could have ruined his career and his value in money. By trading for him and not playing/starting him everyday, the Dodgers hurt Lugo personally and especially financially. Had Lugo played to his capabilities, that trade would have been a steal. That was Ned's only ONE BIG MISTAKE. He didn't mistake in talent but in character. It comes down to the dollar. I guess he learned the hard way with J.D.. or at least I hope he has now.
Posted by: Rob | November 21, 2006 at 04:56 PM
KLAC KEEPS RUNNING A STORY ABOUT THE DODGERS
TRADING A TOP PITCHING PROSPECT( BILLZ/ELBERTS???)
FOR VERNON WELLS.
THEY KEEP SAYING THE DODGERS "HAVE CONFIRMED"
THEY ARE ATTEMPTING THIS TRADE.
FOR WHAT IT IS WORTH?????
Posted by: stargazin | November 21, 2006 at 05:12 PM
IF THE DODGERS GET WELLS, THERE SURE WILL BE A LOT OF COMPETITION FOR THE 4TH O.F. SPOT. ALTHOUGH MAYBE
ONE OF THE CURRENT RESERVES( WERTH, REPKO, KEMP,
THOMAS) WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE WELLS TRADE??
PLUS THAT WOULD LEAVE NOMAR/LONEY AT 1ST BASE ONLY.
Posted by: stargazin | November 21, 2006 at 05:18 PM
THE LAKERS ARE THE MOST STORIED FRANCHISE IN THE HISTORY OF THE NBA. DO YOU REALLY THINK THEY FEEL THREATENED BY THE CLIPS JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE NOW
"COMPETITIVE".
HALF THE BLOGGERS HERE ARE FROM OTHER COUNTRIES.
SOME OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THE CLIPS.
EVEN HAVING THIS DISCUSSION IS GIVING THE CLIPS
MORE RESPECT THAN THEY DESERVE.
'NUFF SAID.
Posted by: stargazin | November 21, 2006 at 05:49 PM
Makoto,
I disagree about Juan Pierre being comparable to Lofton. Pierre is younger and faster than Lofton. He lead the league in steals and I think had about 2x the steals of Lofton. Lofton in my opinion was more focused on his numbers instead of the team. Pierre receiving a huge contract will hopefully be more team oriented. Pierre makes more contact, is more durable, and finally and most important, he covers a lot more ground then Lofton did in Centerfield. I can't count the number of times Lofton got poor jumps on balls hit to center. Missed balls that came off his glove. Got turned around on balls hit over his head. Didn't dive after a ball that he could have easily caught. His effort to me did not compare to the rest of the Dodger team. Lofton, getting into a fight with the team's other distraction Penny. It isn't a coincidence that these two primadonnas had issues. Each placing themselves above team. Needless to say, I'm happy about the acquisition of Juan Pierre in two parts. One, because I think Pierre is a solid player and two because I really didn't respect Kenny Lofton that much. He puts up great numbers and stays in the Major Leagues for a tremendous amount of years but there has to be something to him being bounced around to so many teams. Either, he jumped ship for the money (ala J.D. or the teams let him go after figuring out what he is about).
I also responded to our previous blog about James Loney. Thanks.
Posted by: Rob | November 21, 2006 at 06:12 PM