You can't always get what you want
One point of debate on Wednesday's Purple, Gold and Blue broadcast centered around Juan Pierre. What to do with him when he came back, where to play him, and in what spot in the lineup. Earlier in the year, I was on record as supporting an OF of Ethier, Jones, and Kemp, basically every day, with a smattering of JP in there. Given that we're a week away from August and Jones is hitting .166 and has only 12 more RBIs than I do, it's reasonable to reevaluate my earlier position. I still believe, especially given their recent performance, that Kemp and Ethier need to play every day. Period. But if Joe Torre wants to sit Jones, you won't hear me complain. Torre has implied it's a possibility, but we still won't know how the OF is going to shake out until Pierre is officially available to play. I have a bad feeling it won't turn out the way I'm hoping.
We do know, though, that when Pierre plays, he'll lead off, something else I was hoping I wouldn't see. Simply put, Matt Kemp, despite his tendency to swing and miss, has been more productive at the top of the lineup than Pierre. Now, if the logic behind moving Kemp centered around adding another bat to the middle of the order, helping to beef up the heart of LA's lineup, I'd likely accept that- but the motivation seems to be getting JP's speed back to the top of the lineup: "He doesn't give us the power threat that Matt gives us. But he knows how to lead off," said Torre in this piece from the LAT's Kevin Baxter, "He's going to make the pitcher work hard and be a threat on the bases. He's a good spark plug for us."
Not surprisingly, DodgerThoughts beat me to the punch (the man has kids and a real job that demands an even earlier rise than I get) on some of the logic problems that come with insisting the Dodgers are better off with Pierre up top than Kemp, so I won't reproduce them all here. But a fundamental problem is this:
Although Matt Kemp, who has batted first most often in Pierre's absence, has a .393 on-base percentage and a .532 slugging percentage in the leadoff spot -- both far superior to Pierre's .327 and .318 figures -- he has also struck out nearly a third of the time, and only six of his 22 stolen bases have come when he was batting leadoff.
Pierre, meanwhile, is the toughest outfielder in the majors to the strike out, and his 35 steals still rank second in the league despite the fact he has missed a month.
DT points out that, well, Kemp has only hit leadoff for 19 games, so the six SBs in comparison to Pierre is to be expected (and is actually a pretty good number). To his other point, somehow, Kemp striking out more but being superior in virtually every other way matters more than the fact that Pierre generates more outs and less offense but makes more consistent contact, because, in large part, pitchers have absolutely no fear of letting him hit the ball, knowing as long as they don't walk him, the numbers are overwhelmingly in their favor. Again, if the goal was to move Kemp's ability to drive the ball into the heart of the order- and that might play into it, I'll find out tonight- I'd feel a better. Otherwise, though, it's another example of one of baseball's sacred cows taking priority over actual production and logic.
Can't say I like that. Thus endeth the rant.
In other news, Matt Kemp seems to be ramping up his learning curve. Nomar, knock on wood, is not only playing well at short, but managing to stay on the field. Don Mattingly is settling in as hitting coach, and the Dodgers hope he can make an impact.
John Heyman of SI.com writes that front office issues are making it hard for the Dodgers to make deals.
The ten game homestand LA kicks off tonight is a prime opportunity to make some noise in the NL West, starting tonight with the first of three against Washington. Chad Billingsley vs. John Lannan.
The Dodgers and the city are providing/reviving shuttle service from Union Station to Dodger Stadium for every home game remaining on the schedule, starting 90 minutes before the first pitch, and ending 60 minutes after the last. If anyone takes advantage, please drop us a review of the experience. Hopefully it helps with game time traffic.
BK
Subscribe to this Blog | What is RSS?
I don´t really care a peanut if Kemp strikes out more than JP does. An out is an out. Pierre softly ground to pitcher, softly pops infield. Pierre MORE often is made out than Kemp. That´s the point. OBP is more important than K ratio for a lead off batter. Not to mention RBI´s for a lineup spot that is not expected to.
Posted by: tio | July 25, 2008 at 10:09 AM
From Kevin Baxter's article: "He doesn't give us the power threat that Matt gives us. But he knows how to lead off," said Dodgers Manager Joe Torre, who promised Pierre would be at the top of the order when he returns but did not say where he would play him in the team's crowded outfield. "He's going to make the pitcher work hard and be a threat on the bases. He's a good spark plug for us."
I haven't been a critic of Joe Torre, because for the most part I've been pleased with his approach in handling this team. But when it comes to Pierre, I still don't get it. How can he say that Pierre "...knows how to lead off", and that "He's going to make the pitcher work hard...."
If Pierre knows how to lead off, then please explain the .327 OBP, and the 17 BB in 274 ABs. He may make the pitcher work hard keeping an eye on him when he gets on base, but certainly not in the batters box, not with his lack of plate discipline. In fact, contrary to having to work hard, a pitcher can occasionally lay a fastball down the middle without much fear of a long ball or an extra base hit (Pierre has 9 doubles, 1 triple, and 0 HRs).
I'm not a huge fan of Kemp leading off, but as currently constituted it works for the Dodgers. Ultimately I hope to see him moved down in the lineup. He did well in the third slot last year, and I wouldn't mind seeing him moved their in the future. But as I said, for now he's probably the best candidate for the lead off spot.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | July 25, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Well, when life hands you shards, drink Chardonnay!
http://static.flickr.com/88/230642847_a7b7b6c8c4.jpg
It seems inevitable that Joe is going to play Juan almost every game from here on out as the leadoff. The best we can hope for now is that Torre will hide Juan's pop-gun arm out in left field. Also, now that Donny Baseball is full-time hitting coach, Mattingly can impart some wisdom onto Juan, convince him to take a freaking base on balls from time to time, and get that OBP up to a respectable level for a leadoff hitter.
Posted by: DodgerBlueBalls | July 25, 2008 at 10:54 AM
Well, when life hands you shards, drink Chardonnay!
http://static.flickr.com/88/230642847_a7b7b6c8c4.jpg
It seems inevitable that Joe is going to play Juan almost every game from here on out as the leadoff. The best we can hope for now is that Torre will hide Juan's pop-gun arm out in left field. Also, now that Donny Baseball is full-time hitting coach, Mattingly can impart some wisdom onto Juan, convince him to take a freaking base on balls from time to time, and get that OBP up to a respectable level for a leadoff hitter.
Posted by: DodgerBlueBalls | July 25, 2008 at 10:56 AM
I personally feel that Juan would make more of an impact batting 8th than leading off. The end of the order is so weak!!! This would make the end much more exciting. We know that Kemp will strike out more but he hits better when there are no runners on. The outfield of Pierre, Kemp, Ethier is what should be used. As far as Pierre knowing how to leadoff. Kemp can learn to take more time settling in the box after the pitcher has hit. Thats the only thing Juan knows how to do better at leadoff than Kemp.
Package
Posted by: Package | July 25, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Well, If they call it disfunction because the Dodgers shoot down a deal for Cano v Lowe/Kemp, I'll take it. Lowe for Cano? OK. Kemp and Lowe, NO WAY!.
It seems for the last several years that everyone wants to scalp the Dodgers of their talent for some of their players. Remember the matt Kemp for David Wells? And then the Padres get him for a no-name minor leaguer.
So, I will take the disfunction over a bad deal.
Keep up the good work Logan!!!!
I am officially on the "Show Ned the door" bandwagon.
Posted by: Lex | July 25, 2008 at 11:27 AM
Wait, so Frank McCourt is meddling too much? I'm shocked!
How about we pull a LaRussa and hit JP 9th? Honestly that seems like the best spot for him and it doesn't mess up the current lineup.
Posted by: Russel's Muscles | July 25, 2008 at 11:40 AM
Juan Pierre is a bad baseball player who - but for the black hole that is Andruw Jones - should be nothing but a bench player limited to pinch running and the occasional pinch-hitting or late-inning defensive replacement gig. If Juan Pierre could draw walks like Brett Butler used to do, he might be a useful leadoff hitter. But throughout the thousands and thousands of at-bats in his career, Pierre has shown himself to be a hack who refuses to draw walks and who struggles to hit balls out of the infield. He's a Professional Out Machine. If he's in the starting lineup, he should be hitting 8th to make sure he gets the fewest at-bats possible and can do the least damage to our team.
Matt Kemp has done a tremendous job as a leadoff hitter. Since Pierre's been out of the lineup and Kemp has been leading off and Ethier has gotten consistent playing time, the Dodgers have finally - finally! - started to score some runs. Just imagine how we might do if we didn't have to trot out Andruw Jones, that other crappy veteran with an albatross contract running in the tens of millions of dollars. If we see Pierre and Jones starting, and either Kemp or Ethier on the bench, we might as well raise the white flag and admit we're not trying to win, but just trying to justify the horrendous contracts given to Pierre and Jones.
Dodger fans (and Times writers like the guy who penned the PIerre article in today's paper) should wake up and realize that, just like last season, it is the "kids" who supposedly "don't know how to win" (Kemp, Ethier, and Loney, and Martin) that have been playing well and keeping our team in contention, and it is the overpaid, often-injured "proven veterans" that have been dragging us down.
Posted by: KLV | July 25, 2008 at 11:59 AM
For those of you who were hoping the Dodgers bring back Adrian Beltre to play third, Jayson Stark reports over at ESPN that the Blue have given up on trying because Beltre has a no-trade clause to the Dodgers! Man, what do you think of that? As I remember, I thought the Blue gave Beltre a fair offer, bested by Seattle (who overpayed). If he felt stiffed and inserted the no-trade in retaliation, then he let that one very good year get to his head.
Here's the link:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&page=rumblings
(look down in the column under "Yo Adrian")
Posted by: retrograde | July 25, 2008 at 12:06 PM
"it's another example of one of baseball's sacred cows taking priority over actual production and logic." --BK
"Pierre MORE often is made out than Kemp. That´s the point. OBP is more important than K ratio for a lead off batter."--tio
"If Pierre 'knows how to lead off,' then please explain the .327 OBP, and the 17 BB in 274 ABs."--Brooklyn Dodger
Just when I think my head is going to explode because no one else gets the fact that statistical proof is ALWAYS superior to "feelings" and "know-how" and "mysticism," I see that at least three other members of Blue Nation use their heads when thinking baseball. Thank you for the reassurance, fellas.
But before I go (and to make it a typical VAB post of length) I'd like to point out that there is a way to compare speed to power. If a infield single and a SB is as good as a double (right?), then simply add the SB as bases in recalculating SLG. If Slappy's 35 SB are counted as extra bases, his SLG jumps to .445. Which is better... but not nearly as good as Kemp's .532 SLG in the leadoff spot. Plus, with men on, those extra bases off the bat do more than any slap hits or steals...
Which doesn't even begin to address the fact that stealing bases also exposes you to unnecessary risk. Slappy's shiny 35 SB are tarnished by the fact that he only posts an 83% success rate. By most statistical measures (that I've read by SABR members, anyhow), that is just slightly above the "helps your team" mark. To explain, the consensus is that you need to be successful between about 80% of the time in order for those extra bases (vs. giveaway outs) to actually help you produce more runs. So 83% translates into just a handful (5? maybe 7?) more runs on the season. And of course now that he's coming back from an injury, logic dictates he'll steal a bit less, and at a lower success rate...
But even if he's as healthy as earlier in the year, we're looking at just a handful more runs off of a well below league-average OBP, and for this we're going to move our most streaky--but perhaps most talented--young player out of the lineup position in which he's been the most successful?! We want Kemp to work on that OBP, and he's finally doing it in a spot where it perhaps matters most, and we're going to take him OUT of that spot!?!? For barely-ever-matters SPEED!?!?!?!
Speed is stupidly overrated to begin with, but moving Kemp out of leadoff right now is just plain assinine. But at least other folks on here get that. Thanks for getting it, dudes.
Posted by: VA Blueblood | July 25, 2008 at 12:08 PM
"show ned the door" is Correct! What has he done to improve the ball club since joining the Blue? Lugo, Maddux, Sweeney, Loiaza, Schmidt, Andruw, Pierre, Nomar, Kuroda, Berroa, Ozuna, Bennett. Of the players he has acquired through trade or as a free agent signee, only Maddux had an impact and the verdict is still on Kuroda's inconsistent performances.All the others are Major BUST for the money he has guranteed them. Get rid of Flanders and insert the real talent evaluator Logan White. I'm sure Logan will know who is damaged goods at the time of trading or signing someone. Plus he knows what minor leaguers to trade away in case of a trade to upgrade the roster.
Posted by: ozy | July 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Package
I (and most here) agree. Put Pierre down in the order. When he is done pouting it might work out well.
Posted by: Andy B | July 25, 2008 at 12:24 PM
While I think it's fair to be critical of Colletti, especially in FA areas, I don't understand what is becoming the dominant drumbeat in the media regarding the Dodgers FA (as evidenced by the Heyman piece above). Basically, it seems like writers want the Dodgers to prove front office cohesion by making a bad, shortsighted trade to show "they're active," or whatever.
Not sure how that's the right way to go.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | July 25, 2008 at 12:33 PM
BK,
I agrre! Sometimes the best trade is the one that is NOT MADE!
Posted by: ozy | July 25, 2008 at 12:46 PM
BK,
No reason to make a deal just to make a deal, but like they say, if you've got 3 people in charge, then you've got no one in charge, and that's bad for everyone.
Retrograde,
Beltre could always wave the no-trade clause if he wanted to. But he won't. Why would we want a player that doesn't want to play for us? I'll take Blake's defense and $390,000 over Beltre's inconsistency and $13 mill.
Posted by: Russel's Muscles | July 25, 2008 at 12:51 PM
Really... does it matter WHO bats leadoff when the heart of the order is Kent and AJ? Has anyone thought about that nugget.
Sheesh.
Posted by: benzojones | July 25, 2008 at 01:36 PM
Andy B
You are correct. When Juan gets done pouting. I am sure AJ will pout when he is benched but even by AKBKs standards of correct sample size, surely 2/3 of season is enough to show that AJ is through. I believe that Joe will crumble to Ned and play the two losers JP and AJ wherever Ned wants them.
Package
Posted by: Package | July 25, 2008 at 01:42 PM
This means that Beltre wants the calm rather than playing for performance with a contender. His "sweet smile" reminds me FAJ. I think i couln´t stand a couple of sweet smiles in the same team. Let´s play the kids and save this $ for CC
Posted by: tio | July 25, 2008 at 01:52 PM
Regarding Beltre's no-trade list including the Dodgers, I truly doubt that Beltre included the Dodgers on that list because he wants to lord it over the team that didn't offer him enough money to stick around. It's pretty much a standard contract clause for all top-tier free agents these days to include as many large-market teams into that clause as possible. This gives the player leverage to squeeze more money out of his destination team should a trade become a possibility. Teams like Pittsburgh and Kansas City are rarely included in no-trade lists because those teams would never be trading for a high-salaried premier player.
Posted by: elf | July 25, 2008 at 01:54 PM
Again the Kaminsky Brothers are at it. Their obsession with Juan Pierre has become legendary in its psychosis. The Dodger fans who buy into this are probably among the most ignorant in the game. If it wasn't for the Kaminsky Brothers and these fans we wouldn't be in this position. The arrogance that welcomed Andruw Jones, when every scout in the country said he was done, is just one example. You people do not know the game. Your interests are probably too diverse to stay focused. Juan Pierre was our centerfielder. Myself and many other Dodger experts repeatedly expressed the view that Kemp, Eihier and Pierre should be the outfield this year. We have so many other problems but you folks' obsession with Pierre led to Colletti getting this fat, bloated hasbeen in center. And now that he's done, you complain again about the quickened return of Pierre. How embarrassing for you. Let's review again for the umpteenth time the game of Juan Pierre so maybe a "little Billy in the Valley" type might begin to understand.
Juan Pierre is only 30. Lowest strikout per at bat rate in the League. 1st or 2nd in stolen bases 2001-2007. 2007 - 1st in sac hits. 4 x 200 plus hits per season. 2007 - 196 hits placed him 4th in the league. 162 games per season 2003-2007. His lifetime average is .300! Never been on the dl until just now. Makes 1/2 of Andruw Jones salary. 424 lifetime stolen bases. .371 slugging percentage lifetime. 2003 voted MVP for the Marlins by Baseball Writers of America. Lifetime fielding percentage. 990. Has a World Series ring on his finger for beating the New York Yankees in something called The World Series. With all the problems this organization has - and they are too numerous to mention here - the obsession with Juan Pierre is mindless and inexcusable. The ignorance that you people express regarding this player is completely insane. Brian Cashman recently compared his rookie phenom Garndner to Pierre. Joe Torre claims he has to have him lead off for his team. I could quote 25 other baesball professionals regarding the amazing abilities of Juan Pierre but of course, you people know better than Cashman and Torre, don't you. You know things that these people don't know - or do you just fall back on the old "well I just don't like his game and I'm entitled to my opinion" opinion? Ha. You deserve Andruw Jones, Ned Colletti, et al. He's got a weak arm. Ha. Joe Torre said Johnny Damon has the exact same arm in center field for the NY Yankees. You people have no idea what you are talking about regarding the great game of baseball.If you did, you would kiss the ground that Juan Pierre walks on and pray for his speedy return.
Hollywood Dodger Mark
Vice President
Juan Pierre Fan Club
Posted by: Hollywood Dodger Mark | July 25, 2008 at 01:59 PM
adios flanders
Posted by: dave m | July 25, 2008 at 02:11 PM
Pierre's statistics quoted in the article don't tell the whole story. It should be noted somewhere what his 2008 OBP has been in the LEADOFF SPOT. Overall, his OBP is around .320. However, in the leadoff spot, it's around .255. I believe the sample size is around 200 plate appearances. A .255 OBP for your leadoff guy is beyond pathetic. This man needs to bat 8th, or even 9th if Joe were to take the enlightened view that our pitcher bat 8th.
Posted by: The Dude Abides | July 25, 2008 at 03:06 PM
KBros,
So there you have it. According to Hollywood Mike its your fault that Ned was forced to get AJ and then make Torre play him. I didn't know you guys had so much power?
David S
Posted by: DavidS | July 25, 2008 at 03:06 PM
HDM:
200 hits from Pierre BUT in 700 AB makes him good? If Kemp get those AB´s at leadoff that will come to 250 hits!! the remaining 500 outs is what makes not a candidate for a lead off spot. OBP my friend, OBP .That simple
Posted by: tio | July 25, 2008 at 03:25 PM
David S,
"KBros, So there you have it. According to Hollywood Mike its your fault that Ned was forced to get AJ and then make Torre play him. I didn't know you guys had so much power?"
The amazing part is that Jones originally agreed to come here for a cool mil. But BK and I forced Colletti to add an extra 17. That's juice, baby!!!
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | July 25, 2008 at 03:33 PM