Olney's Latest: Andruw Jones

I wouldnt even have Andruw on my sunday baseball team. You could pay me the league minimum and I could put up better numbers than he did last year.

I know pink. I said to myself if he could get back to his old form partially and hit 30 hr and 100 rbi that would be great. Braves fans must have been laughing their asses off when we threw all that money on that bum.

my bad, that was 05.

You would think that fat ass would lose some weight to try to get back on track.

Yeah, probably worst contract for a position player.

At least Helton/Hafner/etc. produced.

**$12M per homerun hit

Brian

You can have him for 3 maple bats and a rosin bag.

I wouldnt even have Andruw on my sunday baseball team. You could pay me the league minimum and I could put up better numbers than he did last year.

Posted by: bleeddodgerblue | January 04, 2009 at 10:35 AM
----------------------------------------------------------

Its the comments like this that really bother me. Clearly the guy has lost his way at the plate, but are you really going to mention yourself in the same sentence as a possible HOFer who still plays a good CF despite his weight? You really think you could put up a .323/.361/.710 line in AAA?

As for his "struggles" in the DWL, its a sample size of 22 PA, and 6 of those ended in walks. He may very well be done, but I don't think his DWL performance proves much of anything.

And the idea that Jones' contract is the worst ever signed by a positional player is just ludicrous. Its not like the Dodgers are going to be saddled with his contract for years to come. For example, I'd take Andruw and his contract over 2008-2009 over Todd Helton and the 73.5 million he's getting paid from 2008-2011, especially considering that the Dodgers have ~50 million more to spend than the Rockies. I'll agree that he may be the most overpaid player on a per season basis, but it'd be almost impossible for a 2 year deal to be the worst deal ever given out.

Nixa37,

I'm glad someone here understands why short term contracts can never be horrible. They may be bad, but won't saddle a team with a dead contract for 3-5 years after a player has stopped being productive. While Jason Schmidt hasn't provided any benefit for the Dodgers, it's 3 years. Andruw Jones clearly was a horribly signing, but he's done in 1 year (and would have only been 2 years). While these two signing could have made the Dodgers uncompetitive for the duration of those contracts, it would have been 2-3 years.
Compare that to the Barry Zito 7 year deal, or the Jason Giambi 8 year deal, or even the Ken Griffey Jr. 8 year deal and it's not so bad. A long term contract hinders the ability of the team to make any significant moves for years. A 2 or 3 year deal can still be worked around by back loading a contract by a year (as the Dodgers showed when they signed both Blake and Furcal).
I've always been a fan of the big money-short term contracts that the Dodgers have started giving out. I'd argue that the Juan Pierre signing was worse than the Andruw Jones signing because both are untradeable, neither start, but Pierre is around for 3 more seasons.

NIXA37 - At this point in his career, Andruw Jones does not even qualify as a "possible HOF" candidate! The Hall of Fame would become meaningless if Andruw Jones went in - based on his production to date.

It is possible, of course, that he could resurrect his career and put up six or seven more years of impressive numbers. At this point in time, he wouldn't even get the minimum number of votes required to stay on the ballot after his first year of eligibility.

nixa37

i'm sure bleeddodgerblue was using hyperbole to make a point.

fine, instead of worst contract ever...most overpaid position player per year ever.

geez, some of you really get bogged down in semantics.

AJ, sucks. simplistic enough? or, are we going to argue about that, too?

Could Andruw Jones lead to the designated player/FLEX position being added to MLB? All levels of softball have it. Maybe the team who signs Jones will push for Jones to be strictly a defensive player who doesn't bat.
Now wouldn't THAT be something?

I think Hampton's contract was the worst ever. The guy had 2 decent seasons in 7 years. Well I hope it stays the worst.

NIXA37 - At this point in his career, Andruw Jones does not even qualify as a "possible HOF" candidate! The Hall of Fame would become meaningless if Andruw Jones went in - based on his production to date.

It is possible, of course, that he could resurrect his career and put up six or seven more years of impressive numbers. At this point in time, he wouldn't even get the minimum number of votes required to stay on the ballot after his first year of eligibility.

Posted by: bernie | January 04, 2009 at 12:12 PM
---------------------------------------------

Do you really not think defense should play any roll in HOF voting? Andruw is arguably the greatest defensive CF of all time. True his offensive numbers aren't worthy of Cooperstown, but the same can be said of many of the great defensive players who have made it over the years. With the advances in fielding metrics, its just now becoming clear just how good Andruw was and how long he stayed that good.

I got more in depth in to this argument last night, but I'll just give a quick summary here. In terms of total value, a strong case can be made that Andruw has been more valuable that an all hit, no field slugger like Manny Ramirez. In fact, check out the bottom of these pages from fangraphs for the two...

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=96&position=OF

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=210&position=OF

In terms of total runs above replacement, Andruw was worth just short of 50 more total runs than Manny from 2002-2008. The reason is pretty simple...Andruw was worth an average of 45 more runs defensively per 150 games. If you want a HOF completely filled with sluggers who couldn't play a lick of defense, then that's your opinion. Personally, I'll take one that rewards all around play.

BTW, when I say Andruw has been more valuable than a guy like Manny, I mean that only on a year to year basis. Clearly with the length of his career and the fact that he's still an elite hitter, Manny has been much more valuable in total, and that's why he's a no doubt 1st ballot HOFer. My point was more that Andruw Jones from 1998-2007 was likely as valuable in total as (and possibly more so than) Manny was during his best 10 year run.

DodgersBruin

How many horrible short-term contracts does it take to equal one bad long-term contract?

juan pierre+ AJ+ schmidt are about as bad as you can do on a short-term basis. not sure about the dollars, but MANY awful short-terms can exceed one awful long-term.

honestly, i would take zito's long-term deal over all these terrible short-term deals colletti's put us in. at least zito goes to the mound and throws the ball...

Posted by: mr.pink | January 04, 2009 at 12:49 PM
--------------------------------------------------

Are you serious? Maybe Zito can still sort of pitch now, but his deal runs through 2013. Do you really think he'll be able to do anything at that point? Here's the year by year breakdown on Zito

2009-2011: 18.5 million
2012: 19 million
2013: 20 million
2014: 7 million for the buyout

That's basically 100+ million for the next 5 seasons for a pitcher who is clearly below league average.

nixa37

ceteris paribus. actually, the time value of money does make AJ's more expensive.

for instance, you could invest $14mm today at 8%, compound it annually, and in 4 years you've got zito's $20mm for 2013.

the $20mm owed in 2013 will actually be much, much less (in today's $s) if the giants have any financial acumen.

yes, zito's below average. WTF would you call schmidt?! a little below average? the worthless bum pitched a game in three years!

I know what the time value of money is, and as I said it does make the average net present annual value of his contract less than Jones. It does not however make up for the 90 million dollar difference in the total value of the two contracts.

Also, looking at baseball assets in terms of the NPV of salary will lead to some misleading conclusions because baseball teams can't be operated like normal businesses. They are more like investment banks that must manage a pool of assets. If a large part of your portfolio is made up of large, long term, completely illiquid commitments, like Zito or the current mortgage backed securities, there is a large opportunity cost because you can't cut your losses and reinvest elsewhere.

"ceteris paribus. actually, the time value of money does make AJ's more expensive. "

And also, while AJ may be more expensive than Zito for one year, that's one year. Zito will be more expensive than AJ for '09, '10, '11, '12, '13 and '14 after the re-worked deal.
Unless you refuse to acknowledge the reworked deal where the Dodgers pay $5M this season, then $2.85M each season over the next 6 years.

>Andruw is arguably the greatest defensive CF of all time.

That can't seem to throw anyone out to save his life. Plus, I saw at least 3 balls go over his head last year. (Mind you, we're talking about limited playing time too.)

Yes, he used to be great. But, he can't even see great in the rear view anymore.

dodgersbruin

the logic for 2013 holds for 2010-2012, too. didn't think i needed to spell it out.

when i write ceteris parabus, i'm speaking to the contracts. as in, take ANY two contracts and calculate the NPV...not the signings.

as for zito v. schmidt, well, we'll just have to disagree. maybe i just remember zito pitching lights out against the dodgers late in the season and i can't remember schmidt pitching. again, i'd rather have an athlete attempt to compete, regardless of ability (Zito), than to not compete at all (Schmidt, Jones?). btw, say what you will about pierre (personally, i don't care for him) he shows up everyday and is ready and eager to compete.

when i write ceteris parabus, i'm speaking to the contracts. as in, take ANY two contracts and calculate the NPV...not the signings.

as for zito v. schmidt, well, we'll just have to disagree. maybe i just remember zito pitching lights out against the dodgers late in the season and i can't remember schmidt pitching. again, i'd rather have an athlete attempt to compete, regardless of ability (Zito), than to not compete at all (Schmidt, Jones?). btw, say what you will about pierre (personally, i don't care for him) he shows up everyday and is ready and eager to compete.
------------------------------

So you want to only paint half the picture to prove your point? That's some flawed logic you have going on. Even with a shorter term contract having a higher AAV, it ends sooner. So once you set your budget for your club's payroll for the season, you fill it out as best you can. A short term mistake gives you more payroll flexibility over future seasons when you readjust your budget for the club's payroll in those future years.
And as for "competing" vs. "not competing" do you not believe in injuries? By that logic Tony Abreu was a horrible signing last season as we paid him $400K and he didn't play a game. Also, Schmidt pitched 6 games in 2007, not the "1 game in 3 years" that was mentioned earlier. And these contracts, once signed are sunk costs. We have to pay them regardless of how they perform. So I'd rather a below average or injured player sit on the bench in favor of the better player, regardless of what they're all being paid.

And to further my point, even if we were just comparing last season in terms of contracts and performance without worrying about the length of contracts, I'd still rather have Andruw Jones. Jones cost the Dodgers $18.1M if you just take average value. Zito cost the Giants $18M taking the average value. So Jones was more expensive. Except that Jones spent the year on the bench injured, replaced by Andre Ethier. Zito remained in the lineup the entire season. So you take the 85 ERA+ Zito put up and compare that to the combined 200 ABs of 34 OPS+ from Jones AND 350 ABs of 130 OPS+ from Ethier to combine the 550 ABs from a seasonal player. The combination of Jones/ Ethier is more valuable than Zito last season, with the cost about equal.

as a fifth, or whatever, starter?

"do the giants have anyone better to go the mound than zito?"

But you were comparing Zito to Andruw Jones!!!

As for the Giants having anyone better that Zito, are we talking this year or last year? For the upcoming season, I'd argue Noah Lowry is better than Zito. He posted a 113 ERA+ in 2007. And he'll be the 6th starter probably. He definitely won't be pitching in front of Zito.

"i've been accused of far worse than flawed logic."

Okay... I don't know what that has to do with anything. Your logic IS flawed if you just want to compare the AAV of a contract without looking at the surrounding circumstances. Should I be glad that's all I "accused" you of? Should I feel bad others accuse you of other things? I'm confused.

nixa37

very interesting. thanks.

Look, this is for all of the HOF talk:
Harmon Kilebrew didn't get in till his 6th year on the ballot.
Jim Rice and Andre Dawson are still not in the HOF and are down to their final years on the ballot.
So, what the hell says Andruw Jones McBurger will get in?

"LA will be eating the remaining 5 Million once they release him. No GM with half a brain would trade for him."

I agree. No one is going to give up anything for Jones. The Dodgers will have to release him and then some team will probably take a chance at a one year contract at league minimum.

I wonder how serious Jones is taking his hitting and weight problems now? If he is picked up by another team, this will most likely be his last shot to get a big contract in 2010 (if any contract at all).

As far as the HOF, I think that you would even agree Nixa that if Jones continues this downward spiral he will not be a HOFer. Sure he put up great numbers in the first half of his career (even if we assume that he is the best defensive CFer to play the game) its not enough to be a HOFer of any kind. He would have to get much better than he was last year. Even as great as he was with the Braves, half of a career should not warrant a place in Cooperstown. I know you are pulling for him but I just don't think it would be equitable to all the other greats who played full careers and put up amazing numbers for much longer than Jones.

Bernie,

When Andruw was in his mid 20's he was constantly being compared to Mays as the greatest defensive CF of all time. I know Baseball Tonight (not a good source, but whatever), chose him as the greatest defensive CF of all time 2 years ago. I believe Mays is the only CF with more 400+ PO seasons in his career, with 6 compared to Jones 5 (Beltran, Edmonds, and Sizemore have 3 combined). Just compare his UZR numbers at fangraphs.com to any recent CF who you think even compares to Jones defensively and you'll see what I'm talking about. Oh and keep in mind that he was better defensively from 1998-2001 (UZR doesn't go back that far) and that from 2002-2005 the difference between Andruw and Jim Edmonds was about the same as the difference between Jim Edmonds and Manny Ramirez.

Jones offensive numbers are also more than solid. He currently has a 111 OPS+ for his career, which is pretty good for an elite defender. He also has 371 career HR, which is very good coming almost exclusively from CF. Honestly you need to stop comparing Andruw to other great or very good defensive CF. He was on a completely different level than those guys. That's would like comparing Ozzie Smith to JJ Hardy or Yunel Escobar.