Dodgers Extend Andre Ethier

TUESDAY: The Dodgers announced that they've reached an extension with Ethier. A press conference will take place at Dodger Stadium this afternoon. Ethier's deal doesn't include a no-trade clause, Dylan Hernandez of the LA Times tweets.

Ethier's option vests if he reaches an "easily attainable" plate appearances threshold late in the contract, Yahoo’s Tim Brown reports (on Twitter). It vests based on plate appearances in 2017 or 2016-17, Jim Bowden of ESPN.com and MLB Network Radio adds (on Twitter). 

MONDAY: The Dodgers have reached an agreement on a five-year, $85MM extension with Andre Ethier according to USA Today's Bob Nightengale (on Twitter). Jon Heyman of CBS Sports was the first to report that the two sides were near the extension, and added that the contract contains a sixth year vesting option (Twitter links).

Dylan Hernandez of the L.A. Times added that the vesting option would likely push the deal to $100MM total. Hernandez goes on to say that the deal is expected to be finalized tomorrow. The proposed contract would pay Ethier $13.5MM in 2013, $15MM in 2014, $18MM in 2015-16, and $17.5MM in 2017. The option for 2018 would be for another $17.5MM with a $2.5MM buyout (All Twitter links). Ethier

We've heard about a possible Ethier extension several times over the past few months, and the right fielder has said recently that he wouldn't put a deadline on negotiations. The 30-year-old is making $10.95MM this season after avoiding arbitration with a one-year contract this past winter.

Ethier has spent his entire career in Dodger blue after he was traded to L.A. from Oakland in exchange for Milton Bradley and Antonio Perez. Ethier boasts a solid .291/.363/.482 slash line for his career, but has a less-than-stellar defensive reputation. Ultimate Zone Rating hasn't been kind to him, rating him as 6.2 runs below average per 150 games in more than 5,700 career innings. The other big question with Ethier lies in his durability; he's spent time on the disabled list in each of the past two seasons.

MLBTR's Dan Mennella examined the CAA Sports client's free agent stock in April, noting that he had the best chance at landing a big contract among upcoming free agent right fielders.

As MLBTR's Extension Tracker shows, general manager Ned Colletti has locked up the two cornerstones of his team's outfield in the past calendar year. Colletti signed Matt Kemp to a franchise-record, eight-year, $160MM contract this offseason. Colletti also signed ace Clayton Kershaw to a two-year extension worth $19MM and signed Tony Gwynn Jr. to a two-year, $2MM deal this offseason.

A formal announcement is expected on Tuesday, at which point Ethier will officially be the owner of the third-largest contract in Dodgers history, behind Kemp and Kevin Brown.

Photo courtesy of US Presswire/Kirby Lee.


183 Responses to Dodgers Extend Andre Ethier Leave a Reply

  1. yes!!!

    • Casor_Greener 3 years ago

      Dude, this was not a good deal.

      • LazerTown 3 years ago

        I agree, $17 million AAv for a player that hits 22 hr/year when standardized to 600 ab.  Especially for a RF, it’s not a prime defensive position, it is the easiest position and he is below average at it. 

  2. Havok9120 3 years ago

    Good for them. 5/6 years is a nice length.

    • Table 3 years ago

       3-4 years would be nicer

      • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

        One year with extensions options for the next eight would be ideal. Funny how that kind of deal never happens.

    • Casor_Greener 3 years ago

      not when he’s got two good years left at the most.

      • vtadave 3 years ago

        Yeah because…he’s 36?

        • Casor_Greener 3 years ago

          Because people who aren’t healthy/worth their contract in the young prime years usually don’t get that way in the older ones

      • Havok9120 3 years ago

         Yeah, I no longer stand by my comment at all. I was drinking and tired and got his age mixed up with someone else’s like I usually do with Ethier.

  3. Aramos033 3 years ago

    Early Congrats to Andre Ethier, well deserved contract extension

  4. Table 3 years ago

    Hopefully this does not turn out to be the next bad OF contract, and boy have there been allot of them.

    Jason Bay, Alfonso Soriano, Carlos Lee, Carl Crawford, and Jason Werth would be the more notable big overpays

    • 5 yrs for a guy who only has 1 season of 100 RBIs and is in his 30s of age… yeah not good

      • Table 3 years ago

         agreed though I could care less about RBI, especially since he hit 2nd allot when Manny was around

        • True, RBI is not an absolute. But hitting behind Kemp for a few years, there is something wrong if you are not driving in runners.

          • thegrayrace 3 years ago

            Counting stats are pretty much useless. Injuries hampered those totals the last two seasons, and most of them were freak injuries (broken finger from HBP, etc.). And, as pointed out, he hasn’t always hit in a big RBI spot in the lineup.

          • “Counting stats are pretty much useless”??  Wow, this can be true but usually not when discussing your cleanup or #2 hitter.  Anyway, let’s pose this another way: is he someone the Dodgers should build their team around?  He got a 5yr deal, that’s long term.  Should the Dodgers build around him?

          • thegrayrace 3 years ago

            Sure, why not? It is a 5 year deal that will take Ethier through age 36. Matt Kemp got an 8 year deal that will take him through age 36. Makes sense to me.

            The alternative outfielders that will be coming available all have their own issues associated with them, and who knows how many of them will end up signing extensions before the off-season.

            BJ Upton has been inconsistent through his career and not as productive as Ethier. Victorino and the Dodgers have had a some bad history, so that’s unlikely to happen. Bourn doesn’t provide any power, and the Dodgers are looking to Gordon as their long-term leadoff man. Swisher would have been a decent alternative, but he is a couple years older than Ethier.

            Josh Hamilton will cost a fortune, and the Dodgers have other holes to fill (the infield corners in particular). Doesn’t makes sense for the Dodgers to spend on Hamilton double what they’re spending on Ethier. They’ll still need to bring in a bat for 1B at least, and probably LF and 2B or 3B as well.

            The Dodgers have a wealth of starting pitchers in their farm system and they are lacking in positional prospects. Retaining their 2nd best hitter over the last 4 seasons makes sense considering their lack of depth.

          • Kemp is an MVP.  Ethier is a nice solid player. That’s why Kemp is signed to 36.  Just because there isn’t much out there doesn’t mean you give Ethier 5 yrs. The Dodgers are spending a good amount to “hopefully” have 5 yrs of nice player if he doesn’t regress.  That’s a big commitment, right?

          • thegrayrace 3 years ago

            Yes, actually, you do give Ethier 5 years because there isn’t much else out there.

            The alternative to signing Ethier is losing his production and looking for someone else to replace it. The Dodgers have little in terms of prospects to replace his production but a pretty good amount of financial flexibility, so signing someone else would be the obvious choice. And Upton, Victorino, Swisher and Bourn don’t really excite me any more than Ethier. And Hamilton will be even more overpaid and an even higher risk. The Dodgers will still need to address holes at 1B, 2B, 3B and LF. Better to sign Ethier and still have some payroll flexibility to bring in a bat for the infield.

            If the Dodgers could afford to throw away $45m for 2 (pretty much worthless) years of Manny Ramirez and $36m for 2 (even more worthless) years of Andruw Jones, I think the Dodgers can risk some drop-off from Ethier’s production in the latter phase of the contract. None of these 5+ year contracts are signed assuming there won’t be some drop-off in production in the latter seasons.

          • Hamilton would be overpaid but Ethier is not?  What would you pay Hamilton if you are Ned Colletti?

          • thegrayrace 3 years ago

            I’m definitely expecting Hamilton to get a 9 figure deal, similar to Kemp’s. Which is why I’m totally comfortable giving Ethier a deal worth half that…

      • Dylan 3 years ago

        Cmon, you should know better.

        • True, RBI is not an absolute just like SLG is not. But hitting behind Kemp for a few years, there is something wrong if you are not driving in runners.

          • Dylan 3 years ago

            Or the fact that Kemp hits everyone in.

          • Kemp had a .399 OBP last year — Ethier had plenty of opps to knock people in with Kemp on base.  Bottom-line, Ethier is a nice player but not clean up hitter, shouldn’t be paid like a cleanup hitter.  Prince knocked in Braun a lot, Gehrig knocked in Ruth, Kent knocked in Barry Bonds … hitting behind Kemp is ample opportunity to drive in runs

          • Table 3 years ago

             Last year Ethier hit 3rd and Kemp hit 4th

          • #3 hitter who cannot drive in 100 runs??  Oy that’s worse! Kemp hitting behind him, means he should have better pitches to hit. Point is Ethier is very solid but not 5 yr worthy.  I’d like him on my team but not 5 yrs.  That’s long-term and you don’t build long-term around nice, solid players — you build around superstars

          • Table 3 years ago

             having pitches to hit does not make it easier to drive in runs. It only makes it easier to get hits. There have to be runners on base in front of you in order to get RBI. Besides, the third spot in the order is massively overrated in terms of it’s importance. The 4 and 5 spots are far better in terms of getting RBI opportunities. This year Ethier has hit 4th all year, that’s why he has high RBI so far

          • Where are you coming up with this? #3 hitter can have maximum 162 more opportunities to hit than the #4 or #5 hitter.  That is why you like high OBP and/or speed threats in front of the #3 hitter.  That is science. At what point do you stop making excuses for him?  He’s a nice player but not one you build around

          • Table 3 years ago

             I said that the number 3 spot is worse for driving in runners, a few extra abs (and no it won’t be 162) won’t help much if the bases are empty.

            I’m not so much making excuses for Ethier as I am correcting your weak RBI argument.

          • Maximum 162 at-bats because there’s 162 games.  Not definitive 162 at-bats but MAXIMUM… What is the weak RBI argument? He should be driving in more runs bottom-line

          • thegrayrace 3 years ago

            Andre Ethier had guys like Tony Gwynn (.308 OBP), Aaron Miles (.314 OBP) and Dee Gordon (.325 OBP) hitting in front of him. And, again, he missed 4 weeks with various injuries, and was playing through injuries a good part of the season.

          • Again, you don’t give a nice player a long-term deal. So clearly there are a million excuses as to why he’s not a superstar yet you are committing to him as if he is.  He’s a good player just not one you give 5 yrs to

          • thegrayrace 3 years ago

            Since RBIs are clearly your thing, Ethier’s leading the NL right now… so he must have reached superstardom…

          • Ha, no RBIs are not absolute but an indicator. Do you already forget Adrian Beltre’s walk year?  Ethier is doing this in a walk year too

          • Table 3 years ago

             Again I think many of us would be happy to talk about why he;s not a player we should commit to building around for 5 years. Just leave the low RBI part out of it, it’s a terrible argument.

          • Fine he shouldn’t be someone you build around. It’s not smart to give long-term deals to players unless you build around them.  Agreed?

      • vtadave 3 years ago

        RBI?

    • angels4life 3 years ago

      Don’t forget Alex Rios and Vernon Wells!

      • BK 3 years ago

        How can we forget Vernon Wells? HOW???!!!!!!

        • Infield Fly 3 years ago

          By watching your GM get rid of him and his albatross of a contract, of course! :p

          (Go Jays!!)

  5. DodgerCyan 3 years ago

    It’s funny that so many people are speculating that this is not such a great deal for the Dodgers.  It seems like most of the speculation is coming from people who haven’t been following the Dodgers in the last 4 years or so.  Andre has been nothing short of inspirational.  

    • Table 3 years ago

       What makes you think those fans have not been following the team for the last 4 years?

      Besides just because Ethier has hit tons of walk offs does not automatically make him worth any ammount of money. The fact is he’s a great left handed hitter and at his best a decent corner outfield defender. The worry is not that he can’t be “inspirational”, the worry is that as he grows older he becomes more injury prone, he loses power, and his defense becomes much worse.

  6. And 29 other teams wept. 

    • 55saveslives 3 years ago

       Why?

    • Table 3 years ago

       Nick Swisher, Michael Bourn, and after next year Hunter Pence will be available. Missing on Ethier shouldn’t ruin any team’s plans

    • Dylan 3 years ago

      Its not like this was Stanton or Hamilton…it’s Ethier.

  7. looking at his past numbers i’m surprised they are willing to give a 30yo this much money when he has only hit more then 30 HR’s once and drove in 100 runners once, his WAR has never been great than 2.7. huge overpayment by the dodgers, he is not worth more then 10M a season.

    • Table 3 years ago

       by Fangraphs WAR he has been over 3 a few times

      • If by a few, you mean once, then yes, he’s been over 3 a few times.

        • Table 3 years ago

           sorry, was going off of memory, and since he has one at 2.8 and another at 2.9 I usually round up. The calculations are not precise enough for anything less than .5 WAR to be meaningful

      • MB923 3 years ago

        A WAR of 3 on Fangraphs = approximately $15 million a year. As mentioned by @yahoo-GQCMY6YLYA7B4PUTUQVFFM6RFE:disqus , he’s only done it once, and now he’s getting an AAV of $17 million per year for the next 5 years.

        You really don’t think it’s an overpay for the Dodgers?

        • MaineSox 3 years ago

          Not to mention he should be playing 1B, but his offense wouldn’t even be average there, and he’s only a year or so away from the point where players generally start to decline (which, along with your point about him not being worth that money to begin with, does not bode well – at all – for the Dodgers).

        • Table 3 years ago

           he’s on pace for 4.4 WAR this season. Say he only reaches 4. That means over the last three seasons he has one 4 WAR, one 3 WAR, and one 2 WAR season. That’s a total of 9 WAR, and an average of 3 WAR. So right there he’s been worth on average 15 mill.

          Attempting to project his value over the next 5 years

          2013 4 WAR
          2014 3.5 WAR
          2015 3 WAR
          2016 2.5 WAR
          2017 2 WAR
          2018 1.5 WAR

          for a total of 16.5 WAR which in today’s game would be worth 90 something mill. So yeah it might be a slight overpay, and he might not bring in as good as I’m projecting here. However this is the optimistic projection the Dodgers must be going off of. They must think that a healthy Ethier is currently a 3-4 WAR player. They might be wrong, but the new ownership group can afford to take that risk. This deal won’t kill them.

          • Lunchbox45 3 years ago

            why would you assume he puts up a 4 WAR season next year?

          • Table 3 years ago

             I personally am not, but that’s what the Dodgers are hoping of him.

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            You never ‘project’ someone to have a career year.  And that’s also six years.

            If you assume that he reproduces his best year to date next year it goes like this:

            2013 3.0 WAR
            2014 2.5 WAR
            2015 2.0 WAR
            2016 1.5 WAR
            2017 1.0 WAR

            For a total of 10 WAR, which would be valued at $50M.  Even if you want to go with your projection and project him having a career year next year (which is an absolutely terrible way to run a team) but you project the 5 years – not six – he’s 15 WAR which is worth $75M and they’re still overpaying him.

        •  yes

  8. D.j. Wilson 3 years ago

    I don’t follow the Dodgers super closely but I think Ethier is sort of overrated. His numbers are good but I wouldn’t pay him more than $7-8 million a year

    • dieharddodgerfan 3 years ago

       In what market is Ethier only going to get $7 to $8 million? Certainly not the free agent market next year. Tori Hunter got a 5 yr/$90 mill contract as a 32 year old back in ’07.

      Believe me, Ethier would have probably gotten at least as much, if not more, on the open market in the offseason.

      • I seriously doubt he would have gotten a $17 million per deal with how deep the FA outfield market is next year.  Most people don’t even think Bourne will get that much, and he is younger, plays a more premium position, and is just flat out better.

        This is the kinda deal Ruben Amaro would make, and we are seeing the fruits of that kinda signing with the Phillies now.

        • dieharddodgerfan 3 years ago

           He may or may not not have gotten $17 million, but he definitely would have gotten 5 years.

          Michael Bourn and Ethier are two different types of players. Bourn is a table-setter and Ethier is a run producer.

          Bourn has a career OPS of 708 as compared to Ethier’s 856. More specifically, Bourn’s career Slugging % is 369 as compared to Ethier’s 482.

          Bourn is better utilized for his speed and Ethier has more power.

          IMO, Ethier has the more valuable commodity. Especially in the post steroid era where power bats are getting more and more scarce.

          • Jason Richards 3 years ago

            Either cant hit left handed pitching, and is not half the defender Bourn is.

          • hmmm he seems to batting .284, with a OBP of .354 against lefties this year. Pretty terrible.

          • dieharddodgerfan 3 years ago

             Yup, what he said. Ethier seems to have a better approach against lefties this year. He’ll never be great against lefties, but he seems to have improved this year.

          • melonis_rex 3 years ago

            small sample size. 

            Let’s see how he handles lefties for an entire season before making definitive conclusions about his approach against LHP.

          • vtadave 3 years ago

            I watch pretty much 100% of Dodgers games and to me it looks like he’s opening up more against LHP’s and seems to be staying back on the ball more. Agree that it’s too early to say he’s “turned the corner” against LHP, but it sure seems like he’s made some solid improvements.

          • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

            He’s just gotten back to where he was before the finger and knee injuries. He has also become a more patient hitter and less prone to beating himself up for bad at-bats. Maturity is a big issue for many ball players. If you listen to what his manger is and has been saying, Ethier has developed better mental discipline, and this is why he’s worth keeping for another five years.

          • Jason Richards 3 years ago

            Hmmm I’m going to take the larger sample size of 6 years over the sample size of 1/3 of the season….

      • sdsuphilip 3 years ago

        he wouldn’t have gotten more than 12-14 million a year on the open market

        • Yes he would have. He would have gotten a deal around the 5/85 he ended up getting with the Dodgers. 

          • sdsuphilip 3 years ago

            if you cut about 20 million off yep

          • In a market that gives Werth 120 mil, I think he would of gotten 85

          • Dylan 3 years ago

            Youre wrong. Many teams would offer 15-18 million per for his service in RF.

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            Who?

    • Table 3 years ago

       you don’t follow baseball closely enough if you think that’s how much Ethier is worth via free agency. Over the last 10 years MLB has been making more money, and thus MLB has to pay their players more and more. Ethier is easily worthy of a salary over 10 mill. If you said 10-13 mill I might agree with you, but 7-8 is way too low. Find me a player as good as Ethier who only makes that much (and has reached free agency). I guess Josh Willingham is about as good as Ethier and he is not making anything like 15 mill per, but he’s underrated.

      • D.j. Wilson 3 years ago

        I would give him the 10 he is at right now but no raise. I honestly just don’t see it. He’s 30 now and most outfielders don’t last past about 34 or 35. His numbers are inflated to me this year. He normally has B-/B level power but he doesn’t drive in enough runs. The 53 to this point is surprising. The DODGERS as a whole to this point are surprising. 

        The way I see Andre Ethier is: He gets on base a lot, he’s a great defensive player, and he has consistent B level power. He doesn’t steal ever and usually, he doesn’t drive in more than 75-80 runs. If all they are getting is the first three things I mentioned, I don’t know why guys like Denard Span aren’t making more money. He could hit .287 no problem. He did the first two years of his career before he suffered 3 concussions and this year, he’s at .284 on the worst AL team. He drives in 55-70 RBI’s per season, is a great defender, always a threat to steal 20 bases per season, and is a leadoff hitter! Andre Ethier would be worth this kind of money to my A’s because we have no power hitters but considering the Dodgers have Kemp, I just think they over payed. 

        Also, to both of the people who responded to me, just because the market is absurd right now doesn’t mean GM’s have to play into it to land successful Free Agents. I’m an A’s fan. I am used to having to watch my GM make something out of nothing and that is what I want to do someday. You don’t have to pay absurd prices to Torii Hunter, Andre Ethier, guys in their early 30’s to get good power. Guys like Mark Trumbo, Dayan Viciedo, Josh Reddick, Jeff Francoeur, Melky Cabrera are out there for much cheaper. Just gotta keep an eye out.

        • Table 3 years ago

          There are a couple of things here.

          You personally might not give him more than 10, but that would never be enough to sign him. You would be looking to replace him with prospects and bargain finds or whatever. That’s a very legit strategy especially for a team like the A’s who wouldn’t be able to absorb the hit of having one of their highest paid players being a bust. However the Dodger’s are not the A’s, they can absorb such a bust. They should still look to avoid such busts, but since they have the option of retaining Ethier at market value they have to consider it. Ethier at 5 years 85 mill might be an overpay, but 4 years 55 mill would most definitely not have been.

          As to Denard Span he’s similar in value to Ethier, but underpaid because the market does not value what he does as much as power. Power is overrated.

          Another thing, you seem like a fairly smart person, so I’m confused by how much you seem to care about RBI. You do realize how many RBI a player gets each year is not within their control right? Sure better players CAN drive in more runners than others, but so much of it depends on the lineup you are in. A bad player can have more RBI than a good one by hitting 5th with high OBP batters ahead of him. James Loney is a good example, he reguraly drove in 90 runners when the Dodgers had a great offense (Manny, Furcal, Blake), but since the Dodger’s offense have gotten worse, his RBI have decreased. RBI should honestly not factor in to a player’s value at all. If you want to be a GM (go to a good school) that’s a lesson you definitely need to learn.

          • Casor_Greener 3 years ago

            Absorbing bad contracts because you can is never a sound strategy, everyone (sports-wise) runs out of money at some point.

          • stl_cards16 3 years ago

            Probably why he said “They should still look to avoid such busts”

          • Casor_Greener 3 years ago

            Why even say they can do it, and then turn around and say they should avoid it.

            He is just trying to cover his bases and rationalize the bad deal.

          • stl_cards16 3 years ago

            No, he was saying a large market team (Dodgers) can make a deal like this and still survive IF it turns bad.  A smaller market team (A’s) would be killed by this type of contract if it turned poor.

            It makes perfect sense, really.

          • Table 3 years ago

             Because we don’t know that it’s a bad deal yet. There is risk and reward. For a team like the A’s there is not enough reward to make up for the risk. However because the Dodgers are in win now mode, and because the risk is lesser for them due to their finances, they can more easily go after the reward with Ethier. I myself might not have  come to the same conclusion, but it’s justifiable from their perspective.

          • Casor_Greener 3 years ago

            I see your point, but in my eyes, I’d rather save the $15M for a run at Cole Hamels, and if i don’t make it spend it on another decent corner outfielder.  No reason to tie up money because you can “afford it”

  9. southerndodgerfan21 3 years ago

    will we get a discount for his recent bat struggles.  putrid. 

    • Table 3 years ago

      he has always stunk against lefties

      • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

        Not true.

        • Jason_F 3 years ago

          .673 OPS career vs lefties.  You call that good?  His relative success this season in a small sample doesn’t negate the lack thereof over 872 plate appearances prior to 2012.

          • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

            Here we go again. If you take out the year he broke his finger and the year he had knee problems you will find only one season where the drop-off against lefties was dramatic. A healthy, mature Ethier has no great problem hitting lefties. Almost three months into a season is not a “small sample size” and that taken together with the pre-injury seasons when he hit lefties just fine tells the more complete story. Further management has signaled clearly that they believe this player has grown up with the game.

          • Jason_F 3 years ago

            I’m not sure which years are correlated with the injury years you are referring to.  Was it 2007, when he had a .716 OPS vs lefties?  Was it 2008, when he had a .692 OPS vs lefties?  
            Was it 2009, when he had a .629 OPS vs lefties?  
            Was it 2010, when he had a .625 OPS vs lefties?  
            Was it 2011, when he had a .563 OPS vs lefties?   I’ll let you read my response to your maturity claims under a different post that I responded to.

          • Lunchbox45 3 years ago

            to be fair, if you take out those 5 years, then you have no evidence.

          • vtadave 3 years ago

            Ha…laughed out loud there.

          • Casor_Greener 3 years ago

            I admire your fandom, but you are clearly wrong.

          • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

            Haha. A complete argument devoid of a single fact!

          • Table 3 years ago

             kind of like your “not true” comment above no?

          • Table 3 years ago

             three full months is not a small sample size, but three months against lefties is, since he is only going to face lefties during those 3 months about 30% of the time. So it’s not truly a 3 month sample size. In fact even a single season worth of data against lefties is rather small. It’s best to look at the largest amount of data possible, the largest amount of data possible shows that Ethier is not good against lefties. You being a big Dodger and Ethier fan seems to have you refusing to admit he is not good against lefties. Why can’t you just admit it? Don’t you realize that almost every single left handed hitter in MLB struggles against left handed pitchers? Prince Fielder, Ryan Howard, all of them.

          • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

            No, I am not an “Ethier fan,” I just want the facts to be straight. Trust me, watching him struggle for a couple/three years when it was clear he was his own worst enemy, was not fun. No matter the size, the samples have to take external factors into consideration, or you are just playing with numbers. When he came up, Ethier hit lefties about as well as you could expect from a LHB. A few years in he had bout of pressing and beat himself at least as much as any pitcher beat him. Anyone watching him at bat could see it. The season after that it was all coming together, then he broke his finger. Again you could see what that took out of him even after he returned from the DL. The season after that, knee trouble. So this is the first season in at least the last three that we can use fairly to evaluate his abilities. Obviously the people who manage him think he’s got it, or they would have let him walk. So we will see.

  10. nats2012 3 years ago

    How many great players has Oakland traded away?

    • D.j. Wilson 3 years ago

      Well, our OF right now could have been Andre Ethier, Nelson Cruz, Carlos Gonzalez but I try not to look at it that way because we cannot afford them anyways. I am perfectly happy with Smith, Cespedes, Reddick right now. I love all 3 of them, all are hitting very well

      • FYI — Lew Wolff made money last year owning the A’s.  Just like Glass did in Kansas City

      • MaineSox 3 years ago

        To be fair, none of those guys would looks quite like the players they do now if they had been playing in the Oakland.  Two of them went to two of the most prodigious run producing parks in the game (Cruz in Texas and Gonzalez in Colorado), and even Dodger’s stadium allows more home runs than the Coliseum.

        • melonis_rex 3 years ago

          also: Cruz was not-that-good in the A’s minor league system for years, and was also traded away for not much by two other teams. 

          the only bad trade on that list is Gonzalez. 

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            Trading Gonzalez for Holliday could be justified, it was what they traded Holliday for after the fact that made it bad.

          • melonis_rex 3 years ago

            Not really, IMO. 

            the 2009 A’s were built on rookie pitching that only had limited numbers of innings past A-ball , injury-recovering ben sheets and a past-prime jason giambi.

            They had several good players, but even with holliday, not even close to the team the angels had. 

            Even with the massive rookie/career years of certain A’s players, the A’s weren’t built to contend, and it was a silly, ownership-mandated move. 

            With the fact that there was no way the A’s were going to give 100MM++ to Holliday, the move looked bad from day one. 

    • melonis_rex 3 years ago

      I’ll take the AL West title and playoff stint that trade/Milton Bradley helped bring. 

  11. trueBlueTony 3 years ago

    Thanks magic!!!!!!!!!

  12. trueBlueTony 3 years ago

    Next thing on the list is trade for a solid third and first basemen!!!!!!!! Then sign Hamilton and hamels in the offseason

    • and reincarnate Babe Ruth!!!!!!  Ned Colletti has been nothing but an amazing GM!!!  

      •  Ethier is all ready 30 and was injury prone all last season, you don’t think his numbers are going to increase as he gets older, do you?

        • TophersReds 3 years ago

          It was sarcasm man…

          •  I think I must have replied to the wrong post, if not I have no clue what I was thinking, hah!

        • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

          One injury does not make a player “injury prone.” Before the knee problem, it was a broken finger that lead some to call him that. How much sense does that make? As for his numbers getting better with age, very possibly yes in his case. Those who know this player know that he’s taken longer than most to get his head into the game.

          • Jason_F 3 years ago

            Despite your persistent attestations about his mental state improving over time, his production (rate stats-wise) has been remarkably consistent.  This type of on-air filler talk is the kind of stuff you should really take with a grain of salt.  If it really has taken him 7 years to “get his head into the game,” that would be a red flag, IMO.  He is what he is, a bad fielding corner outfielder with decent pop that will hit for a good average, for the most part.  Something to keep an eye on is his strikeout rate, which has increased for 5 straight seasons.

          • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

            Not mine, just what I am hearing from management. No reason to take all of it with a grain of salt, especially when you see words acted upon in the form of a big contract extension. Sometimes I feel like the nearly the only person around here who recognizes that ballplayers are human beings, and that guys in their 20s are not always very mature, and that they don’t all mature at the same rate. Maybe your life experience with people is totally different than mine, but this makes perfect sense to me. The SO stats may be a concern, but only if accompanied by an overall decline in production. I won’t comment on the defensive claims, since this argument is likely based entirely on black box junk stats.

          • Casor_Greener 3 years ago

            give it up my dude, this was a bad deal.

          • Casor_Greener 3 years ago

            LOL he said “persistent attestations”

          • Jason_F 3 years ago

            Not sure why your response disappeared, but here is both:

            BlueSkyLA:
            Not mine, just what I am hearing from management. No reason to take all of it with a grain of salt, especially when you see words acted upon in the form of a big contract extension. Sometimes I feel like the nearly the only person around here who recognizes that ballplayers are human beings, and that guys in their 20s are not always very mature, and that they don’t all mature at the same rate. Maybe your life experience with people is totally different than mine, but this makes perfect sense to me. The SO stats may be a concern, but only if accompanied by an overall decline in production. I won’t comment on the defensive claims, since this argument is likely based entirely on black box junk stats.

            Mine:
            What you are hearing from management?!?!  I’ll go ahead and assume you mean what you read and listened to, and not that you have Ned Colletti on speed dial.  Did this newfound maturity occur before this season, wherein he is performing right in line with his career averages?  Did it happen prior to last season, when he had the worst power production of his career?  Until you can make a correlation between production and mental state, I will consider your assumptions are nothing more than sports talk radio white noise and broadcast booth rambling that occurs over the course of 3 hours per night for 6 months.

          • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

            Sigh. So I suppose I will have to assume that you understand management to be fibbing and acting on less information than you seem to have at your disposal.

          • Jason_F 3 years ago

            Have you even considered that management isn’t always 100% honest with the media?  The assertions you are making about his mental state basically amount to fairy tales and pixie dust unless you can make a correlation between production and the timeline of when this newfound maturity set in.  Seeing as you obviously can’t do so, I’ll leave you to your Aesop’s fables.

          • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

            Uh, yeah. But I have also considered the validity of armchair GM opinions constructed out of whole cloth and thin air.

        • Definitely joking

  13. jfretless 3 years ago

    Wow.  That’s a lot of money for a 30 year old who had his best year at age 27 and been on a decline ever since.

  14. Dodgerzz 3 years ago

    Not sure Ethier is worth it. His career has been 50/50 for me. He had a hitting streak, a 31-home run season with several walk-offs, and now a season in which he’s started off well but has been sliding down lately. The rest of the time all he’s been doing is testing patience and/or spending time on the disabled list.  This kind of duality isn’t the kind of thing that merits such an enormous contract. Obviously I want Ethier to kill it out there, but I’m just saying. It could handcuff the team significantly if it goes wrong.

  15. Robb Logan 3 years ago

    Reading some of these comments gave me a good laugh. I am an Angels fan as some know but ragging on Colletti for this is a mile off base. This is a new ownership move and makes perfect sense for L.A. to secure what they see as the core players (Ethier, Kemp and Kershaw) and keep them together for a 4 to 5 year span. I expect this club to be active at the deadline as well as in the off season. Seems Kasten and company are real intent to use the deep pockets and build a solid ball club for many years to come and put the Dodgers back in the prominent role they once had. 

    • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

      No kidding. It seems many Dodger fans are still taking their energy from years of bitterness and resentment, a lot of it unfocused and misdirected. Most of the static isn’t coming from real fans, as far as I can tell, but from the armchair GMs who think they know best how to spend other people’s money. This fan is more encouraged by the new ownership and the moves made recently than I have been in ten years or more.

      • IdontknowwhyIpostonforums 3 years ago

        +1
        And I might add that this is not going to be the only move the Dodgers make.  It is not like they have to stop spending or dealing now that Either has signed.  They simply solidified a position both in the field and in the lineup.  Now they don’t have to worry about finding 2 OFs, they can look for a LF and fill other needs.

        • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

          Exactly. Ethier may not be a perfect player, but extending him was a good baseball decision. The other signal we’re getting here (overlooked by everybody so far apparently) is it’s looking like ownership is not going to be afraid of longer-term contracts. I’m not totally thrilled by that development, but I think it’s important, since it takes that willingness to go head-to-head with the big money teams these days. Tells me that the Dodgers will be in the hunt on some of the big ticket free agents this winter. Isn’t that what we’ve been wanting for years? It’s a new day, Dodger fans. Try to smile — you won’t break your face.

  16. Typical.  Sour grapes from those who either wanted a crack at signing Ethier for their own team or are the wanna-be GMs who think they know how to spend other people’s money.

    If you are the Dodgers, this move makes sense.  At a time of ownership transition, they go out and let every future free agent know they are going to take care of their guys.  This contract might be about $15 million too high but that’s basically like taking a chance on signing a $3mill/year middle reliever who doesn’t work out.  No big deal.

    If the Dodgers don’t lock him up and end up losing him to elsewhere like they did with Beltre, then what were they going to do?  Give Josh Hamilton $200 Million?  They have a core of guys and need to keep that core intact so they can go out and get the other pieces they need.

    Lastly, didn’t Ethier just win a gold glove?

    •  Ethier “won” gold glove, but his defense is considered decent at best.

      This move makes some sense, but you can’t exactly let the fans be the GM either; which is what this move more or less looks like.  Ethier is 30 years old and has only put a 2.9+ WAR once in his entire career, that includes his bat, glove, and aura.

      • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

        One of these days the believers in black box stats like WAR and UZR are finally going to realize that GMs don’t use them to select players. But clearly that day is not today.

        • Wes Whitenack 3 years ago

          One of these days I hope people like you understand how sabremetrics help teams go from mediocre to outstanding. But today’s not that day.

          • BlueSkyLA 3 years ago

            Non-sequituer responses, you gotta love ’em.

    • dieharddodgerfan 3 years ago

       Yup. These same fans would probably be giddy if their team signed Ethier to the same deal. Is the deal commensurate to his value? Probably not, but it doesn’t matter when you are talking about the free agent market. His market value is what teams are willing to pay to get him and for sure another team would have paid the same to get him in the free agent market.

    • MaineSox 3 years ago

      He ‘won’ a gold glove with his bat.  It happens all the time.

    • James Attwood 3 years ago

      Nope. Not sour grapes. Love Ethier. I think he’s a fun player to watch and follow. Still would never have signed him to this sort of deal. It’s an awful lot to pay towards a player that is pretty much one-dimensional.

      His winning the GG was pretty much a farce. His defense is below average, but he has a flashy name and plays in high profile LA. There are a number of RFs that are better patrolling the position than he is – Upton and Pence come to mind.

      • Jason_F 3 years ago

        Not to mention, they don’t give gold gloves by position (i.e. 1 each for LF, CF, RF).  As recently as 2008, it was given to three CFs in the NL.  It is laughable to think that Ethier is one of the three best fielding outfielders in the NL.

        • James Attwood 3 years ago

          Actually, as of last year, that’s exactly what they did – one for each of the three OF poaitions. That’s how Parra wound up with one. Don’t get me wrong, Parra is one heck of an OFer. But he was the third best OF on his own team.

          No way Ethier should have won. And for that matter, no way Kemp should have won last year either. But I stopped putting much faith in the GG awards a while ago now. Too many times it seems the winners make no sense.

          • Jason_F 3 years ago

            Thanks, I had no idea they changed how GGs were given out. Not that that makes them any more valid as an award…

  17. The Dodgers only have two players that can hit, Kemp and Ethier.   Kemp and Ethier are very beloved to Dodger fans.   If the Dodgers decided to let Ethier go, who would they replace him with?  You have Bourn, who is talented but he is not a middle of the order bat.   The rest are either older than Ethier, or in Josh Hamilton’s case, extremely expensive.   Hamilton is a bigger signing risk than Ethier.   Hamilton has been on the DL more often than Ethier.   He has missed more games than Ethier has.  He is also a year older and has a history of substance abuse.   I’m not knocking Hamilton just stating facts.   As a Dodger fan I am glad they are locking him up for the next five years.   I just hope they can find a thirdbaseman one day.     

    • James Attwood 3 years ago

      I’m not entirely convinced that $17MM/yr is all that much cheaper than Hamilton will be. There is still a fair chance that such a contract is close to what he gets unless he remains healthy the entire season without anymore problems.

    • vtadave 3 years ago

      A.J. Ellis and Jerry Hairston disagree with your first sentence.

  18. Mike1L 3 years ago

    This is a little like the Tori Hunter signing with the Angels; marginally cheaper and Ethier is a little younger than Hunter was, but players of roughly the same level when signed.  Maybe it’s an overpay-I’m not sure that’s really relevant.  If the Dodger see him as a cornerstone player for both performance and esthetic reasons, why not?

    • James Attwood 3 years ago

      Except that Hunter was an exceptional defensive player at the time as well. Ethier is, well, not.

  19. Dylan 3 years ago

    I wonder if this could be a model for a Hunter Pence extension. Maybe 6 years/105 if they buyout his last arbitration.

  20. hrbomber1113 3 years ago

      Nick Swisher for 3 years and $30MM-$45MM or Ethier for $85MM is a no
    brainer. Swisher is a switch hitter while Ethier can’t touch lefties and
    is the much better defender. Swisher is just flat out the better player
    and he’ll be lucky to get 1/2 of what Ethier got. Look at what
    Willingham got last offseason. This was a huge overpay and an
    overreaction by the front office to an overrated start to the season
    instead of looking at Ethier for what he truly is. A platoon DH. He’s
    awful in the OF and can’t hit lefties. I suppose he could be turned into
    a platoon 1B but look at how the market pays them. Now cue the Dodgers
    fans who will use is awful GG selection, walkoff hits and other bad ways
    to value a player. I can hear it now, “you have to see him play every
    day!”….”his numbers against lefties may be horrible but when you add
    them up he’s still puts up good numbers so it shouldn’t matter that
    you’re throwing away AB’s by letting him face lefties”…”you don’t know
    what he means to the organization and the fans”…aaaaaaaaaand go.

    • James Attwood 3 years ago

      This is as much a PR signing as it is signing talent. At 17/year, Ethier is getting paid well above value, especially at 5 years. But the new ownership needs to make a splash and to excite fans. So you get contracts like this one.

      • Hey look, someone gets it!

        This move was more about restoring the rapport that was eviscerated during the McCourt era than it was about “winning” a contract negotiation.

      • dieharddodgerfan 3 years ago

         Agree. Part of the signing was a PR move to show Dodger fans they are willing to open up the pocket books.

        Probably are going to see some July trade deadline moves as well where the Dodgers will take on some significant salary to acquire a player that is being salary dumped.

    • vtadave 3 years ago

      “He’s awful in the OF and can’t hit lefties. ”

      UZR/150 the last 2 years: 6.8 and 10.8
      vs. LHP this year: .281/.350/.427

      Look, what was the new ownership group supposed to do? Let their third best player leave as a free agent?  No, he’s probably not going to provide $85 million worth in value, but as long as this doesn’t prevent the team from pursuing other free agents (no indications whatsoever that it will), who cares?

      It’s funny how much people get worked up over these things.  

      • TommyL 3 years ago

        This move is a bit of an overpay from a talent standpoint, but not terrible by comparison to other corner outfield contracts over the past few years. Werth, T. Hunter, Wells, etc. Plus, this is partly a marketing/damage control move for the Dodgers. Andre is very popular with Dodger fans, especially with the ladies, and the Dodgers have a lot of fences to mend with their fan base due to previous ownership. If they were to let Ethier walk they’d face losing more fans unless they greatly overspent elsewhere to make up for it. And since when is 30-35 ancient for an outfielder who’s speed has never been part of his game? If he was 27-28, you’d probably need a 7-8 year contract at more per season to sign him up.

  21. monroe_says 3 years ago

    The dude’s a 2.0 + WAR player.  He’s hardly a difference maker and won’t be getting any better. 3/35 is his market value. A massive overpay.

    • vtadave 3 years ago

      So if he hit free agency this winter, there wouldn’t be an offer topping 3/35?

      Buzzzz.  Incorrect.

      • monroe_says 3 years ago

        Over the last three years, Ethier had a cumulative 7.9 WAR, Josh Willingham had a 7.7. Granted, Willingham is three years older, but  he got 3/21 last winter. With that in mind, 3/35 is more than a reasonable market expectation for a slightly decent player like Ethier.

  22. AaronAngst 3 years ago

    So, worse deal: Ethier or Yadier Molina? I think they’re both terrible, though I’ll readily admit that I also thought the Jose Bautista deal was going to backfire.

    • James Attwood 3 years ago

      Molina plays both sides of the ball. As long as he can remain effectively one of the best defensive backstops in the game, his contract actually somehow looks better.

      Not that I like either contract. Molina got his due for pretty much the same reason Ethier did. Neither team could actually afford NOT to sign those players. The fans would have revolted.

  23. I’m sorry but “less than stellar” defensively? He has a 2011 Gold Glove and 0 errors last season that say otherwise.

    • MB923 3 years ago

      Using gold gloves to judge a players defense is using W-L to judge pitchers. And while 0 errors of course is great to have, the average RF only makes about 4 errors a year.

      • vtadave 3 years ago

        Alfonso Soriano has zero errors this year.

        That is all.

      • Gumby65 3 years ago

         He also makes some pretty dang good plays out there even if he *appears* to get around out there like an oaf…  These include charging in dives, lateral dives, crashing the fences.  Arm may not be Raul Mondesi-esque, but he has NOT embarrassed out there.

    • Lunchbox45 3 years ago

      0 errors in the outfield? How did he not get a  10 year deal, he should fire his agent

  24. Table 3 years ago

     Ummmmm because the Sox don’t have enough offense? lol. They should worry about pitching, not a 30 year old outfielder

  25. Ben_Cherington 3 years ago

    and why does it suck for red sox fans?

  26. MaineSox 3 years ago

    Actually this is the best baseball news this Red Sox fan has gotten in quite a while.  I did not want them to trade for him – at all.

  27. Table 3 years ago

     not to say that the Bosox have had a great offensive team this year, but next year Ellsbury will be back and A Gonzalez will do better

  28. lefty177 3 years ago

    He was probably hoping (as was I) that Andre’s best friend (Pedroia) could talk the RFer into playing right for the Sox

  29. Because the last big deal OF signing Colletti did, Andruw Jones 2yr/$36M, wasn’t long enough

  30. $1529282 3 years ago

    The simple answer is… “because he wouldn’t take it.”

    Without five years, Ethier leaves, and gets it elsewhere. Then the Dodgers are looking at offering similar money to a free agent, but competing with the other 29 teams in baseball for him too.

    They looked at Ethier, evaluated him as the best hitter of that group, and decided “we have him already, let’s see what he wants to stick around.”

    It’s not as easy as just saying, “Ok Andre, we’re going to keep you through 2015 and that’s that!” Ethier was the one close to free agency, where the other RFs were Swisher, Quentin, Torii Hunter, and Berkman. Ethier had all the leverage. No way he takes three years.

  31. Jason Richards 3 years ago

    I would take Swisher and Quentin for 2 to 3 year deals before I would give Either anywhere near 5 to 6 years at 85 million.

  32. MaineSox 3 years ago

    Why would you want that?

  33. vtadave 3 years ago

    Because the Red Sox already have a great outfield?

  34. MaineSox 3 years ago

    Crawford, Ellsbury, and Ross or Kalish?  Yeah.

    Even if the Red Sox were in desperate need of an outfielder I wouldn’t want Ethier.

  35. vtadave 3 years ago

    And both of those guys would be locks to sign with the Dodgers?

  36. Casor_Greener 3 years ago

    I would have taken Torii Hunter for 8 million on a 1 year deal.

  37.  Wins Above Replacement :)  and if Ethier can only provide a WAR north of 2.9 once in his career it would make me cautious about giving him this amount of money; he is also aging and that does not help his stock.

Leave a Reply