Category Archives: Mark Ellis

Money For Nothing, and Hits For Free

Posted on by 114 Replies

It’s 2012, and I’m referencing a song mostly known for having a video that shows what people in 1985 thought 1997 would look like. Deal with it.

After the surprising spending spree that kicked off the offseason, one question no one’s really been able to answer adequately is, “are the Dodgers really even any better offensively for it?” Most of the articles I’ve seen on that topic start off with “if Andre Ethier & Juan Uribe return to form, and if James Loney hits like he did in the second half and not the first…” which is all well and good, except that none of those three are new acquisitions and their performances were going to be the most important no matter how many other declining veterans were brought on. For the approximately $22m the Dodgers spent on six offensive signings this winter (other than Matt Kemp‘s extension), does it improve them at all over last season?

Over at Beyond the Box Score, David Fung takes a graphical look using wRC (weighted runs created) and wRAA (weighted runs above average), along with 2012 Bill James projections. Remember, this is talking about offense only.

click to embiggen

Fung isn’t including returnees Juan Rivera and Tony Gwynn, as I would have, but they wouldn’t change the overall impression that for all of the money spent, the offense isn’t markedly improved, with the newcomers seemingly unlikely to provide more offense than the departing Jamey Carroll, Rod Barajas, and Casey Blake. Mark Ellis / Adam Kennedy probably won’t contribute all that much more than  Carroll / Aaron Miles (if even as much), and while I think he’s far too optimistic on Matt Treanor‘s projected 87 OPS+, I’ll take the over on A.J. Ellis at 69, so that’ll probably even out.

This also doesn’t take into account the terrifying prospect of a full season of Rivera in left field, since after being lousy for five of six months last season, he’s not exactly high on my optimism list as he turns 34. The damage could be limited by allowing Jerry Sands a healthy amount of playing time in Rivera’s stead, though whether that’s realistic remains to be seen. (By the way, who among us wouldn’t have traded a fallen top prospect and a middling pitching prospect, say Chris Withrow & Josh Wall or Cole St. Clair, to the White Sox for Carlos Quentin, as the Padres just did? Quentin probably can’t play defense any better than Rivera can, but he’s at least under 30 with great power and good plate discipline, and at ~$7m in his final year of arbitration wouldn’t have cost all that much more than what Rivera will get.)

With the estimated offensive production coming in not much better than the production going out, the hope for success, as it always has been, rests on those returning. Uribe has to be better. Loney has to be August/September Loney. Ethier has to be healthy and productive (which I believe he will). Dee Gordon has to keep improving. Kemp has to repeat or come close to repeating his stellar 2011. If a majority of those questions don’t land on the right side for the Dodgers, their season is sunk.

That being the case, it’s worth repeating: why spend tens of millions on older, mediocre role players unlikely to bring much improvement?

Cy Young Wins the Clayton Kershaw Award

Posted on by 53 Replies


…which is what I can only assume it will be named by 2025 or so. Congratulations to Clayton Kershaw, who today became the first Dodger to take home the Cy Young Award since Eric Gagne in 2003, decisively defeating Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee of the Phillies. Kershaw took home 27 of the 32 first place votes, and becomes the youngest winner of the prize since Dwight Gooden at age 20 in 1985, who then of course went on to enjoy a long, productive, and trouble-free career for the ages. Four of the first place votes went to Halladay, and one goober cast his for Arizona’s Ian Kennedy, which, I can’t even right now.

Kershaw capped off his magnificent season by winning the pitching “Triple Crown”, which is a distinction so outdated that I dislike even discussing it, yet history has shown that the voters respond to that feat overwhelmingly positively. To be honest, I’m a little surprised that the margin of victory was so wide, because Halladay (higher WAR, better K/BB, better HR rate) and Lee (most shutouts) were both stellar in what is widely perceived as a tougher hitter’s park than Dodger Stadium, while each performing for a playoff team. You could really have made a case for any of the three, and Kershaw probably could have finished as low as third behind the two of them and it wouldn’t really have bothered me too much – all three pitched either 232 or 233 innings, and all three allowed 65 or 66 runs, making this the closest to a dead heat that I can ever remember.

Either way, Kershaw wins the award and is absolutely deserving of the honor. Before the season, I noted that his pedestrian win/loss record over the previous two seasons had somewhat held him out of the spotlight, and said that “this is the year that the greater baseball world recognizes Kershaw in his rightful place as one of the dominant starters in the game.” I doubt you’ll find much argument for that now.

******

Totally unrelated, but what the hell: the Dodgers have reportedly inked former Marlin & Ranger Ryan Tucker to a minor league deal with an invite to big league camp, though the team has not yet confirmed. (Like anyone’s really going to fabricate such a low-importance move.) The Burbank-born righty was a first-round pick (…ish, because he was the 34th overall choice) of the Marlins in 2005, but has contributed just 42 unbelievably unsuccessful innings for Florida in 2008 and Texas in 2011. In 153 minor league games (94 starts), he’s struck out 7.5/9 while walking 4.2/9, and missed most of 2009 with a knee injury. Tucker reportedly owns a plus fastball and not much in the way of command or secondary pitches, so he’s likely a depth move for ABQ and little more, though he doesn’t turn 25 for another two weeks.

******

Count R.J. Anderson at Baseball Prospectus as another writer who’s a bit confused by the Mark Ellis signing:

The question worth asking about the Ellis signing starts with “Why.” As in: Why pay Ellis more than the Twins paid Jamey Carroll? Formerly a sabermetrics cause célèbre, Ellis moved on from Oakland last season in a trade to Colorado. Upon doing so, Ellis’s bat perked up, and he went 11-for-22 with six extra-base hits over his first five games with the Rockies. In the 263 other plate appearances he received with the Rockies, Ellis hit .253/.298/.340 with 13 extra-base hits. Offensive feebleness is nothing new for Ellis, who owns a .267/.317/.374 line since 2009. Blame some of that ineffectiveness on Oakland, but Chavez Ravine is no offensive dreamland, either.

Ellis turns 35 in June and has a lengthy injury history, having made at least one trip to the disabled list in each season since 2008. He remains a capable glovesman, by most measures, but an atrophy of skills brought on by the injuries is not out of the question. There is an old pitching saying that goes something like, “You can give a batter height or width, but not both.” You can give an older, injury-prone player like Ellis money or years, but not both. The Dodgers did.

******

It’s been a long time coming, but it’s now official: the Houston Astros will move to the American League in 2013, a second wild card will be added (likely for 2012), and the two leagues will each have 15 teams, ensuring interleague play every day. Presumably, the two wild card teams will have a one-game play-in for the right of being the #4 seed in their league. Frankly, I’m not thrilled with the addition of another wild card – that’ll make 10 of 30 clubs in the playoffs, though whether the team that loses the one-game play-in really should consider themselves a “playoff club” is dubious – though I do agree that it’s time the 4-team AL West and 6-team NL Central go away. Still to be determined is how the schedule will work, and if the multiple wild cards can come from the same division.

Of course, since there’s reportedly little momentum to enforce a consistent ruling on the designated hitter across the leagues, that could potentially lead to a situation where an AL team in a tight race for the playoffs has to play their final series of the year in an NL park without their DH.

What Do the Dodgers Have Left?

Posted on by 84 Replies


The Dodgers certainly aren’t taking their time this offseason, are they? After getting things started quickly by bringing back Juan Rivera, they’ve now snapped up Mark Ellis, have agreed in principle to an extension for Matt Kemp, and are getting close to adding catcher Matt Treanor. Yet they’re not done yet, because they still need at least one starting pitcher (preferably two), one more bench bat, and Ned Colletti’s yearly “oh god, my bullpen is too young and talented” veteran reliever.

But as Dylan Hernandez points out today, the 2012 payroll could be less than it was in 2011. So it’s fair to ask – after the recent spending spree, how much is left? When I did my 2012 plan a few weeks ago (one which looks more outdated by the day), I noted that the 2011 club had spent about $98m on player salaries and an additional $17m or so on “dead money”, or approximately $115m total. Before they had done anything this winter, they already had $99m committed for 2012, broken down by category, and assuming that James Loney is tendered but Hong-Chih Kuo is not:

2012 commitments as of 11/1/11

$22m of dead money - Manny Ramirez ($8m), Juan Pierre ($3m), Andruw Jones ($3.375m), Rafael Furcal ($3m), Hiroki Kuroda ($2m), Casey Blake ($1.25m), Jon Garland ($1.5m)

$33m of committed money – Ted Lilly ($12m), Chad Billingsley ($9m), Juan Uribe ($8m), Matt Guerrier ($4.75m)

$41m of arbitration money – Matt Kemp ($15m), Andre Ethier ($12m), Clayton Kershaw ($8m), James Loney ($6m) (all best guesses)

$3m of team control money – approximately, for minimum salary guys like Javy Guerra, Dee Gordon, Kenley Jansen, A.J. Ellis, and several others

We’ll assume that Kemp’s new contract is backloaded in such a way that his 2012 salary doesn’t change that much in either direction, and since then they’ve either added or are likely to add the following new contracts:

$7.5m of new money – $4m for Rivera, $2.5m for Ellis (backloaded, per Hernandez, and let’s enjoy paying him $5.25m in 2013!) and ~$1m for Treanor (per Jon Morosi, though it’s not finalized yet; if he doesn’t get it, someone else will to fill that role.)

That puts the budget up to about $106.5m, with $84m of that being 2012 players – which I assume is what Hernandez is referring to when he says that the payroll could be less, because only nerds like us remember the “dead money”.  Yet if Hernandez is correct and that number is to be lower – and let’s admit we don’t know if Hernandez’ info is good (though he’s generally excellent) or how much lower we’re talking about – the Dodgers could have only about $10m remaining to spend for the 2012 club. Is that enough to bring back Kuroda (who, by the way, decided to return for 2011 a year ago today, so the clock is ticking)? To get a fifth starter so Nathan Eovaldi can go back to the minors? To get another righty 1B/OF bench bat to ensure that Loney & Ethier never have to face lefties again? To bring back Tony Gwynn, as seems likely? To accommodate the inevitable guaranteed veteran reliever who will show up?

There are ways to decrease these commitments, I suppose. Maybe Loney is non-tendered, though that seems unlikely and you’d still need to replace him. Perhaps Kemp’s contract is even more backloaded than we think it’ll be. Or maybe this is finally the year Ethier gets traded, though again, I wouldn’t count on that. Either way, we can stop with the Prince Fielder and Aramis Ramirez talk, because it’s just not happening. Personally, I’d be happy with bringing back Kuroda for one more year and fill in around the edges as best as can be done.

******

Joey Matschulat of Baseball Time in Arlington on Treanor:

Treanor did, of course, end up finding his way back to Texas when the Rangers acquired him just before the August 31st waiver-period trade deadline, but came to the plate only 12 times over the final month of the regular season, and didn’t record a single post-season plate appearance. For all of the praise that Treanor drew a year earlier vis-a-vis his game-calling and ability to handle the Rangers’ pitching staff, he had clearly ceded his previously high spot in the backstop pecking order to Mike Napoli and Yorvit Torrealba, and thusly found himself relegated to more of an emergency catching/pinch-hitting role.

Mark Ellis Is Your New Dodger Second Baseman

Posted on by 82 Replies

I almost feel bad writing about this, because there’s absolutely nothing that should take precedence over Matt Kemp coming to terms on a new $160m extension (pending, of course, a physical). Yet the wheels keep turning and I can’t simply ignore the news, because ESPN’s Buster Olney tweets that the Dodgers may have a new second baseman:

Mark Ellis is on the verge of a two-year deal with the Dodgers.

Alright, I guess. We all know the second base market is dire, especially now that Aaron Hill has returned to Arizona, and though Ellis is coming off a brutal .288 OBP and will be 35 this season, he’s long been regarded as a plus defender. I’d love to not give him two years, yet in a world where Willie Bloomquist is getting two-year pacts, you can see how that might be unavoidable. At least I’m sure he’s not getting a ton of money, though. Wait, what

Ellis’s deal with the Dodgers worth a little less than $4.5 million per year, over the two years.

…and there it is. (Ken Rosenthal now confirms the deal, two years, $8.75m.) Mark Ellis is coming off a .288 OBP and is the proud owner of a better wOBA than Jamey Carroll exactly one time going back to 2006, yet he’s going to pull down about a million dollars more per season than the Carroll contract we didn’t even particularly like. Ellis was once a solid player with some pop, hitting double-digit homers each year between 2005-09, but that’s declined precipitously as he’s aged and been injured, averaging 33.5 days on the disabled list over the last four seasons. (h/t to pal Jay Jaffe on that stat.) Ellis is pretty one-dimensional now, since he doesn’t get on base well, doesn’t have a lot of power, and only has real value in his defense. Age and injuries – particularly leg injuries, which is what Ellis has had – can do a lot to diminish an infielder, so if Ellis suffers even a little with the glove, that’s going to make him a trouble spot, quickly. At least he’s not going to cost the Dodgers a draft pick, though the Rockies do pick up one on their end.

As you can imagine, the reaction on Twitter has been negative/sad/hilarious depending on your perspective.

D.J. Short, NBC Hardball Talk: 

Guys, Ned Colletti has to give Ellis $4.5M/yr. Some knucklehead already set the market for roughly 1 WAR players with the Juan Rivera deal.

Grant Brisbee, McCovey Chronicles:

I think an Uribe/Gordon/Ellis/Loney infield is going to hit just fine. But I’m also a Giants fan, and my perspective is alllll screwed up.

Andrew Grant, Minor League Central: 

Dodgers to spend almost 10 million in 2011 on Juan Rivera and Mark Ellis 

And so on. The best part is, you know – you just know – that Dee Gordon (.325 OBP) and Ellis (.288 OBP) are going to hit 1-2, because of course they will. I’ll grant that each has a chance to improve on those numbers, yet neither are likely to be above-average at getting on base. And isn’t that what you want, setting up for your new $160m center fielder? Granted, there’s not a lot of better alternatives… it just seems backward, is all.

If there’s positives here… well, as hilariously awful as the starting infield might be at the plate, there’s potential for at least three good gloves, plus the potential for Gordon to improve. It almost makes me wish the Dodgers had been the one to take a $5m gamble on a groundballer like Derek Lowe, but perhaps something similar can still be done. Plus, since Ellis can’t play short and the Dodgers don’t seem to view Uribe in that light, maybe this is the welcome end of Aaron Miles, since Justin Sellers would seem to have the edge in versatility. It’s certainly another black mark against the presumed Dodger career of Ivan DeJesus, anyway.

******

Back to Kemp, let’s not let that great news be overwhelmed so easily by this. When we look back on this day, we’re going to remember the Kemp signing, hopefully the one that put this franchise back on the right footing, and not the signing of yet another questionable Ned Colletti creamy veteran goodness of mediocre vintage, so let’s keep that discussion up in the comments. R.J. Anderson checks in at Baseball Prospectus with a positive review of the move:

Keep in mind that these are the Dodgers. Frank McCourt aside, this should be an organization able to throw around its financial girth more often than an isolated incident here and there. That should ease the qualm most people will have with handing Kemp a giant contract with a year of team control remaining. There is risk involved with any eight-year deal, and Kemp is not the exception. And yet, if Kemp has another big season, or if other teams in the league view him as a potential superstar, then the Dodgers may have saved themselves money by re-signing him now.  Add in the goodwill generated for a franchise that could use some, and the Dodgers are making a worthy enough gamble.

Agreed. By the way, the surest indication that this deal is done? Bill Shaikin, as always:

Scoreboard on youth field where #Dodgers expected to announce Kemp contract: Home 27, Visitor 0.

Dodgers Interested in Second Basemen and Catchers

Posted on by 25 Replies

Yesterday at Fox Sports, Ken Rosenthal put some names out there that the Dodgers might be looking at to fill the second base hole and… wait, I feel like we need to say something first.

(Look, it’s here where I have to issue the standard disclaimer we talk about every year: 90% of what you hear in the Hot Stove season is total BS. If it’s not a team or agent leaking a ‘rumor’ to create leverage, it’s a reporter rushing to be first to press with a hot story he got from a ‘source’ who got his info from Scott Boras’ best friend’s sister’s boyfriend’s brother’s girlfriend that he heard from a guy who knows this kid who’s going with the girl who saw Prince Fielder pass out at 31 Flavors last night. That doesn’t mean it’s not fun to think about and discuss, because it is – I love this time of year – let’s just try to keep it in perspective and not damn anyone for moves that haven’t actually been made yet. Okay? Okay.)

Back to Rosenthal:

The team is aggressively pursuing infielders and also talking to backup catchers and starting pitchers, major-league sources say. First baseman James Loney, shortstop Dee Gordon and third baseman Juan Uribe are virtually assured of starting positions in the Dodgers’ infield, but the second base and utility jobs are unsettled.

Ivan DeJesus and Justin Sellers could end up in the mix, but defense was a major issue for the Dodgers at second last season, and the team would prefer to add an established regular. Clint Barmes, Aaron Hill and Mark Ellis are among the free-agent second basemen the Dodgers are targeting; Hill currently is negotiating with his previous team, the Diamondbacks.

No surprises here, though a conspicuous lack of Jamey Carroll or Kelly Johnson - but again, this story is hardly written on parchment handed down from the gods. (Carroll sounds likely to sign a multi-year deal with another team soon anyway, according to ESPN’s Jerry Crasnick.) There’s reasons to like them all, I suppose, though none can really hit, since at a position where the top performers had wOBA marks north of .360, Barmes (.308), Hill (.292), and Ellis (.283) all lagged far behind. Ellis and Barmes each graded as plus defenders, with Hill about average, and toss some extra credit to Barmes for an ability to play shortstop where the other two cannot. Hill has at least shown the ability to display power in the past (36 homers in 2009, 26 in 2010) though his career has largely fallen off a cliff since that outstanding 2009.

Here’s the thing, though: all three will be 30 or older when next season starts, and it’s possible that at least two of the three command multi-year deals. Remember, this is a world where Willie Bloomquist is getting $4m guaranteed over two years, so you’d think that in what looks to be an inflated market these guys could be getting $4-5m per year – or more –  for multiple seasons.

For guys who are unlikely to be difference makers, is that really worth it? Sure, Hill could rediscover that 2009 form, but he’s also far more likely to be the guy with the 11th-worst wOBA in baseball (min 900 PA) over the 2010-11 seasons. Ellis and Barmes join him in the bottom 20 of that same list, saved from negative WAR largely because of their defense. But if you’re punting on offense and are just buying defense, Justin Sellers can probably provide a large portion of that same value for the minimum salary, even though he can’t hit a lick either.

I’m not necessarily saying that I prefer Sellers to these guys, because I really don’t think Sellers can hit enough to be more than a bench player. In a vacuum, I’d absolutely rather one of the vets over Sellers. But we don’t live in a vacuum, and we’ll have to see what the cost-benefit analysis works out to be when we see what type of deals these guys come down with. Mark Ellis is better than Justin Sellers (or Ivan DeJesus), I’m just not sure he’s worth 10 times the salary at multiple years, which he may very well get. In what may be a transitional year for the Dodgers, that might not be the best use of money. Still, time will tell how the market lands, so my tune on that could change as the offseason progresses.

Rosenthal also checks in behind the plate with a similar opinion to the one I stated yesterday when we learned Rod Barajas jumped ship:

At catcher, the Dodgers would like to add a Brad Ausmus-type backup behind A.J. Ellis, someone who could catch once or twice a week and serve as a mentor while the team develops Tim Federowicz at Triple A.

The free-agent market for catchers market is thin, but Jose Molina, Brian Schneider and Matt Treanor are among the players who fit the description of what the Dodgers would like to add.

I agree completely with Rosenthal that the likely addition would be a blue-collar veteran type, solid behind the plate and unlikely to add much on offense. I’ve seen support for Ryan Doumit, since he can hit, but he’s such an atrocious catcher that I’m not sure I’d be comfortable with him even as a backup. He’d fit a lot better as a 1B/RF bench type who can be your emergency catcher in case of injuries or double-switches, though he’s not strong enough against lefty pitching to really be an upgrade on James Loney or Andre Ethier there. Ramon Hernandez is likely to command too high of a salary, but I might not mind Ramon Castro as an at-least-he’s-not-awful addition.