The Cold Stove: MLB Winners and Losers In a Winter of Inactivity
Baseball January 5th. 2009, 4:00pm
It is hard to assess winners and losers in this season’s free agent market. Nearly every team not opening a new stadium in the Bronx is battening down for more favorable economic winds. With spending down $250 million from 2007, the Halcyon days of $60 million for Aaron Rowand seem remotely extravagant.
Yankees (Winners): The Yankees signed three of Keith Law’s top four free agents. If Manny Ramirez keeps lingering without a contract, Boras could grant them all four. There likely will be more hype for Sabathia, Burnett, and Teixeira than benefit from them, as those players still must replace Mussina, Pettitte (for now) and Jason Giambi. However, the inertia of others magnifies the impact of the Yankees’ modest gains. This winter’s signings pit them as definite AL East contenders.
Giants (Winners): I am on record against the Edgar Renteria signing. However, Jeremy Affeldt and a bounce backing Bob Howry could solidify the Giants’ pen for little cost or commitment. Sabean also stole Randy Johnson from their division rivals, at a sensible cost. San Francisco, as projected, possibly improves to 85 wins. That could be more if they sign a decent second baseman and add Manny Ramirez or the more likely Adam Dunn into the outfield. In a division where the other four teams will likely be worse, the Giants’ improvements could bring them a Bonds-less October.
Dodgers (Losers): Frank McCourt, unlike his compatriots, has spent this off-season. Unfortunately, it has been in maintenance, not improvement. The Dodgers paid $47.5 million to retain Rafael Furcal and Casey Blake. Furcal is a good player, though no sure bet because of injuries, and almost certainly not last year’s 36-game Dynamo. Casey Blake has finished in the top ten in the league in four categories, strikeouts, sacrifices, caught stealings and grounded into double plays. The Dodgers will lose Derek Lowe, relying on Jason Schmidt to replace him, and probably lose Manny Ramirez as well.  Where some wise spending could cement their NL West leader status, the Dodgers have, at best, sputtered.  An early prediction: We eventually see Trot Nixon in Dodger Blue.
Phillies (Losers): Philadelphia won the World Series, but appear content rather than raring to improve. The sentimental two-year $13 million deal for 46-year-old Jamie Moyer seems foolish. Letting Pat Burrell walk for Raul Ibanez who is an equally inept fielder, five years older and distinctly less powerful while not saving any money seems insane. With bullpen additions and a presumably supplemented rotation the Mets may now be the NL East favorites.
43 Responses to “The Cold Stove: MLB Winners and Losers In a Winter of Inactivity”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

January 5th, 2009 at 4:02 PM
He declined their very reasonable offer. He is signing with the Rays for less. Not really their fault.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:04 PM
baseball post? ugh…
January 5th, 2009 at 4:06 PM
cracker jack- they didn’t even offer him arbitration though. Dumb dumb dumb
January 5th, 2009 at 4:09 PM
Thread Jack…..Jerry O’connell has twin girls.
His life is now over and he can look forward to a lifetime of guys like us and the papprazzi watching their every transgression
January 5th, 2009 at 4:14 PM
Missed the biggest winner the Indians.
Signed Kerry Wood, the trade for Smith and the trade for DeRosa. Now they just need to find a 2nd or 3rd starter, have Hafner and Martinez return to close to their former selves and you have the AL favorite.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:15 PM
Jerry O’connell has twin girls.
Who?
January 5th, 2009 at 4:16 PM
@slcbuckeye
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Did you forget your Cleveland?
That is all
January 5th, 2009 at 4:16 PM
only a month away from pitchers and catchers…
January 5th, 2009 at 4:17 PM
I think Ibanez will help the Phillies win games in the regular season, but I’m not entirely sure about the post-season, yet. They already have Howard, they don’t need another low average power hitter. OBP is nice, but Ibanez is going to hit about 30 points higher in batting average and I think that will work better in their lineup.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:18 PM
Ibanez sucks balls defensively. He’s worse than Burrell and not as good of a hitter.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Don’t remind me
January 5th, 2009 at 4:19 PM
@KC resident….
The Dude banging Rebecca Romijn minus the Stamos
January 5th, 2009 at 4:21 PM
No. That is why I only said AL favorite and not World Series favorite. Being from Cleveland does appear to be a big problem. The odds of Wood blowing out his arm and getting less than 10 saves is very high.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:23 PM
that casey blake stat is funny.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:23 PM
@fetch: Burrell made $14.25 million last year. He would’ve gotten a raise in arbitration. Call it $15-$16 million. There’s a pretty huge chance he accepts that, considering he just signed for $8 million per year for 2 years. He could’ve made his Rays contract this year alone, then seen what happens next year.
I don’t think not offering arb is that cut and dry.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:25 PM
I’d pay Pat Burrell a risk free 15 million for one year over giving Ibanez 13 million or whatever it is for 3 years. Everyday and twice on Sundays.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Cubs signed Milton Bradley.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:27 PM
@KC resident….
The Dude banging Rebecca Romijn minus the Stamos
Yeah, I know. I should have tagged it as me immitating most TBL commenters on the subject of Mr. O’Connell. I’m one of the few on here that defend him and his lucky ass life.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:28 PM
$30/3. Maybe.
You have to evaluate the decisions independently though.
The Ibanez decision was terrible. No question.
I don’t think the no arb offer was terrible, though.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Meanwhile, the Rays made the AL East that much more interesting.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:30 PM
to those fans in the AL East…to everyone else? not so much.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:34 PM
The Cleveland/Big 10 fans’ inferiority complex never gets old.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:34 PM
Who signed Tebow?
January 5th, 2009 at 4:35 PM
The Yankees should remain losers, regardless of what they do, for three years minimum after refusing to give up Hughes and Kennedy for Johan. Just because you have money to spend doesn’t mean you’re FO are winners.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:40 PM
you know who is a big friggin loser? alaBAMA!
January 5th, 2009 at 4:40 PM
NickP: Agree to disagree.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Biggest losers in this off-season? My beloved St. Louis Cardinals. Other than trading for a semi-washed up Khalil Greene, they’ve done jack shit. Owner Bill DeWitt has put salary retstrictions on certain positions, all the while saying publicly that if there was a player out there that would make the team better, he’d increase payroll to sign said player. Let’s see, what players were/are out there that could help make the Cards better? CC Sabathia? Nah. Brian Fuentes? Nope. Derek Lowe? Not good enough, apparently.
I know; let’s put all our eggs in one basket and count on Chris Carpenter coming back 100%, and letting 2 other starters go, and NOT sign any FA starters. Oh, and the guy who you signed to play 2B two years ago, and who asked to be traded late last season because of a lack of playing time, is now your starting 2B again. Oh yeah, there’s also a good chance that your All-World 1B will leave via FA when his contract is up in two years.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:46 PM
True…
Still though, Bama > Mich St.
Btw, work has banned me from S&F sparty. This is what they gave me for Xmas. Bastards!
January 5th, 2009 at 4:46 PM
neither does the east coast big market elitism where they think everyone in the country gives a shit about what they’re doing.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:50 PM
Strongly agree with this, and I’ve lived in every part of the country so I’m not biased. New Jersey does smell, though.
January 5th, 2009 at 5:00 PM
really? that fucking sucks. but at the same time, i feel so proud.
January 5th, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Francessa is flipping his shit on WFAN about NFL overtime.
Like, aren’t radio professionals supposed to be … mentally balanced?
January 5th, 2009 at 5:15 PM
I would take the slight advantage in on base percentage and 10-15 more home runs, but that’s just me.
Letting Burrell leave is conceivable. Replacing him with a bloated Ibanez contract is nutty.
January 5th, 2009 at 6:03 PM
I think there are certainly some situations where the OBP advantage and 10-15 homeruns is something that a team would need. The big stat, though is with RISP Ibanez has hit .305 while Burrell hit .263 for their careers. Last year, .327 for Ibanez and .234 for Burrell.
That’s a pretty big difference.
The biggest problem that the Phillies lineup had last season was consistency. They scored a lot of runs, but the lineup was at its best when the bottom of the order hit well. Having someone that will hit at that higher average with RISP and provide good situational hitting is a huge upgrade from Burrell.
January 5th, 2009 at 7:32 PM
1. There’s no stat that proves “clutch hitting” ability exists. It fluctuates too wildly from year to year.
2. Your contention is that the Phillies’ lineup had a “problem.” They were tied for second most runs scored in the NL. They won the World Series. Burrell has a better OBP, a better slugging percentage and hits for more power.
They signed someone who isn’t as productive of a hitter, as bad in the field, older and for significantly more money.
January 5th, 2009 at 7:44 PM
Sounds about right.
/Fuck Frank McCourt and MLB for letting him become an owner
January 5th, 2009 at 8:02 PM
Hitting with RISP and “clutch hitting” aren’t exactly the same thing. Situational hitting certainly exists, but is a much different thing. Ibanez hits better with RISP and runners on because generally he is a better contact hitter than Burrell is. With RISP I’d rather have a hit than a walk in most situations.
That’s not even close to making an argument about clutch hitting existing.
I’ll stick with my contention that the Phillies lineup had a problem and that I think this helps fill that problem. You stated the obvious in saying Burrell has a better OBP and hits for more power, but that doesn’t address the point much at all. Why is better OBP and power needed for the spot that Ibanez/Burrell would fill? My point was that the bottom of the order gets a bit clogged and OBP isn’t as important for the spots of the lineup they are trying to fill.
It shouldn’t be about staying the same even though they scored the 2nd most runs in the NL and won the World Series. The Mets got better, if the Nats sign Adam Dunn and Orlando Hudson they will win more games, the Marlins are always pesky. If the Phillies were to stay the same and not try to fix problems in their offense, that gives them less of a chance to win the division. They should always be striving to get better and there are always going to be problems.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:12 PM
With a runner on first I would rather have a HR or double than a ground out. The one thing I will agree on is that Ibanez will help the bottom of the lineup but the middle of the order is considerably worse. And I am basing that on the fact that PHI can’t have Ibanez bat in the middle of the lineup. Right? Right?!?!
January 5th, 2009 at 8:15 PM
Well, I’d bat Werth 5 and Ibanez 6 and think that is better than Burrell 5 and Werth 6.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:25 PM
Really? Well, I guess I just disagree. And it isn’t like the Phillies used the cash they saved by going with Ibanez over Burrell to fix their holes at catcher or 3rd base. I would almost go along with that decision if they had plugged those awful positions. Or another starter.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:45 PM
I just think a lot of times the Phillies have been a HR or nothing offense and this helps them move away from that.
I’m not entirely sure what they are doing at Catcher, they are supposed to have a guy in the minors in Lou Marson that is supposed to be a good prospect. So, I don’t mind them making a move there. Also, part of me has the unrealistic hope that Carlos Ruiz can hit more like his postseason than his .219 average. At 3rd base, Feliz is there mainly for his glove, I wouldn’t mind seeing them get Dobbs more at bats, though.
January 5th, 2009 at 11:03 PM
Yes, it does move them away from that. Because they won’t hit as many home runs!
January 6th, 2009 at 1:29 AM
So, explain to me why that is such a bad thing. The Cubs scored 56 more runs than the Phillies with 184 Homeruns. The Phillies had 214 homeruns. The Phillies as a team had a .255 average, 10th in the NL. It was an area to improve.