Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 98: Zack Greinke and the Dodgers’ Bottomless Bankroll

Episode Date: December 10, 2012

Ben and Sam discuss the Zack Greinke signing and the Dodgers’ astronomical payroll with Mike Petriello of Dodgers blog Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness.

You can't do this, big guy. Money. We need money. Carlton, you know we can afford this. You're the one who helped me invest. My money makes money. We're rich. That's right. We are rich. I like being rich. It's cool. Good morning and welcome to episode 89, 98. It's episode 98. It is 98.

Effectively Wild, the daily podcast from Baseball Prospectus. I'm Sam Miller with Ben Lindberg. Today we are joined by Mike Petriello of Mike Socha's Tragic Illness and Fangraphs.com. Mike, how are you doing? Very well, guys. How's it going? It's going great. We've had you on because of uh your connection to the los angeles dodgers the dodgers this weekend signed zach granky the top free agent

pitcher on the market this winter they also agreed to terms with korean lefty heon jin ryu and keith law wrote today the dodgers have the best team on paper in the division at this point, not just due to their offseason, but due to the potential to have Matt Kemp fully healthy for the first time since April. The San Francisco Giants have moved to bring back the same team that won the World Series, but haven't upgraded the roster anywhere with very little upside from their lineup at this point. The Dodgers also have a record setting $225 million-ish, it might be higher now, payroll for 2013. They have many, many, many millions committed beyond that. They are well into luxury tax range this year and essentially already for next year as well. It is an unprecedented spending

spree. And so, Mike, I wanted to know how it feels. You know, it's funny you ask, because earlier today I was looking back at what I was writing about a year ago today, and it was, can they afford Hideki Matsui? and Might They Bring Back Mike McDougal? and Russ Newhan, who's an all-fame writer for many, many years, was writing conspiracy theory stories about whether Franklin Ford's deal was actually a long con

to try to hang on to the team for the courts. So, here we are a year later, and they've spent more in the last six months than I think Franklin Ford spent in the last six years or so. The great thing is they could not afford Hideki Matsui in the later, and they've spent more in the last six months than I think Franklin Ford spent in the last six years or so. The great thing is they could not afford Hideki Matsui in the end, and they brought back McDougal, and he pitched, what, about two innings? Yeah, he got cut at the end of April, I think.

But hey, at least they got Adam Kennedy all year. So, I mean, obviously I think every fan prefers that his team spend money and every fan prefers his team sign players who can make them competitive. But there is a certain amount of kind of, I don't know, tackiness. I think that a lot of fans who aren't Dodgers fans feel about this club. They have been adding non-stop since july and i mean i think that maybe what's interesting about this from a non-dodgers fan perspective is that um they they seem to be making moves that um you would that an analyst would normally question and they've just continued to spend on spend on spend and essentially um kind of undo the imperative to analyze because they they seem to have a bottomless pit of money but i mean you're

a smart fan you're a fan who has looked at this team through a smart lens for many years it must feel odd to to have that kind kind of logic taken away from everything and to not really know where the bottom is and whether this is kind of a dignified way to win, or does that not matter? Well, I guess there's two answers to that. The first is as far as a dignified way to win, the team hasn't won anything in 25 years. So if they do win a World Series this year,

I look forward to Bill Plasky complaining about how they didn't win the the right way but they'll still have the championship so i'll be okay with that as far as analyzing it you're totally right i've found myself having to rethink how i analyze some of these deals because any other year for any other team i would see three years and 22 million for brandon league and i would just be apoplectic about it you know but now it's like well that's a drop in the bucket and you'll not even for the Dodgers, but all across baseball, the TV money coming in and all the value is going up. I mean, it sounds like that should be crazy, but you compare it to all the other deals, and maybe it's not.

Maybe we're just overrun by the billions of dollars that's coming in here. We're seeing things through colored glasses. But it's really so much different than evaluating deals the same way I would have a year ago or two years ago or five years ago. So are we kind of just wasting our time to try to break this down by what it comes out to, dollars per win, and whether it's in line with the rest of the market? I mean, I saw that on Twitter, you were kind of critical of people who think that this is an overpay for Granke. What is your rationale? Does that come down to more that you think that Granke is worth this money

just on his own or that the money is just so different now that he doesn't have to be as good as someone who got this contract would have had to be in the past? I think it's a little bit of both. I think that a lot of fans are like, well, Granke's not an ace, which obviously I don't agree with, but he's not one of the top five pitchers. He's not Clayton Kershaw. He's not Justin Verlander. So why is he the top paid pitcher, top righty pitcher?

And obviously a lot of people don't understand, well, those guys aren't free agents or they didn't sign a deal on free agency. And if they did, they didn't do it this winter. So if they were available, then the money would be a lot different. And the fact that Granke is now the top paid righty pitcher forever, it's really just, it's kind of an outcome of his situation. It's good timing for him. And then it's kind of also, a lot of people look at him,

and he's one of those guys whose advanced stats, his fifth and everything, don't always match his ERA, except for that one really great year he had. So it's kind of a disconnect for people. Where do you come down on that? Sam wrote a bit about it today at BP, how his peripherals have been fantastic, his ERA not quite so much. And depending on your perspective,

you can think that he is a guy who just has underperformed due to factors not under his control? Or at this point, is the sample size so large that that's just who he is except for 2009? I think that he has had problems pitching with runners on base at times and runners in sport position. And some of the advanced stats don't really show that that well. I don't think that makes much of a differential between that. I also think he's had some pretty terrible defenses behind him at times so that hasn't helped him either you know the dodgers mark ellis is a really good defender and adrian gonzalez is a really good defender but

you know and their mirrors at shortstop that's not really going to help him with that either uh you know getting back into the national league and some of the big parks in the west you know goddard james good pitchers park in in San Francisco and San Diego. I think that'll help him too. And, you know, he's also been traded twice now. Yeah, twice now in the last three years. So, you know, you hope that knowing where he's going to be for the next six or seven years can really help him. You know, is he going to be an ace?

He doesn't have to be because they have Clayton Kershaw. And he's probably the best number two starter. And he, you know, arguably, unless you want to throw in Gio Gonzalez. So is there a move they could make right now that would worry you? That would make you think that they would maybe

just lost all self-discipline? Absolutely. What is it? What's the move? The move is the same move that's been my nightmare since the beginning of the offseason, and that is Kyle Loesch. There is no right answer, or the right question that Kyle Roach is the answer to. You know, giving up the first-round pick, and he's going to get four years,

and he's overrated, and he's older. I'm hoping that now they've got so much started pitching that even Ned Kalani can't want to go for Kyle Loesch, but until he's signed somewhere else, I will never believe it. But, I mean, if the money doesn't matter, I mean, Loesch is more valuable than a first-round pick, right? I mean, I guess, probably, right? I don't think he's that great. I know he's had some good success the last two years, but before that he had, like, eight years of being hurt and mediocre. So, I mean, he could fall apart at any second.

I just don't have a lot of confidence. Yeah, no, I mean, I agree. I think Loesch is probably a disaster waiting to happen, but that's because I think that the money means something. If you're the Dodgers and your theory is that you can never have too much pitching and they just sign nine or ten of these guys. I mean, right now there's eight if you count Lilly, and I'm not sure what is Lilly's health I mean, right now there's eight if you count Lily, and I'm not sure

what is Lily's health report card for right now. Lily should be good to go for the spring. I mean, he was out so long last year, he didn't actually pitch past late May, I don't think. So he's got plenty of time to recuperate. But if you're going to throw more money at a pitcher you don't need, then at least go with

Anibal Sanchez. So it's Kershaw, Granke, Billingsley, Beckett, Capuano, Horang, Lilly, and you. Yes. It's absurd, isn't it? It is absurd. It's eight pitchers, but it's not as much as you might think. Because like you said, Lilly's got injury problems. I don't know that Billingsley's

elbow is really going to hold up all season long. He's got a partial atory in the CL. Kershaw's had some hip issues. Beckett and Capuano have their health problems. It sounds absurd, but it's not as much of a pitch issue, I think. Well, not to take anything away from the roster, because I'm coming around to the idea that this is a really good roster, but it really does sort of show the challenge of building a team this way.

I mean, since July, they've been doing nothing but adding guys who are famous, and yet every single one of them has a mark against him, even though they all come with huge, huge salaries, and yet there really isn't a sure thing in the bunch. I guess Adrian Gonzalez is the closest thing to a sure thing, but with Granke, Granke is a little bit of a, he's a theoretical ace more than he's an ace. He could be amazing, but there's a question mark there, and Hamley has an ace um he could be amazing but you know there's

there's a question mark there and hamley has question marks crawford beckett uh certainly league um ryu all these guys have question marks it's it's a it's a scary way to build a team in a way do you have any kind of fear that like all these guys might actually just be um like they might all be the guy that they were last year which they all had kind of flaws and that maybe this isn't like what would it mean if they missed the playoffs i guess is the question that i think that would be a disaster you can't ever expect the team to win the world series because so much can happen in the postseason but if they don't make the playoffs or at least come down to the very last day unless there's some massive disaster i don't know how you can come

back from that because they put so much money into winning this year. And, you know, you're right. There are things that can go wrong. I'm looking at the perspective roster right now, and if the season started today, they would have four guys, I think, who are pre-arbitration, which is absurd. I mean, it's going to be kind of an old issue.

Yeah. Right? How it would be Luis Cruz, who I don't even like, and then, like like three bullpen guys you know gara and jensen and albert and maybe another backup outfielder but i know they're going to get outfielders so it won't matter out of 25 well they should probably sign a couple more starters just to be safe at this point maybe they will i mean at this point i would put nothing i mean if you're at 225 might as well, might as well go $250,000 or whatever it takes to put all doubt out of your mind.

Go ahead, go ahead. Sorry, I was going to say, if you count the posting fee for you and all of the deferred and dead money, they're already up to $270 million this year, which is crazy. And they're still going to add guys. Wait, $270? Did you say $270? Yeah. And that're still going to add guys. Wait, 270? Did you say 270? Yeah. And that doesn't include the luxury tax? No, it's 222. It's just contracted money.

And then there's the $25 million posting fee and a bunch of other deferred money and buyouts and arbitration and the zero to three guys. So you add all that up and I've got it at 263. My word. My word. I sort of have this theory that maybe one of the things that they're thinking is that players, that contracts are going to be more movable in coming years. And so even though they've taken on

all these long-term contracts and expensive contracts that maybe they think that like sort of the Marlins showed, it's kind of easy to tear down quickly because more teams are trying to take on money than are able to sort of spend it on the free agency market. And my guess is that right now the plan is to trade one of the back starters in the rotation. Do you think that's true?

I mean, is Capuano gone? I would say at least one and probably two. There were rumors of Capuano for Joel Hanrahan, which is possible. I think he's probably gone, maybe Hurray in two. They'll have to keep at least one of the extra guys just for depth because of the injury concerns. But I do think at least two of them will be gone. And why is there no third baseman on this team? Well, that's because Ned Coletti had to go out and sign Juan Uribe two years ago. There's no third baseman because Dee Gordon failed, really, and so they put Heindler-Mirror's back in short, which is kind of a terrible idea,

but I can't even push too hard for them to move him back because there's no one to put it short because Dee Gordon's not ready. And the market, it's pretty terrible. I mean, maybe Kevin Euclid, I guess. But, you know, money can only buy what's available. I'm just surprised that I haven't even – I mean, it seems like they're exactly the team that would go after Euclid and not really care if he fails because the money doesn't matter.

I mean, right now they don't really have a third baseman. It's like it's this weird – I mean, it seems odd for them to be going after two starting pitchers this weekend and not have that position taken care of. But, I mean, I guess – I guess I don't know what they would do. Without Chase Hedley, he's not going to be traded. I guess I don't even really know what they would do because there's a lot of teams that need third basemen, and I certainly wasn't sad that it wasn't the Dodgers that got Michael Young.

Would you have been happy to have Eric Chavez? Yes, actually I would have. I've liked him for a couple years, and I wish they would have had him. But, yeah, I don't know if he's really durable to be kind of the guy you rely on more than part-time anyway. So you don't want to sign Loge partly because of the draft pick. I know that you were against signing Corota, which surprised me, because I like Corota, and itge partly because of the draft pick. I know that you were against signing Corotta, which surprised me, because I like Corotta, and it was also because of the draft pick.

Do you really think a draft pick has that much value to a team that's committed to building through this manner? Well, I think what they're trying to do is they're trying to be better quickly, and their farm system is really destroyed under the report there. And I don't even just mean the draft picks and players. Their scouting system was just torn apart. So if you look over the last two months or so, they've signed a whole bunch of scouts and big names,

guys like Bob Angola, John DeFaculic. So what their plan, I think, is to spend a lot now up front and then kind of put the rest of their money into rebuilding the farm system. So they went out and they signed Jesse O'Fleeg, and they signed a bunch of other international guys, and they're building up their scouting system. And, you know, if you look at their salaries going forward, I know they have a long-term deal, but after 2013, there's like $75 million coming off the books.

And after 2014, there's like $45 million more. I don't think that long-term they want to have a $300 million payroll. So I wonder what they would have done had this change in ownership taken place under the old CBA with the old compensation rules where there's no way that they could have avoided giving up basically all their draft picks if they were doing a free agent spending spree like they're doing now. I wonder whether that would have dissuaded them from doing this or whether they would have just considered that the price of doing business this way. I mean, is there, I guess, is the benefit to the Dodgers making the playoffs very quickly now higher than it is for most teams?

I mean, is it more imperative that they do it the kind of the quick and easy and expensive way than the slow rebuilding way just to get there kind of after the McCourt era? You know, I think that goes a long way towards winning back fans. And the fan feeling towards the Dodgers could not have been more toxic in the last year or two. But also I think, you know, you hear a lot about teams that win the offseason and then it doesn't work out for them in the regular season. And that's definitely the Dod year or two. But also, I think you hear a lot about teams that win the offseason and then it doesn't work out for them in the regular season. And that's definitely the Dodgers so far.

But for them, winning the offseason actually does matter because they're very close to signing this new television contract, which is where all this money is going to go. So I really think that showing that they have a team that's committed to win, that can bring new ratings. That's where this $6 billion, $7 billion, whatever it's going to be, TV contract is going to come from. And that was really, I think, the main goal for this ownership to put all this money into it.

Okay, so of all the moves they've made since July, what's the best move? What's the worst move? Oh, that's a good one. Well, I think Granke is probably the best move that I like just because he is the only difference maker starting pitcher. And maybe they overpaid for him, maybe they didn't, but they didn't give him a talent for him they they got the only guy who could really pair with

grunty uh with kershaw uh the worst move you know there's there haven't really been anything that i've outright hated yet i mean the boston move is definitely the biggest flash point i think taking on all that crawford money is super risky but to get adrian gonzalez when there is no other first baseman option and you've been living with James Loney for the last five years, it made sense. I'd say the move I probably like the least is, surprisingly enough, giving $85 million to Andre Ethier, who I like, but who's kind of a platoon, probably should be a DH outfielder. Wow, you pronounce it platoon. Is that what I said, as opposed to platoon? I don't know where that came from. All right.

Well, I personally liked it when they signed Andy Sisko. But that's probably not the most headline-grabbing one. Ben, do you have anything else to ask Mike? I don't think so, but we'll probably have him back next week when the Dodgers sign every remaining free agent. Yeah, I mean, Josh Hamilton's got to have a role on this club somewhere, right? Maybe he can play third. probably have him back next week when the dodgers sign every remaining free agent yeah i mean josh hamilton's got to have a role on this club right he can play third you know what they're they're not done they still have holes to fill so it's not going to be anything on the level of a cranky

but there's going to be more moves this week when they when i saw that they were looking at uh when jim bowden suggested that they might go after anibal sanchez was that just uh real leverage uh i think it was almost cranky leverage because I think there was a time where it was real. They really thought he was going to Texas. Well, Bowden said it today. Did he say it today? Yeah. I mean, I don't know.

Jim Bowden is kind of – he says his free agent predictions are like right on and I respect him for that. And then he says some other things where I'm not sure. He does his own. All right. Prediction prediction how many wins um i'm gonna go with uh 93 wins 93 wins all right well we'll have you on at the end of the year and see how it went awesome all right um that was it that's episode 98 of effectively wild thanks to mike petriello check him out at mike social's'sTragicIllness and on Twitter at Mike underscore Petriello at Twitter.com, I guess. All right. Thanks, Mike.

Thanks a lot, guys. Appreciate it.