Failure Is An Option

by Andrew on May 2, 2008 3:22 PM PDT

A while back, I wrote an article about how I finally figured out what it was about Ned that I didn’t like, the man simply refused to take a risk. Need to have Brett Tomko around so your eighth starter has been here before. Need to bring back Nomar because Loney might not be ready. Can’t have Jayson Werth on the roster because he might get hurt, and so on. This lack of risk taking has lead to the large amount of proven veterans clogging up the Dodger proverbial bases the last couple years.

Because of this rather annoying habit of buying high and selling low, it was a huge shock when Ned signed Andruw Jones this off season. Jones was coming off a coming off a season where he made Juan Pierre look like an offensive force, so the typical Ned thing to do would be ignore Jones, then beg Torii Hunter to come play for us. Instead, Ned took a risk. Ned took the guy that had a suppressed value in the market, but had the potential to be good anyway. This was the first time he did something like this with someone that you weren’t sure was going to get hurt immediately. It was good, it was the type of move that good GMs make to get a leg up on the competition.

This is why I can’t get upset, even if Jones fails miserably. It’s what I’ve wanted the whole time that Ned has steered the ship. Will it suck if Jones keeps flaling away for the next two years like he did this April? Of course. But for the low, low cost of only money, the Dodgers got a chance to get a very good player without being stuck in a potentially ruinous financial situation. I would much rather we get Jones, and see him fail that pick up some “safe” option, like, well, Juan Pierre.

Even if Jones never finds success, he’ll still probably be better than Juan Pierre thanks to his defensive prowess, so it will be hard to say this deal was a total loss. Even if Jones never figures it out (and it’s way too soon to say he won’t) picking up Andruw Jones was a good move by Ned, regardless of the end result.

--------------------------------

Speaking of buying low on a guy with upside, Derrick Turnbow was DFA’d by the Brewers. Turnbow has struck out 10.25 per nine since 2006, but has had control issues the whole way, and that’s blown up into a 5/13 K/BB ratio this year. Would he fail miserably on the Dodgers? Probably, but as long as we keep Chan Ho in the pen, we’ve got room for a guy like Turnbow.

------------------------------

Julio Franco has officially retired , ending a career that began two years before I was born.

1 recs | Comment 5 comments | Add your comment

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Well said, Andrew

I completely agree that the Jones signing was wise because it was small committment, high risk, high reward. And Jones’ defense prowess alone makes the deal an upgrade over Pierre’s rubber arm. It takes some cahones to speak up against the raising wave of resentment against Andruw Jones, and I commend you for that.

Paul Lo Duca is MLB's Pablo Escobar..

by DodgerBlueBalls on May 2, 2008 3:59 PM PDT reply reply 0 recs

Yep

Agreed, not even the people that sit in Dodger stadium booing him everyday can say they were wary of this signing when Ned made. We all thought this would take our offense to a new level, and if he ever comes around and shows signs of the old Andruw, he still will.

O.A.

by Ollie on May 2, 2008 4:39 PM PDT reply reply 0 recs

At least....

If Jones fails miserably he won’t be resigned. Before the season started there was talk that is Andruw performed he would be extended several more years. That was scary. I don’t see that happening unless things turn around dramatically.

by JLS23 on May 2, 2008 5:51 PM PDT reply reply 0 recs

Completely Disagree...

The signing of Andruw Jones was a complete contradiction of the direction the Dodgers were ultimately heading. We purposefully didn’t trade off any of our good young talent, that being Kershaw, Kemp, Loney, Broxton, Ethier or Martin, for a legitimate third baseman which we were completely lacking but what was the point of not trading any of them? We didn’t trade them because there is a huge upside to playing our bright young talent , especially a player like Matt Kemp but with the signing of Andruw Jones, Kemp gets limited playing time which has proven to be a huge mistake. What Kemp has done in his limited starts as been huge, he is a great offensive presene to our team, while on the other side of the spectrum Jones might as well be a card board cut out up there at the plate, at least then he might draw a walk and get on base. Jones’ mechanics are fundamentally flawed and he hasn’t found a way to correct them. With one home run and 4 doubles this year, Jones is looking like an early bust, granted there is alot of the season left but I feel that the everyday outfield should be Pierre at Left, Kemp at Center and Ethier at right. The most logically and productive decision for keeping our youth movement…......PLAYING THEM! There have been multiple situations where we could have busted the game open when or got some offense going when Jones’ comes up to the plate with runners in scoring position, but instead of being an offensive presence, he likes to swing at unhittable pitches. If Kemp had been in the game, he would have driven in some of those runs, which may have helped us win some games. But that’s just my two cents. Jones light doesn’t shine blue, it just flickers in the dark when all you really need is a little glow but he can’t even manage that. Dop him down to the minors to regain his bat. Jones said in a recent interview, “you get paid for what you do,” so either cut his salary or drop him down to the minors so he can regain his composure.

by TrueBlue82 on May 3, 2008 2:24 PM PDT reply reply 0 recs