I wonder if part of the reason they didn’t fully pursue voiding Andruw’s contract was because they knew at least partially for his outofshapedness (I’m making that a word) via his physical.

I was willing to accept that the Dodgers simply made a risk with Schmidt when they signed him. But when it became public that they knew of a partially torn rotator cuff his signing moved into the “criminal” classification.

The Pierre signing is still the worst. There was some risk with Jones, but his ‘07 year was due more to bad luck than lack of skill. Essentially, everyone says he was bad in ’07 because of his low BA, which was due to his much lower than average BABIP. Andrew (who writes here) actually did some good stat analysis that Jones might’ve been declining based on his line drive % ratio, but at the very least, there was valid reasoning to think Jones could’ve been an asset.

Juan Pierre on the other hand, has always been mediocre, and never did anything for anybody to justify him ever even being offered such a contract. Worst LA free agent signing ever. I don’t care what anyone says. There was never any reason at any time to make one think Juan Pierre was worth that contract. Jones was at least a calculated risk. Juan Pierre was (and is) just worthless.

Good, at least Ned was looking at skill.

You make a good point but I think Ned did think he was a better centerfielder even with the rag arm. He was signed to play CF not LF and that is what we have now. A light hitting, speedy LF and those careers don’t have much of a life. I’ll use Podboy. as an example.

So if we give a mediocre player a huge contract that can’t be considered a bad signing because we knew he was bad coming in? That doesn’t really make too much sense. You can expect something from a particular player and get exactly what you wanted, and it can still be a bad signing. One obvious reason is you overvalue what that player provides you. In Juan Pierre’s case, it’s an empty batting average. This argument is akin to those who say that Jim Rice and Dawson shouldn’t be penalized for not walking back in their playing days because they ’weren’t asked to do it’ or ’didn’t know how it important it was.’ Even though it’s obvious (and always has been) that being on base is much better than making an out.

To conclude, if your only assets are “good average, great speed, good attitude,” you’re probably not a very good ballplayer. And Juan Pierre isn’t. And he shouldn’t have been paid like one. Juan Pierre was, IMO, our worst free agent signing ever because there wasn’t even a calculated risk involved. He wasn’t potentially coming back from a bad season or injury. He was a mediocre player who played exactly the same as he always have, and the Dodger front office should’ve known better. I applaud moves like the signing of Andruw Jones. It was a risk, but it would’ve had great results if it worked out. If it didn’t, we’re out some money (and a roster spot). But to know you’re getting mediocrity and then signing that player to a contract worthy of a very good player, that is a bad signing. At least guys like Jones and Schmidt had actually produced before. Juan Pierre never did anything in his career that would make anyone think that he was worth the contract he got.

Short term high money signings represent a calculated risk taken by the front office. It might work, or it might not, but you could make the argument it’s at least worth a shot. The Juan Pierre signing, however, is a sign of systemic front office ineptitude. It’s a sign that they don’t know how to properly value baseball players. And that is much more dangerous than taking a risk and failing.