Ned Colletti kicked off the hot stove for the Dodgers by resigning Ramon Martinez to an $800,000 deal for 2007. The deal includes a one million dollar option for 2008 with a 50,000 dollar buyout.
I'm not a huge fan of this because, well, Ramon Martinez isn't very good. While Martinez found a little bit of success early in his career, the .702 OPS he put up this year was his best since 2003. While Martinez did start off the season hot, he was rendered irrelevant with the acquisitions of Julio Lugo and Wilson Betemit. These acquisitions, combined with Martinez's swift regression to the mean meant that Ramon Martinez received only 20 at bats in the last two months prior to starting a meaningless game at the end of the season. Is a player that can be rendered completely irrelevant the type of guy you want to hang on to? I have a feeling that Colletti thinks Martinez is more like the guy who was hitting .361/.426/.475 on June 3rd rather than the guy who finished the season at .278/.339/.364.
Ultimately, is there going to be a huge difference between Ramon Martinez, and someone like Craig Counsell in a bench role? Barring a massive string of injuries, no. Nor is there much of a financial difference between Martinez and an in house option like Oscar Robles. But making a commitment to a guy that has no discernable talent or upside other than being able to play a lot of positions isn't something I'm a fan of. It's pretty much just the principle of the move that offends me.