Saturday, December 03, 2005
Furcal A Dodger, $40M/3 Years
Update: Yes, you can go visit Jon's for his reaction. My reaction is that, yes, you might justifiably think that Ned Colletti needs to be sent to boot camp for the financially clueless. No question, relative to the 2003 and 2004 offseasons, this is an overpayment, but it's one that the Dodgers almost had to make, for two reasons: first, their hideous, clumsy offseason has spooked a lot of free agents, and second, their declining payroll has spooked the fans. That's not to say that spending a ton just to get the payroll up is a good idea, but as overpaying for players goes, this isn't a bad deal. Furcal's mostly been healthy, he's also been a slightly above-average defender at short, and he's a much more consistent hitter than Izturis has ever dreamed of being.
There are those who say that this will be the end of the Choi experiment, but I would suggest otherwise. Recall that the Dodgers have a vacancy at third (and no,slap-hitting Willy Aybar isn't the guy to fix that); Furcal could go there, or stay at short. That is, the Dodgers could trade Izturis midseason, though the easy solution would simply be to move Choi, but the cast of "potential" has left him as a player without a portfolio, and trade value; Izturis, at least, has a gold glove and a shiny, recent All Star appearance. Of the two players, who's liable to fetch more on the auction block?
I doubt Stoneman is smart enough to try that, but I wouldn't be averse to seeing that.
I also don't mind the money too much. I mean, the Dodgers are a big budget team, so it's ok if they overpay for talent as long as that money is not being taken away from something else they need.