On proven veterans

Wilbur, his neck snapping from the strain of pondering a Mike Lowell trade, offers this editorial at OnlyBucs. He's making sense--if there are many fans who believe the Pirates are only one bat away from contending. And if those same fans will believe that Mike Lowell is that bat. Are Pirate fans that gullible?

We can't smack ourselves on the forehead every time the Pirates sign some 30-something that another team no longer wants. Every team adds "washed-up," "struggling," "overrated," and/or "past their peak" veterans. Just because the Pirates have been stuck around 75 wins, that doesn't mean they should not add veterans. Wilbur describes a method for maintaining an "OK" 75-win team, but this same method is also employed by most of the best teams in baseball right now. The difference between the Pirates and the perpetual winners is not that the Pirates sign more mediocre proven veterans.

Consider the following transactions. In the 2004-2005 offseason, the Cardinals signed 30-year-old David Eckstein to lead off in 2005. Eckstein was coming off a season in which he posted an OBP of .339. The White Sox signed 31-year-old Jermaine Dye, who was coming off seasons in which he posted OPS numbers of 514 and 793. The Angels signed the ancient 40-year-old Steve Finley and 30-year-old Orlando Cabrera, who came off a 630 OPS second-half and down year. The Red Sox signed the 29-year-old Edgar Renteria off a down year. The Braves signed the conspicuously-worthless 34-year-old Raul Mondesi. The Orioles signed the 36-year-old malcontent Sammy Sosa. The Rangers acquired the long-worthless 30-year-old Richard Hidalgo and the 760-OPS underwhelming 31-year-old David Dellucci. The Indians built their team around the maimed and disappointing 32-year-old Aaron Boone. The Athletics acquired a 31-year-old overpaid catcher with 1205 games on the odometer of his knees and ankles.

Hmmm ... what do these teams have in common? They all add "washed-up," "struggling," "overrated," and/or "past their peak" as part of the regular ongoing roster shuffle. What else do they have in common? They all have GMs basking in the warm, adoring light of fans and pundits.

Of those acquistions, most would have irritated Pirate fans if the Pirates had done the signing. With a few obvious exceptions, most of these players would have been regarded as the second coming of Derek Bell, Chris Stynes, Randall Simon, or Raul Mondesi. (Renteria was a four-year, $40M player, yes, but fans and pundits recognized that he was "at the end of his peak, not the middle of it", so I include him.) Of these eleven acquisitions, I count six clear busts and five good acquisitions: Renteria's 14.8 VORP is sixth-best on the Red Sox, Dellucci has posted 26.9 VORP numbers, Dye's 16.4 VORP is second-best on the White Sox, Eckstein's 15.3 VORP is fifth-best on the Cardinals, and Kendall's 15.7 VORP is third-best for the Athletics. (Play with VORP.)

The addition of one player will not make a huge difference for any team. These teams are winning because they already had a good nucleus of players. But it should be no shock that some of the more surprising winners, like Chicago-AL and Texas, are winning because they hit the jackpot in the "worthless" proven-veteran lotto.

Are these vets such a bad gamble? What are the odds that Ryan Doumit, Chris Duffy, Brad Eldred, Jose Bautista, or Yurendell DeCaster will play every day in 2006 and contribute in a way that ranks them as a top-six hitter on a top-ten team? Are those odds five in eleven? Four in ten? Three in nine? I would guess 33% or less, but maybe that's because I'm jaded. (As a side note: if you think the Pirates' main problem is evaluating talent, wouldn't that incline you even further toward the addition of veterans? Is our taste in rookies that much better than our taste in veterans?)

The Bucs should trade the likes of Lawton, Mark Redman, Tike Redman, D. Ward, Freddy Sanchez, and Bobby Hill if they can find takers. None of these guys, for various reasons, has much of a chance of being a top hitter on a team that's as good as any of the teams listed above. Certainly the chances are not four in ten or even three in nine.

The Bucs don't need to add a half-dozen veterans to make their best play for a playoff-worthy 2006. But they certainly need to add new players. The current crop is not getting the job done. A Mike Lowell may or may not be 2006's Jermaine Dye, but he has as good a chance, I think, as Brad Eldred or Jose Bautista.

The best approach probably involves balance. The Pirates need better players. They will add a "proven veteran" or two or three. It's inevitable. No one manages their roster without doing this.

Finally, some will argue that the Pirates, lacking the solid offensive core that these other teams have, need to be looking not for one-year past-peak wonders but for long-term solutions. I agree. My definition of "long-term," however, would be not one but two or, at most, three years down the road. Too many things change from year to year to make longer plans wise. Four-year plans, five-year plans, these have always been doomed to fail.

Rob Mackowiak, Freddy Sanchez, Bobby Hill, and Ty Wigginton have not done much to suggest they will be one of those top hitters in 2006. Since the Pirates have no minor-league third baseman poised for a promotion, it makes sense to add a "proven veteran" to play third base for 2006.