Is this Man Worth $13 Million a Year?

I've been asked up here in the clouds what I think of the Dodgers signing of Rafael Furcal to a three-year $39 million contract. There's no question that it's an obscene amount of money for a guy who isn't exactly a superstar.

On the bright side though, the contract is only three years. Furcal will probably be productive for the life of the contract. He's one of the better shortstops in baseball, gets on base at a high rate, has plenty of speed, and he has arguably the best the arm for any shortstop in the majors.

Moving Jeff Kent to first base makes sense (assuming it's at the start of the season). Kent is a defensive liability at second base, and he might extend his career by playing a less demanding position. The first base free agent market is also kind of weak right now. This also gives the Dodgers a chance to play Antonio Perez the only position he can, at second base, and I know the kid can hit.

But why on earth would you move a gold glove shortstop in Cesar Izturis to 2B? Izturis is the game's best defensive shortstop because of his range. He's like a vacuum cleaner out there. Oscar Robles is more than capable of filling the position until Izturis comes back from Tommy John Surgery. And if the Dodgers were going to move Izturis, why didn't they talk to him first?

As TJ Simers points out today, the Dodgers are being hypocrites when they talk about character, considering Furcal's three DUI arrests. He also is a .157 lifetime hitter at Dodger Stadium, but I'll pretend I didn't hear that.

Apparently the clincher for this deal came when Frank McCourt had dinner with Furcal, and brought Manny Mota along. Ned Colletti would have showed up, but he was interviewing Joel Skinner in Ohio. This is a side issue, but why on earth would Colletti go to Ohio for the Skinner interview? Joel Skinner is a fourth-rate managerial candidate. The Dodgers are theoretically a first-class organization. Skinner should be the one coming to Colletti on a plane from Cleveland to LA. He should be the one begging for a job. Colletti is the one who has way too much on his plate. There is no reason for him whatsoever to fly to Ohio. And it turned out to be a big waste of time.

So back to the issue at hand... is Furcal a good signing? The answer really depends on what Frank McCourt's budget is. Yes, Furcal will improve their lineup. And theoretically the defense will be stronger overall. But if Frank McCourt is really just spending $75 million, then throwing $13 million at a position where the Dodgers were already basically fine is an imprudent expenditure designed more to make headlines than to actually help the team in the long run. If McCourt wants to have a $100 million-plus payroll, then it can sort of make sense. We'll see what the payroll.