What is so wrong about the Rollins contract?
Among the litany of complaints that I have heard about this Phillies team, the one that confuses me most involves the four-year, $38 million deal that Jimmy Rollins signed this offseason. I expounded on that confusion in today's Daily News, which you can read here. Now is an interesting time to have this discussion, because the last time the Phillies played the Dodgers, Rollins was also a focal point. It was early June, and Rollins was coming off an awful two-month start to the season. The start of a four-game home series against the Dodgers brought plenty of questions from reporters about whether Rollins should continue to leadoff, or whether Juan Pierre should assume those duties. They were legitimate questions at the time. So were the questions about Rollins' contract when he signed it.
What is so wrong about the Rollins contract?
David Murphy, Daily News Staff Writer
Among the litany of complaints that I have heard about this Phillies team, the one that confuses me most involves the four-year, $38 million deal that Jimmy Rollins signed this offseason. I expounded on that confusion in today's Daily News, which you can read here. Now is an interesting time to have this discussion, because the last time the Phillies played the Dodgers, Rollins was also a focal point. It was early June, and Rollins was coming off an awful two-month start to the season. The start of a four-game home series against the Dodgers brought plenty of questions from reporters about whether Rollins should continue to leadoff, or whether Juan Pierre should assume those duties. They were legitimate questions at the time. So were the questions about Rollins' contract when he signed it.
What I don't understand is how anybody can look at anything that has happened since both of those occasions and use it to denigrate Rollins.
On June 5, I wrote a column defending Rollins, pointing out that he usually hits well after June 1 and that Pierre lacked the power the Phillies needed in their lineup. Since that day, Rollins has hit .292 with a .354 on base percentage, a .569 slugging percentage, and seven home runs in 158 plate appearances. Pierre, meanwhile, has hit .277/.313/.383 with one home run in 102 plate appearances. Rollins has outperformed Pierre in every major category, yet some still think Pierre is more valuable to the Phillies' offense. Same goes for Freddy Galvis. Can somebody explain to me what, exactly they saw out of Galvis that makes them think that he would not be a huge offensive liability next season? In 200 plate appearances this season, Galvis hit .226 with a .254 on base percentage. Every time he stepped to the plate, he had a 75 percent chance of making an out. That matters. I understand the appeal of Galvis' defensive prowess and youthful exuberance. But you gotta hit.
My bigger point, though, is that Rollins is not as overpaid as you think he is.
Over the last two years, eight shortstops have signed multi-year deals worth at least $7 million per season. Here is how their current numbers compare:
| Player | Total $ | Years | AAV | PA | BA | OBP | SLG | OPS | HR | RBI | RS |
| Derek Jeter | 51 | 3 | 17.0 | 407 | .306 | .351 | .407 | .758 | 7 | 26 | 50 |
| Jose Reyes | 106 | 6 | 17.7 | 401 | .264 | .335 | .374 | .709 | 3 | 22 | 43 |
| Jimmy Rollins | 38 | 4 | 9.5 | 396 | .262 | .317 | .421 | .739 | 9 | 34 | 52 |
| J.J. Hardy | 22.5 | 3 | 7.5 | 393 | .216 | .255 | .373 | .628 | 13 | 34 | 42 |
| Rafael Furcal | 14.0 | 2 | 7.0 | 393 | .275 | .338 | .360 | .697 | 5 | 37 | 56 |
| Alexei Ramirez | 32.5 | 4 | 8.1 | 355 | .263 | .284 | .337 | .621 | 2 | 44 | 32 |
| Erick Aybar | 40.1 | 5 | 8.0 | 335 | .267 | .305 | .383 | .688 | 2 | 44 | 31 |
The question isn't even which one of those hitters you would rather have, because Furcal and Reyes were the only ones available this offseason. The question is who is going to take the place of Rollins if you trade him away. And we haven't even mentioned the elite level defense he continues to provide.
I'm not arguing that it is a great contract. But it certainly looks better than Reyes', Ramirez's or Aybar's. Long story short, you sometimes have to overpay at premium positions. After all, there is a reason they are considered "premium."
I liked JRoll's contract and you can't knock his defense. But he is somewhat maddening to watch bat in the leadoff spot. I didn't look at any stats, but it doesn't seem that he tries to see a lot of pitches, thus helping his teammates. And popups SHOULD be a problem for the leadoff hitter - as he's typically a fast runner who could beat out a groundball - except that Jimmy doesn't even try to beat them. So, I can't find fault with his end production, but the way he gets there does drive me nuts.— phils_tnj1- I don't want to lose Rollins. I just want him out of the lead-off spot. He's always wanted to be a #3 hitter, and he belongs there or in the 2-spot. His OBP has never been good enough to lead off. 52 runs in just over 350 AB comes to about 80-90 for a full season, horrible for the lead-off spot on even a last place team. His value would skyrocket in my eyes if we weren't relying on him to get on base (which he just doesn't do enough).— Edward Creed
- MURPH! HOW DARE YOU USE STATS TO MAKE THE ROLLINS HATERS LOOK LIKE THE IDIOTS THEY ARE!— AlexSp
- 3 year 15 million, take it or leave it.— likhon
- It's not about the SS position, it's about what was best for the organization at the time. This guy doesn't get it. They could have gotten better production by signing another player to get more offensive production. And it's not about this year production, it's about the lenght of the contract for a player that has been hurt and hit .250 and .240 prior to last year.— EL Zorro
- nothing is wrong with it...for a 2-hole hitter. He is not a leadoff guy. Period.— MichaelZoe
- EZ, what you are saying, it appears, is that you were willing to downgrade in one position in order to upgrade in another. I don't see how this puts you any further ahead.— schmenkman
- Murph,
There are two things with Rollins that I have a problem with.
1) He has sulked through the first half of the season. He wasn't afraid to open his mouth in years past when Utley and Howard were there to share the load. But the first half of this season when the team was desperate for leadership, someone who could be the difference he was nonexistent. (who you calling a frontrunner?) Perfect example, last night I'm sitting 10 rows behind home plate and I watched Juan Pierre hit a ball to second and bust it down the line to try and beat it out. He didn't, but he didn't concede anything. Rollins on the other hand, grounded out to first in the first inning and gave up a few steps out of the box and never even crossed first base. (Ironically, Victorino was the next batter and he reached on an error when the SS bobbled it trying to rush the throw because Victorino was busting it down to first). Rollins is making $11mil this year, Pierre is making $800k. That's a problem.
2) Before Galvis got hurt he was putting up better numbers than Rollins, more doubles, more homers, more runs batted in, more clutch hits late in games, more plays in the field, and he's making league minimum. That too, is a problem.
Rollins wants to be a fat cat. He got paid, not as much as he wanted, so he pouts. Turns it on and off as he sees fit. He's going to get hammered for it. He's been around long enough to know this (so have you, btw). The unspoken part here is that one of these days Rollins is going to reach over to flip the switch to "on", and it's not going to work, and no one knows whether that's this year, or next year, or the year after, but it's going to happen. In part because he's getting older and in part because he isn't working as hard as he did when he was younger. He's entitled now, and in Philadelphia the only things athletes are entitled to his criticism when they don't hustle.— T-Money - Rollins will make $11 millions in each of the 3 seasons with a vesting option of $11 in 2015 if he meets some goals. If not, there is a player's option of 6.5 I think, which he'll agree to it obviously. I believe that's why Murph has that $9.5 salary. He even is conceding Jimmy won't meet the goals.— EL Zorro
- Love your work Dave, but it's not this year that makes the contract so bad, it's years 2, 3 and 4. Jimmy's already been in decline. Can you imagine what he's going to be like in 2015? 3 more years of frustrating pop-ups. 3 more years of slow starts. 3 more years of not busting it down the line. Do you think he's going to get faster? Do you think his bat speed or his range at SS are going to improve? They were going for it again this year, so I guess they had to bite the bullet on this contract, but they ARE going to bite the bullet.— Alpha Male
- schmeckman, the problem with some writers and posters is that they love to compare position by position. You can't compare Zimmerman or Wright when discussing how much you should pay Polanco, even if he was the same age. There different kind of players. This is not an AS game. And the other point is, the team played very well last year with Martinez and Valdez sharing the SS position when Jimmy was hurt. There was no need to spend a possible $44 millions for 4 years of an old SS. This is not hating. I'll see you in 3.5 years to see how you feel about the contract.— EL Zorro
- I watch every game. When does Jimmy "turn it off". I just dont see it. Lets be honest Utley, Pence & Bryce Harper are about the only players who truly bust it 100% down the line every time. So does that mean Jimmy is not hustling? I dont buy it. I get as frustrated as anyone else with him and some of his wasted abilities at times. But to say hes selfish and should become a spray hitter is just absurd. He's not a spray hitter, never has been. People think hes selfish for being the type of player he is, I totally disagree.— philsfan in the atx
- Good thing we didn't sign Reyes or they would really have something to whine about..:)He isn't hurt yet but he also is not hitting up to his contract. People forget how under paid he was compared to others for quite a few year. I also think he might be replaced before 4 years with very little regret about signing him. 1st of all we need a lead off hitter so until we have one he is it. We haven't had a true lead off hitter in years and have done quite well for ourselves with a guy that can not lead off. His contract is the least of our problems for a few years when he is hitting 8th.— pattymac3
- this debate re Jroll reminds me a lot of the discussions that preceded the "trade" of Abreu (comdulce). at some point, it became addition by subtraction. the "good of the team" required a change in culture. how long can the team afford this "too kool for school" attitude? how pervasive is its effect? based upon pure production, Jroll remains secure. imho, there is no replacement available or in sight - to replicate current performance. then again, this team has developed a distinct and troubling personality. makes on wonder.— defg0003
- LJ14...Spoken by someone who evidently knows very little about MLB...— ctfan
