Why Juan and not the other?

I was away from the computer for most of Friday, and thusly found out about the Juan Encarnacion signing by an e-mail from a dear friend. In that e-mail, my friend asks if I could help him understand why the Cardinals are paying a $5 million average to Encarnacion while the Mariners signed Matt Lawton for, at most, $1.5 million. (Lawton signed for a $400K base; incentives could push that to $1.5M.)

Chris, that’s a good question. Could the Cardinals have gotten better value with Lawton at $1.5M than they got with Encarnacion at $5M? Their basic career offensive numbers are as such:

Encarnacion .268/.316/.440/756, 128 HR, 541 RBI, nine seasons
Lawton .267/.368/.418/786, 138 HR, 630 RBI, 11 seasons

The discrepancy in OBP is striking. Encarnacion set a career full-season high in 2005 with a .349 OBP on 41 walks; his previous career high had been .330 (29 BB) in 2000. Lawton, however, has consistently posted a much higher walk rate throughout his career, with eight seasons of 54 or more BB, with a career high of 91 in 2000.

In the field, particularly in right field (where Encarnacion will play for the Cardinals and where both have a majority of starts), Lawton has a slight edge in career range factor:

Encarnacion 1.93, 1.73 lgRF; .986 FP, .981 lgFP
Lawton 2.15, 1.79; .984, .981

So in this admittedly skin-deep analysis, Lawton shows to be the slightly better all-around player on a career basis. And at $400K-$1.5M this year, Lawton seems to be the far better bargain.

So why did the Cardinals pass on Lawton? Age is one factor; Encarnacion will be 30 on opening day, while Lawton will be 34. But perhaps more importantly, the pass on Lawton can be boiled down to this:

Steroids.

Lawton tested positive for the juice at the end of 2005 and then explained his situation earlier this week. I think the Cardinals are rather sensitive in that regard, given Mark McGwire’s shameful “testimony” at the congressional hearings in March and that Tony La Russa (and Walt Jocketty to a lesser extent) still goes out of his way to protect McGwire and enable his denial. Management wanted no part of any controversy regarding players who used or were “rumored” to have used steroids. But on the other hand, the team also signed noted miscreant Sidney Ponson, who had just gotten out of jail the day he signed and who has well-documented struggles with weight, anger and alcohol. Are multiple DUIs and assault convictions less bad than being named a steroid user? Especially when there was/is greater need in the outfield than in the rotation?

Meanwhile, the team gave $15M over three years to a lesser offensive talent, albeit one who represented the best of what was left on the free-agent market. It seems, as my friend pointed out, that after watching the top talent pass them by, the Cardinals scrambled to overpay lesser players just to fill their numerous holes. It’s like doing your Christmas shopping on the Eve: “Well, this will have to do.”