Left-hander Scott Kazmir did not opt out of the two years and $32MM remaining on his contract with the Dodgers prior to Saturday’s deadline, tweets Joel Sherman of the New York Post. Barring a trade, the 32-year-old will stay with the Dodgers next season.
After a stint in the independent Atlantic League in 2012, the former elite prospect tossed 150-plus frames in each season from 2013-15 and recorded a 3.54 ERA, 8.15 K/9, 2.64 BB/9, 42.6 percent ground-ball rate and 9.7 percent home run-to-fly ball ratio in 667 2/3 innings. On the strength of that 92-start stretch, Kazmir agreed to a three-year, $48MM deal with Los Angeles last winter in a market that featured far more high-end pitching than this offseason’s class, so another quality campaign would have made him an obvious opt-out candidate. Instead, the three-time All-Star logged a 4.56 ERA – up from 3.10 in 2015 – over just 136 1/3 innings. Part of the problem for Kazmir was a 15 percent HR-FB ratio, by far the highest figure of his 11-year major league tenure. He also recorded a 3.43 BB/9, a notable decline from the control he showed in the previous three seasons, and threw just one inning after August (on Sept. 23) as he dealt with thoracic spine inflammation and spasms in his ribs and chest.
The 2016 season wasn’t a complete disaster for Kazmir, who posted an 8.85 K/9 and 14.3 percent infield fly rate – his best marks in those categories since 2013 and 2009, respectively – and yielded mostly soft contact. Given Kazmir’s somewhat strong track record and the dearth of of decent starters on this year’s market, it’s possible he could draw trade interest, as Sherman notes. It’s unknown if the Dodgers plan to shop Kazmir, but if they do, it would be a tall order to deal him without eating some portion of the money left on his contract.
Shocking…
Yup, like I’ve been saying all year, the Dodgers will be stuck with this hunk of meat for two more seasons unless they opt to take a bath.
One of many bad contracts in the last 2 seasons McCarthy, Anderson, Kazmir, Norris etc……..,,,
So McCarthy and Kaz yes. Norris was a trade so that doesn’t count. Anderson was a QO that no one expected him to take. On that note there’s never a bad one year contract. But McCarthy and Kaz yes bad ones.
And if you’re referencing this regime vs the old regime let’s not stack those together because it’s not close
Norris was acquired for basically nothing and then released
100000000% the TRUTH
Take the good with the bad and there’s been far more good
Frozen is on his pro Ned Colletti trip but there are so many bad contracts on that regime.
Actually A Lot of people expected Anderson to take it, and surely enough he did.
The Anderson QO is one I would actually defend. He was given only a small chance of his back issue recurring. They threw the dice and got snake eyes. I have a lot less problem with risking one year of Anderson at the bottom of the rotation than I do with three years of Kazmir at the top of the rotation. Even worse his contract guaranteed that if he stunk they’d be stuck with him for another two years. And did he ever stink. Been saying since the early part of the summer that he was going to be roster dead weight for two more years, and took a lot of guff for saying it then. So more of the same now when it turns out to be true. Why am I not surprised.
Could be a good opportunity to turn Kazmir into a hotly-talked about fireman reliever. Pretty hard to rely on this guy for consistent innings in the rotation – might as well maximize his arm and be at the forefront of changing bullpen philosophies.
A logical move for Kaz. Ouch for the Dodgers.
jesus you dodger fans are the worst! you make the playoffs year after year, you have infinete money, amazing depth at both the mlb and minor league level and all you do is criticize Friedman and complain about the org in general. Kazmir had a subpar year on the heels of several good ones. he absolutely could return to form, and its not like he’s killing their poor meager payroll…jeez, i’d love to have the Dodger’s “issues”
After having to deal with McCourt, Dodgers fans welcomed Friedman, but making the playoffs 4 years in a row with no results gets old.
You would prefer to be a Mariners fan? Nearing 2 decades without even making the post season.
Haha couldn’t have said it better Addison!!
Lame
Ten postseason washouts in 28 years is the really getting old part.
Not all Dodger fans are. I actually like the direction of this team.
There will always be winners and losers in any free agent and/or trade of players. You can’t win them all, but isn’t it time that the owners get smart and start to plan and use the “opt out” clause to their advantage.
First, Kazmir should get on his knees and kiss the feet of Dodger’s upper office elite for giving him that contract in the first place. I’m sure the Dodgers were hoping for a good performance out of him so that he would take the bait and leave. Instead they got a too typical outcome from Kazmir as he seemingly got tired at the end of the season and wasn’t worth the salary he had gotten.
Owners have to start putting in their own “opt out” clauses should the player they are trying to sign demands one in the negotiations. So should you not (as a player) perform to the level of the original contract you (the owners/GMs) can say this is no longer viable. As long as the owners/GMs continue to provide players with these opt outs, they will continue to sign with those teams that offer them. I would imagine that there would be a different scenario should the owners insist that they too have an opt out clause. Bottom line, you either want to play for my team at this agreed salary or you don’t. An opt out clause indicates that “I love you, until something better comes along”. Personally, I don’t want that player on my team.
Yeah, it’s called a “club option”. Kazmir got market value for his performance from 2013 – 2015. With your logic you would never win. Players will have at least one club give them what they want regardless of whether that be with a winner or not. If you don’t like it, then please apply for a general manager position and inform them of how you would spend the owners money.
Not that I feel sorry for the owners, but I agree with njastrosfan, these opt out clauses after the first or second year need to go both ways, so teams can get out of bad contracts, just like players can stay in them, even though they had a bad year. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again though, all sports need to adopt a performance based salary structure.
I don’t think Dodgers see this as a bad move, the depth of the bench is what got them to the championship series. Having him assume a role of a swing man, 4/5 starter is insurance in my eyes.