to see the number are this bad. A LOT of teams believed he had enough value to roster him for 14 years. I wonder if that was a failure of analytics at the time, or if there is something the numbers are missing (pinch hitter specialist).

They saw an early career .300 hitter that happened to only provide replacement level value in scoring runs.

Back in the day, it seemed common for teams to sign someone who they could "depend on" to give someone a rest every once in a while. These players were relatively cheap (Mabry made about $500,000-$1,000,000 per year on single year contracts in his 30s).

When it comes to bench players nowadays, you see teams willing to depend on young prospects over veterans. The players are cheap, and it gives teams the opportunity to see what they've got. Rather than signing a player with a long track history of mediocre at best.

There are still exceptions. For example, the Cardinals give at bats to Taylor Motter last year. Or the Cardinals giving at bats to Brandon Crawford and Matt Carpenter this year.

I have little recollection of Mabry as a Cub, but I see Dusty trotted him out for 237 plate appearance in 2006 with an OPS+ of 54. At least he wasn't clogging the bases!

sign them. Wasting a couple million on a few bench guys that likely won't perform better than prospects. I'd rather save that money to throw an extra year on a future free agent deal of a good player.