Padres Add Statue to Collection
Fri, Nov 4, 2005
by Geoff Young
Let me get this out of the way: I hate the idea of watching Vinny Castilla play third base for the Padres. A liability in the field and at the plate, Castilla is an older, cheaper version of Phil Nevin.
That said, I understand (but don’t defend) why the Padres made the trade. First, moving Brian Lawrence clears salary for beyond 2006. With Ryan Klesko and Chan Ho Park coming off the books after next season, assuming the Padres don’t make any bad signings this winter, they increase their flexibility heading into 2007.
[Update 11/6: Vinay points out in the comments that:
Lawrence's last guaranteed year is '06; the team has an option on him for '07 ($4.7M, IIRC). Unloading Lawrence doesn't help the team from a financial or flexibility standpoint in '07. In fact, I'd say it hurts their flexibility for '07; if they kept Lawrence, they'd have the option of paying him the $4+M for one season, or cut him loose.
Apologies for getting the details of his contract wrong. I was at a ballgame in Surprise, Arizona, and phoned this post in to my wife, who actually entered it into the computer for me. I didn't have access to as many resources as I would have liked but I thought it was important to at least say something. Thanks to Vinay for setting the record straight and making us all feel even better. ;-)]
Second, Castilla is a hero in his native Mexico, the border of which lies about a half hour drive south of Petco Park. He may be well past his prime, but he is still marketable.
Again, I’m not defending the deal. As a fan, I don’t like it. But I can understand what the Padres are thinking.
I just wish they would think of something better.
Picking up where last year's version left off, the Ducksnorts 2008 Baseball Annual provides in-depth analysis of and commentary on the San Diego Padres. Get your copy today.
November 4, 2005 at 8:17 pm
Geoff, I agree with pretty much everything, except:
“First, moving Brian Lawrence clears salary for beyond 2006. With Ryan Klesko and Chan Ho Park coming off the books after next season, assuming the Padres don’t make any bad signings this winter, they increase their flexibility heading into 2007.”
Lawrence’s last guaranteed year is ‘06; the team has an option on him for ‘07 ($4.7M, IIRC). Unloading Lawrence doesn’t help the team from a financial or flexibility standpoint in ‘07. In fact, I’d say it hurts their flexibility for ‘07; if they kept Lawrence, they’d have the option of paying him the $4+M for one season, or cut him loose.
November 4, 2005 at 8:24 pm
I hate this deal, hate, hate, hate. Duck, you are basically saying the 06 season is in the toilet so we have $$$ for 07?
BLaw can still pitch but Vinny is a has-been. Christ, I hate this shit. We need to get younger. What about Bouorghs? Total BS. This is what bad teams do, give away pitchers and bring in crap. We have become the Royals of the West?
So he hits a few in the Metals Building, so what. He’s gonna boot 2 out of 5 balls for you and has no range and noodle for an arm.
So fucking typical of Small Market teams. Bring in the Hispanic Amer player to draw fans from Mex. You fans from Mex, great, win another division and do the right way this time.
Reminds me of Tom Warner and Jack Clarke all over again. NExt thing you know, Fernando will be coaching first.
November 4, 2005 at 11:33 pm
uh vinny is still one of the best defensive 3b in the game. you guys are way clueless on that front
November 5, 2005 at 10:18 am
I’m sort of wondering about the defensive condemnation of Castilla as well. The past two years he’s had a Rate2 of 106, although he was terrible in Atlanta the two seasons prior to that. Over his career he’s been above average, Rate2 of 103, and had some stellar seasons. ESPN’s RF and ZR don’t rate him very highly; however, he did place above Randa if that’s any consolation.
He was 15th in Fielding WS. To me he appears to be a solid defender, not elite, but not deficient either.
That being said, his offense is pathetic anytime he doesn’t play half his games in Coors. And I really don’t understand the purpose of bringing him in. I, too, can see moving Lawrence. He’s not improving, rather he seems to be regressing. Since we’re locked into Park, there’s no point in having Lawrence blocking Hensley and Stauffer (and, hopefully, soon Carillo). But why move him for Castilla?
At least it’s early and there’s still hope for more interesting, exciting, and productive moves by the home team. Here’s to hoping we do better on the next one.
November 5, 2005 at 11:26 am
Vinay: Thanks for the correction. I was doing this from memory, as KT seems to make his trades when I’m away from home (Dave Roberts last winter). I’d thought B-Law was guaranteed for ‘07. Knowing that the *club* had an option on him makes this even worse.
Dan: By what measure is Vinny one of the best defensive 3B in the game? As Pat notes, his RF is higher than Randa’s, but that’s not exactly high praise.
I dunno. I was trying to find some positives here, and maybe I was trying too hard. This sucks.
November 5, 2005 at 12:44 pm
Ok, the stat guys have proven my rant on Vinni’s D a bit exaggerated (once again), but come on, Vinny Castiilo? It belies our pathetic position at the corners, Klesko and Vinny, and the fact that the Padres are saddled with several bad contract and have their hands tied.
I thought we were getting younger, developing the farm. Now we have another washed-up hitter.
Tell me, is Vinny gonna protect Klesko or will Klesko protect Vinny at the plate.
Spin the move any way you want, its pathetic.
Whatever. I see my toe nails need clipping.
November 5, 2005 at 2:05 pm
I’d rather play Burroughs. At least he MIGHT be good. You know Castilla won’t be worth a crap.
November 5, 2005 at 3:23 pm
Burroughs hasn’t proved himself…we need a proven player…at least we don’t have to worry about Vinny dropping the hammer on the Padres…Vinny hit three homeruns in a three game series @ Petco in 2004….Try to be positve…..How can the Padres be good if everyone is negative all the time? How would you like to be a Padre player….and having to hear crap out of people’s mouth all of the time…..Vinny will hit 16-30 homeruns for us….he dropped the hammer for the braves two years ago….you guys don’t deserve to be called baseball fans…i’m a baseball agent…you guys don’t know s_it…..
November 5, 2005 at 5:08 pm
I think Burroughs will turn into a pretty good player . . . just not in SD. He probably needs a change of scenery like J. Kruk did.
Trade him to Boston. He’d probably have a field day with the Green monster!
The more I think about it, the more I don’t mind Vinny playing third. I figure he’s a pretty good fielder, and hitting-wise, he can’t be any worse than Randa or Burroughs, right?
November 5, 2005 at 5:40 pm
Geoff, you know this Braves fan’s feelings about Vinny Cashsteala, so I won’t waste the space on the guy other than to say that my dead aunt has more range and a better mullet.
November 5, 2005 at 7:39 pm
I love the commenters here, But 30 Dingers!!!!, come on!!!
If you told me Shawn has to move on, I’d say OK, and then said we are bringing up a guy who hit well at Portland (I know nothing about the farm system), I’d say great, a young guy, wants a chance to play in the SHOW, going to try hard going to make mistakes, I’d say great.
But Vinny is a sign of weakness, a sign of another year of mediocrity, another year of Klesko, Randa, Nevin, Robeert, Myers, Clarke, and a ton of other elder statesmen who have made SD their home for a year.
Telling me Boston isn’t happy to move this guy.
Oh well, he might not even make he team in spring, hell, I might not make the team as a fan, to critical and negative….and the crack about being the Royals of the West, probabyly stop me at the Az border.
Gees, I thing this is a moth in the house. Better chase after it….
November 5, 2005 at 8:53 pm
I think everyone other than Kevin Towers is agreed that this is a crap deal; clearing money for 2007 by busting the 2006 offense a right jab to the gut seems a little silly when the division remains iminently winnable next season. Bill Mueller would likely cost about the same and be considerably better on both sides of the ball. Right?
November 5, 2005 at 11:21 pm
Blingjag: Thanks for stopping by. I hope you are right about Castilla being productive for the Padres. I find it hard to imagine, but I hope you are right.
Voxter: Yeah, and it’s worse than what I originally said because, as Vinay pointed out, the Padres actually held a club option on Lawrence for ‘07. So there’s no real savings.
Jeff: Chan Ho Park for your dead aunt?
On another note, I have a guest spot at Baseball Analysts:
http://baseballanalysts.com/ar.....rong_2.php
The bit about finding “takers for one of Lawrence, Park, or Williams” was written before the deal happened. Knowing what I now know, I’d probably throw a qualifier or two into that sentence.
November 5, 2005 at 11:38 pm
BTF thread on the deal, if interested:
http://www.baseballthinkfactor.....shstealer/
Everybody loves Kevin Towers.
November 6, 2005 at 5:59 am
Count me in the minority on this one. I like the trade for the Padres.
Castilla is no great shakes, but he is still a solid defender, had a 96 OPS+ last year, and is moving from a park that punishes right handed power to a park that punishes left handed power. In fact, I think it is pretty hard to argue that Castilla won’t put up better numbers at Petco than Burroughs or Randa could be expected to do. Of course, he won’t put up Coors-type numbers, but almost anything will be better than Seanny B. One big concern is what they will do at 3B in 2007, so Bill Mueller might have been a better option, but then you would have been stuck with Brian . . .
. . . Lawrence who was flat awful in 2005 (80 ERA+) and has regressed pretty consistently over the last few years, with eroding groundball tendencies and even losing MPH off an already subpar fastball. A fair argument could be made that Hensley will put up a better line than Lawrence in 2006. I’m 95% sure B Law wouldn’t have been back in 2007 anyway.
On the other hand, this could just be shuffling the deck chairs on the sinking USS Padre.
November 6, 2005 at 11:19 am
TF: I hope that you’re right and I’m just getting my panties in a bunch over nothing like I did with the Dave Roberts acquisition last winter.
On the point of RFK punishing right-handed power, it actually was *less* extreme than Petco Park in 2005. In fact, Petco Park was the most difficult park in all of MLB for RHB to hit HRs in last year.
I posted this in the comments over at SD Spotlight, but here are the number of HR hit by RHB last year in each of the NL stadiums:
Cin: 115
Hou: 114
Mil: 113
Col: 108
ChN: 105
StL: 104
Ari: 88
Phi: 87
SF: 87
Atl: 79
LA: 78
Pit: 76
NYN: 74
Fla: 53
Was: 53
SD: 44
November 6, 2005 at 6:32 pm
Baseball America’s Jim Callis on Castilla:
Castilla, 38, is on his last legs. He batted .253/.319/.403 with 12 homers and 66 RBIs in 142 games this year, including just .236-9-50 after April. His bat speed has slowed, and he was bothered by tendinitis in his knees. He may grade out better as a defender than as a hitter at this point of his career, and he’s a well below-average runner.
Ugh.
On the other hand, Lawrence:
Lawrence, a 29-year-old righthander, is an innings-eater whose ERA has steadily climbed in his five years in the majors. He had the worst season of his career in 2005, going 7-15, 4.83 in 33 starts . . . . Lawrence doesn’t have a plus pitch, as he relies mainly on command. He works mostly with a high-80s sinker and a slider, and he struggles against lefthanders, who tagged him for an .841 OPS this year.
Sounds like a wash!
Those numbers for Castilla after April are just not pretty. I’m not sure BA’s scouting reports on Lawrence were up to date — when was the last time he was in the high 80s??
November 6, 2005 at 6:40 pm
On that Thinkfactory blog:
“. . .Chan Ho Park, who isn’t just a hole but a gravity well of suck.”
That’s just a beautiful line. Made me laugh out loud.
November 6, 2005 at 7:14 pm
I can tell you that for the second straight year, Lawrence had the slowest average fastball of any pitcher in the NL at just over 83 mph.
November 6, 2005 at 11:51 pm
Well at least when Vinny is released we’ll only have to eat one year’s salary.
November 7, 2005 at 7:31 am
On the Nats side, they love the trade. I have to say I like it, too. Given a fully healthy year, Vinny might in fact be more valuable than Lawrence, but the chances of Vinny giving you a full healthy year is slim. His defense is still pretty good if his knees hold up, but if not, he’s got no range.
My suggestion to turn this trade into a winner - platoon Vinny and Burroughs early in the year to “showcase” Sean. Not only could you then hopefully get something worthwhile in trade value for Burroughs, but Vinny would more likely be healthy and able to give you .275 / .320 OBP / .450 SLG down the stretch. (Ok that’s not great, in fact it’s pretty poor, but it’s better than Randa would have done)
November 7, 2005 at 7:37 am
Oh and “after-April” Vinny is not really fair. He was something like .200 2 20 in 170 ABs in June / July but .270 6 21 in 150 ABs in August Sept. With RFK being about as power-friendly as Petco.
November 7, 2005 at 11:46 am
Just a hunch, but I’ll bet those power numbers for right handers at Petco are heavily influenced by the fact that most of the right handers were Hernandez/Olivo (not bad for catchers), Nady/Nevin (mostly Nevin for 1B, and we know how that went, and not enough Nady), Loretta/Jackson/Young/Blum/etc. (need I say more?), Greene/Jackson/etc. (Greene has pop but was injured again), Burroughs/Blum/Randa (no power there as Randa flopped), and almost no one in the OF (except more of Jackson/Young) until Johnson showed up late in the year.
I have another hunch that if you put out some right handers with power in the Padres lineup for a whole season (names like Greene, Nady and Johnson come to mind), you might see a less extreme figure for Petco.