2005 in Review - Relief Pitchers, Part 2
Wed, Dec 28, 2005
by Geoff Young
We continue our look back at 2005 with two more pieces of the bullpen puzzle that will set up shop elsewhere next year. Part of what made last season’s relief corps so brilliant was the fact that it consisted largely of cheap parts whose value exceeded their cost by a large margin. Last year’s Rudy Seanez and Chris Hammond could well be this year’s Steve Andrade and Brian Sikorski. With luck, next winter we’ll be paying some other relative unknowns glowing praise for providing a lot of bang for the proverbial buck.
[Previous entries in this series: C | 1B | 2B | 3B | SS | LF | CF | RF | SP (1) | SP (2) | SP (3) | RP (1)]
Rudy Seanez
| ERA | ERA+ | WHIP | H/9 | BB/9 | SO/9 | HR/9 | BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 3.33 | 129 | 1.261 | 7.63 | 3.72 | 9.00 | 0.59 | .228 | .301 | .374 |
| 2005 | 2.69 | 143 | 1.177 | 7.31 | 3.28 | 12.53 | 0.60 | .222 | .297 | .335 |
| Stats courtesy of ESPN. Color key: green, positive trend; red, negative trend. |
||||||||||
Expectations
From my season preview over at Baseball Think Factory:
Another low-risk signing with potential upside. This is Seanez’ third tour of duty with the Padres. His injury history is pretty lengthy, as he’s managed to appear in 40+ games over a season just once in his career. On the other hand, he’s not being asked to do a whole lot, essentially replacing the frequently disabled Antonio Osuna at the back end of the bullpen.
Positives
- Set career highs in appearances, innings, and strikeouts per nine.
- Tremendous production for very little cost ($550k).
Negatives
- Priced himself out of Padres plans for 2006.
Outlook
Seanez is a fascinating study. He’s always had an electric arm when healthy, but he’s never been able to stay healthy. The Padres signed Seanez when his value was down, and he performed beyond anyone’s wildest expectations. This winter, with a healthy and extremely successful season behind him, the Red Sox gave Seanez $1.9M guaranteed for 2006 and a $2.1M mutual option for 2007. In the current market, and assuming he can come anywhere near his career best levels of 2005, this is fair value. But at Seanez’ age (38) and with his injury history, continued dominance is far from assured. In a year, Seanez has gone from one of the best bargains in all of baseball to a guy who could be worth his salary or a good deal less. The stuff, as always, is there. Who knows about the rest. Ask Rod Beck how quickly things can change.
Chris Hammond
| ERA | ERA+ | WHIP | H/9 | BB/9 | SO/9 | HR/9 | BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 2.63 | 175 | 1.262 | 9.22 | 2.14 | 5.60 | 0.66 | .277 | .326 | .411 |
| 2005 | 3.84 | 100 | 1.108 | 7.82 | 2.15 | 5.22 | 1.38 | .229 | .278 | .413 |
| Stats courtesy of ESPN. Color key: green, positive trend; red, negative trend. |
||||||||||
Expectations
From my season preview over at Baseball Think Factory:
Hammond isn’t a world beater by any stretch, but when you compare him with some of the other guys who were signed for more money this winter (Dustin Hermanson and Bob Wickman, among others), he looks pretty darned good.
Positives
- Brilliant first half (2.08 ERA, .194 BAA, 3.11 K/BB ratio).
- Destroyed lefties (.164/.203/.288).
- First effective southpaw the Padres have had out of the bullpen for a full season since Jose Nunez in 2001.
Negatives
- Homerrific second half (8.80 ERA, .309 BAA, 2.35 HR/9).
Outlook
Hammond played a key role early in the season, helping the Padres bridge the gap between the starters and Trevor Hoffman. Unfortunately, neck problems severely limited Hammond’s effectiveness after the All-Star break. His second half decline was so precipitous, in fact, that the Padres left him off the playoff roster. Signed this winter by the team that originally drafted him back in 1986, Hammond will have to prove to the Reds that at age 40, he’s still got a few innings left in his arm.
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.
December 28, 2005 at 3:59 pm
So much for Chad Bradford. To the Mets, 1 yr/$1.4M:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/.....BHeadlines
Also, the Pirates have signed Joe Randa:
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tr.....08315.html
December 28, 2005 at 4:10 pm
Guess, it’s too late to get that pick by offering Randa an arbitration, right?
Because that would be sweet with the Pirates pick position.
How about Chad Fox?
December 28, 2005 at 6:01 pm
So the Blue Jays have a glut of corner infielders and the Padres are going into the season with Vinny Castilla as the starting third baseman. I wouldn’t mind seeing the Padres pick up Eric Hinske. I’m sure that the Jays would pay most or all of his salary and we would not have to give up anyone that any of us have ever heard of to get him. He’s a left-handed hitting bat off the bench at worst, at best maybe he develops into the hitter that people thought that he could be in TOR. He’s still not 30…
Just a thought.
December 29, 2005 at 5:07 am
Looks like it’s the Pads vs. Dodgers for Wells:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/.....adres.html
December 29, 2005 at 5:59 am
Last paragraph of this article — more Wells fodder. Rumblings that AZ may be joining the fray, since Glaus’s salary is gone.
http://www.boston.com/sports/b.....?page=full
I’m not sure how I feel about giving up Roberts and a young pitcher (Hensley, Stauffer were mentioned in the U-T article) for Wells. It would feel like another Loretta-Mirabelli deal for me.
I say if the Dodgers or AZ want to overpay for him, then let ‘em.
December 29, 2005 at 9:27 am
Wells is a guy who never walks anyone and always gives his team a chance to win. Very efficient, he’d be a very nice addition to our team. Having the Dodgers & D’backs joining that fray bothers me, however, I’m glad KT & Alderson have said they won’t overspend.
December 29, 2005 at 9:49 am
If the Pads do end up reacquiring Wells, it’s got to make you think about the absurdity of this whole exercise.
I mean, the guy spurns the Pads last year for more $$. Then he decides he doesn’t like Boston (go figure), now the Pads are talking about trading for him.
I suppose it’ll end up working out for the big guy — he gets his money regardless.
December 29, 2005 at 4:09 pm
Nick, when you put it that way I kind of want to tell Boomer to buzz off and go spend his money on Dunkin Donuts. I can’t see him pitching more than one year at his age, it doesn’t make sense to me to give up anyone that’s both adequate and under a reasonable contract.
I’d be all for Hinske if he didn’t cost much. Kind of sad that his 2005 was another poor year for him yet if Sean Burroughs had put up those numbers we’d all be talking about how he made a big leap forward.
December 29, 2005 at 5:44 pm
Anthony, I agree wholeheartedly. I’ve never really been a big Wells fan. I appreciate the way he pitches, but every other part of him pretty much makes me sick.
Then again, the idea of him going to the Doggers or Snakes is not appealing. If he’s not with the Pads, keep him out of the NL West.
Here’s some food for thought: Is Wells exhibit A for the “San Diego discount” or what? I mean, he takes a bare bones contract to come home, then leaves for more money. Then he realizes he’s miserable in Boston, wants to come home again. Like I said before, this is going to work out for him, but it’s been a bit of a difficult process.
Whatever made this clown think he was going to do well in Fenway? It just was not a good match.
December 30, 2005 at 12:56 pm
I’ve got no problem with trading Roberts for Wells, I personally don’t understand the sudden stance by the Pad’s of ” he’s our starting LF’er and not someone we want to trade”…..hello?!?… get his speedy, but otherwise worthless butt out of SD..and while we’re at it, if Boston doesn’t want to take Woody back as part of the trade, ship Klesko or some other semi-useless part (Chan Ho) to them then. I whole-heartedly do not understand the path we’ve taken this off-season, although I do kinda like the Texas trade. i’m not completely sure we’ve taken any steps forward thru all of this though.
December 30, 2005 at 3:20 pm
I have no problem getting rid of Roberts as we have three better options in left (Giles with Johnson in right, Sledge, or Klesko or Gonzalez depending on who you stick at 1B). No young pitchers for Wells, though. That would be bad indeed.