2005 in Review - Starting Pitchers, Part 3
Fri, Dec 23, 2005
by Geoff Young
I am completely fried and ready for the long weekend. This will be my last post before Christmas, so I’ll take the opportunity to wish you and yours a Happy Christmas/Channukah/Kwanzaa/Festivus. Enjoy our look back at Tim Stauffer and Pedro Astacio, and enjoy the holidays; I’ll catch y’all on the flip side.
[Previous entries in this series: C | 1B | 2B | 3B | SS | LF | CF | RF | SP (1) | SP (2)]
Tim Stauffer
| IP/GS | ERA | ERA+ | WHIP | H/9 | BB/9 | SO/9 | HR/9 | BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | minor leagues | ||||||||||
| 2005 | 5.71 | 5.33 | 72 | 1.494 | 10.22 | 3.22 | 5.44 | 1.11 | .286 | .348 | .469 |
| Stats courtesy of ESPN. | |||||||||||
Expectations
From my season preview over at Baseball Think Factory:
Stauffer probably needs a half a season at Triple-A. He’s the one guy here [in the farm system] who could be an impact player (not an ace but a solid #3).
Positives
- Stuff was a little better than advertised.
- Showed good poise; he didn’t appear to be in awe of his surroundings.
- Worked into the sixth inning in each of his first 13 big-league starts.
Negatives
- Not as sharp command as you’d like to see from a guy without overpowering stuff.
- Struggled early in games: opponents hit .377/.493/.607 against him in the first inning, with 1 walk every 6.25 plate appearances; they hit .265/.310/.444, with 1 walk every 16.12 plate appearances thereafter.
- May not have pitched well enough to secure himself a spot in the 2006 rotation.
Outlook
Despite less than stellar overall numbers, Stauffer never looked like he didn’t belong in the big leagues. He worked good sequences and competed but wasn’t always as precise with his pitches as he could have been. Given a little better command, which should come with experience, he’ll be a solid mid-rotation starter. It may not happen right away, but he will get there.
Pedro Astacio
| IP/GS | ERA | ERA+ | WHIP | H/9 | BB/9 | SO/9 | HR/9 | BA | OBP | SLG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 4.00 | 10.38 | 47 | 2.077 | 13.50 | 5.19 | 6.23 | 2.08 | .342 | .419 | .579 |
| 2005 | 5.71 | 4.69 | 89 | 1.342 | 9.45 | 2.63 | 5.54 | 1.21 | .271 | .322 | .446 |
| Stats courtesy of ESPN. Color key: green, positive trend; red, negative trend. |
|||||||||||
Bear in mind that the 2004 numbers are over a mere 8.2 IP, so the comparison between those and last year’s numbers should be taken with huge buckets of salt. Also, the 2005 numbers include time with the Rangers.
Expectations
Before the season, none. When the Padres signed Astacio after he was released by Texas, I was a little miffed that he would be taking time away from younger pitchers in the Portland rotation. Before coming to San Diego, here is what Astacio had done over the past 2 1/2 years:
IP ERA WHIP H/9 BB/9 K/9 HR/9 112.1 6.81 1.540 11.14 2.72 5.69 1.84
You tell me what I should have expected.
Positives
- Provided a real shot in the arm to a depleted Padres rotation, pitching better down the stretch than he had over any extended period of time since the end of the 1997 season with the Rockies. There aren’t really any other positives, but this one can’t be emphasized enough. With no reasonable expectation of anything from a guy who appeared to be washed up, Astacio came through for the Pads in spades. His was one of the most remarkable performances of the season.
Negatives
- None, really. Didn’t go deep into games (wasn’t asked to); peripheral numbers were weak (doesn’t diminish what he did, just means he’s unlikely to repeat). But this is like complaining that the $20 bill you found in the gutter is dirty.
Outlook
Astacio is 36 years old and has been hurt most of the past three seasons. There is no reason to expect him to come anywhere near the success he enjoyed in the second half of last season. He can’t really eat innings anymore either. Still, Astacio is a veteran who knows what he’s doing. He’ll probably end up in the back end of someone’s rotation, at least for a while.
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 23, 2005 at 1:02 am
San Diego inked Stauffer for the cheapest signing bonus of players taken in the first and first supplemental rounds of the 2003 draft. You guys know the story, Stauffer revealed his shoulder condition to the Padres and he settled for $750,000.
Looking back at the 2003 draft, I think the Padres did fairly well considering the money spent and how the rest of the picks have fared in the top half of the 1st round:
5. Royals: Chris Lubanski, OF $2.1 million
6. Cubs: Ryan Harvey, OF $2.4 million
7. Orioles: Nick Markakis, OF $1.85 million
8. Pirates: Paul Maholm, LHP $2.2 million
9. Rangers: John Danks, LHP $2.1 million
10. Rockies: Ian Stewart, 3B $1.95 million
11. Indians: Michael Aubrey, 1B $2.01 million
12. Mets: Lastings Milledge, OF $2.075 million
13. Blue Jays: Aaron Hill, SS/3B $1.675 million
14. Reds: Ryan Wagner, RP $1.4 million
15. White Sox: Brian Anderson, OF $1.6 million
Lubanski and Harvey are having a tough time. Maholm is essentially a southpaw version of Stauffer. Aubrey is battling chronic back problems. Aaron Hill and Brian Anderson are solid players who will play significant major league roles in 06, but are nothing special.
Milledge, Stewart, Markakis and Danks are the players who could potentially break it big and make the Padres regret that pick. Despite their raw talent, I don’t think any of them is a sure thing.
Actually, the lower half of the draft is the best bet for superstars with Conor Jackson, Brandon Wood, Chad Billingsley, Daric Barton and Carlos Quentin. Chad Cordero and Eric Duncan were also taken in the lower half.
Looking back, who did you want the Padres to draft at time and how do you think they fared when you look back 2 1/2 years later?
December 23, 2005 at 4:18 am
Festivus - For the rest of us!
Geoff, Merry Christmas, Baby!
December 23, 2005 at 5:14 am
I’m up way too early, couldn’t sleep, but it’s offical, the Padres are moving the “Death Valley” fences in a bit…
http://www.signonsandiego.com/.....adres.html
December 23, 2005 at 6:39 am
Merry Christmas, All; Merry Christmas, Geoff!
December 23, 2005 at 10:39 am
BP’s got an article up about the Padres …
http://www.baseballprospectus......cleid=4670
… even the “free intro” is interesting … anyone out there with BP subscription who can syopsyze the full article?
December 23, 2005 at 11:52 am
Merry Christmas, Geoff, to you and yours.
And to everybody, a season’s greetings.
Happy times to be a Padres fan. Exciting off-season. Looking forward to more.
December 23, 2005 at 1:44 pm
Bryan Smith’s conclusion: “Giving picks away, rather than collecting extras, might just be the Padres best strategy.”
He recognizes that we’ve brought in Fuson and that the 2005 draft was likely a success, but still concludes that Brad Sloan’s ugly tenure proves we’ll never have any success drafting amateur players. It’s interesting to look at the Padres’ inept drafting history over the last ten years, but to draw conclusions from it when we now have different people in place makes no sense.
December 23, 2005 at 8:54 pm
Thanks for the tip on the piece at Prospectus. I agree that Bryan’s conclusion seems like a bit of a reach in light of Fuson’s presence.
FYI, I reviewed these exact same drafts earlier in the year at the old site:
http://www.ducksnorts.com/weblog/022005.html#9
http://www.ducksnorts.com/weblog/022005.html#10
Those will be in the “Best of 2005″ package that I’m currently putting together.
December 25, 2005 at 11:19 am
Merry Christmas to all! or, if you’re a pc type, Have A Joyous Non-demoninational Winter Celebration! or we could just wish you a Joyful Solstice, since the astronomical event at least happens regardless of religious overtones :).
2005 was great for Padre fans, if not perfect, and 2006 will at the very least be interesting.
Peace friends!