Pretty uneventful day, huh? Somehow I get the feeling “uneventful” is not a word that will ever be used to describe Sandy Alderson’s tenure with the Padres. And it’s nice to see that Kevin Towers isn’t content to rest on any laurels after receiving a contract extension.
You might want to sit down for this one. We’re going to be here a while tonight.
Back in Black
So, the Padres made a decision on their next manager. Bud Black gets the call over Trey Hillman and, let us all breathe a huge sigh of relief, Dusty Baker.
Black played at SDSU with Tony Gwynn in 1978 and 1979, and enjoyed a fine big-league career, winning 121 games over parts of 15 seasons. Since 2000, he’s served as pitching coach for the Angels, where he helped develop the likes of Jarrod Washburn, John Lackey, and Francisco Rodriguez.
According to his Angels bio, Black hasn’t managed at any level. How much does that matter? Eh, the difference between “has fresh ideas” and “lacks experience” is about the same as that between winning and losing.
Honestly, I would have been perfectly happy with either Black or Hillman (Blez at Athletics Nation likes both as well). I’m just glad the decision has been made and we can get on with life.
Who Moved My Barfield?
I’m a huge Josh Barfield fan. I’ve been covering him at Ducksnorts since July 2, 2001. After his monstrous 2003 season, I geeked out big time on the kid. No, I mean really big time.
Heck, one of the key chapters in the book I’m writing focuses on an improbable walk-off home run he hit just over two months ago. I made T-shirts because of that homer (get ‘em now; soon, like Barfield, they’ll be gone forever!).
None of this, of course, is a compelling reason not to deal Barfield. I can be sad to see him go but also acknowledge that, from an organizational standpoint, moving him for a third baseman makes sense.
The one concern I have is that in filling one hole, the Padres are opening another. This is mitigated to a large extent, I believe, by the fact that second base should be a much easier hole to fill than third base has proven to be over the past few years (Sean Burroughs, we salute you!).
Case in point, here are this winter’s free agent second basemen of note, along with how they did in 2006:
- Ronnie Belliard: Age 31, .272/.322/.403 — solid, unspectacular; about on the same level as Barfield, obviously without projectability
- Mark DeRosa: Age 31, .296/.357/.456 — flukish season aided by home park; useful talent but could be overvalued
- Ray Durham: Age 34, .293/.360/.538 — had a career year, but he’s been extremely consistent over most of the past decade
- Adam Kennedy: Age 30, .273/.334/.384 — not many secondary offensive skills; good defensive reputation
- Mark Loretta: Age 35, .285/.345/.361 — on downside of career; previously enjoyed success in San Diego
This doesn’t include guys like Atlanta’s Brian Marcus Giles, or the Padres’ own Todd Walker. So, really, we’re looking at five relatively useful guys, one of whom (Durham) stands out a bit from the others.
And here are the third basemen:
- Rich Aurilia: Age 35, .300/.349/.518 — enjoyed second best season ever since career year in 2001; with four seasons of extreme mediocrity in between, someone else can pay to see whether he’ll repeat or revert
- David Bell: Age 34, .270/.337/.399 — we’ve had enough third basemen in San Diego who can’t crack a .400 SLG, thank you
- Pedro Feliz: Age 31, .244/.281/.428 — can’t get on base
- Aubrey Huff: Age 29, .267/.344/.469 — decent option who will be overpaid due to lack of competition
- Aramis Ramirez: Age 28, .291/.352/.561 — opted out of an $11M deal with the Cubs; hint: he doesn’t expect to make less this year
Japan’s Akinori Iwamura is also available. So, here we’ve got one guy who will break the bank (Ramirez), one who should do pretty well for himself (Huff), and three who should scare the heck out of you and me.
In short, there are more options at second than there are at third, and none should cost so much as to prohibit bringing in a legitimate power hitter to play left field and/or a big-name starting pitcher.
[Brief pause for hot chocolate]
Kouzmanoff? Gesundheit!
For their troubles, the Padres received Kevin Kouzmanoff (pronounced kooz-MAHN-off) and minor-league right-hander Andrew Brown. Peter Friberg has profiled Kouzmanoff quite nicely at Padres Run Down. Basically he’s a 25-year-old hitting machine. His minor-league numbers are impressive, to say the least. Yes, he’s a tad old, but so were Mike Lowell, Bill Mueller, and Phil Nevin when they got their big-league careers started.
Baseball Think Factory’s Dan Symborski likes the deal for the Padres from a talent standpoint (he compares Barfield to Rennie Stennett; I think Orlando Hudson is a better comp) but cites the aforementioned hole it creates at second base as a negative. Symborski’s ZiPS projection system tabs Kouzmanoff as a .279/.334/.452 hitter. Sure, I’ll take one of those.
Between Kouzmanoff and Russell Branyan, the Padres should be in pretty good shape at the hot corner for the first time since Nevin played there.
Big Picture
The Padres still have holes to fill. But that was the case even before they moved Barfield for Kouzmanoff (and Brown). In making this deal, they’ve just shifted the nature of one of those holes, presumably making it easier to fill.
I hate to see Barfield leave. And I have concerns about the perception among some fans (mostly the ones I hear on the drive-time sports talk shows) that the Padres somehow aren’t trying to improve themselves through this and other moves. I don’t know if it’s a general misunderstanding of Moneyball, fueled in part by some members of the media who maybe can’t (or won’t) figure it out themselves, but I hear a lot of negativity about the direction Alderson, Towers, and company are headed. I don’t think it’s very well founded.
But never mind what I think. Just let me know the last time the Padres had three straight winning seasons. Or the last time they reached the playoffs in back-to-back years.
Alderson talks about the Padres teaching their young hitters to be aggressive, with judgment. He mentioned on the radio Wednesday afternoon that he holds the front office to that same standard. Dealing Barfield for Kouzmanoff and Brown is consistent with this philosophy. Does it upset fans from time to time? Yes, probably so. We all get comfortable with what we know. But there’s a difference between being comfortable and being great. And when push comes to shove, as a fan of this team, I’m glad that the guys running the show appear to be more interest in greatness than in comfort. As for those of us who find change difficult, rest assured, we’ll feel better when this team becomes great.
I’d have no problem with Linebrink for Marcus Giles.
51: ?
52: No posting images, eh?
I’m also excited about what I hear for Andrew Brown. Sounds like he’s got a power arm, throwing in the upper 90′s.
Zito’s full-season numbers:
’01: 3.49 ERA, 214.1 IP, 80/205 BB/SO
’02: 2.75 ERA, 229.1 IP, 78/182 BB/SO
’03: 3.30 ERA, 231.3 IP, 88/146 BB/SO
’04: 4.48 ERA, 213.0 IP, 88/146 BB/SO
’05: 3.86 ERA, 228.1 IP, 89/171 BB/SO
’06: 3.83 ERA, 221.0 IP, 99/151 BB/S0
He certainly walks more than I’d like, but his walk totals have varied by only 21 BB over 6 seasons. And while he isn’t striking people out like he did his first 2 season, his last 4 seasons K/9 rates have been: 5.67, 6.89, 6.74, and 6.15… Furthermore, while he hasn’t posted any more sexy sub-3.00 ERAs, if we throw out that amazing 2.75 in ’02 and that awful 4.48 in ’04, every other ERA is within roughly half of a run of eachother (3.30 to 3.86).
Zito isn’t a prenniel Cy Young candidate, but he doesn’t get hurt, he’s consistent, and he’d make our staff amazingly good.
From my blog:
The Padres scored 731 runs in 2006 while allowing 679; both numbers are among the lowest in all of baseball (four teams scored fewer runs and only the Tigers allowed fewer runs).
&
[With Peavy, Young, Hensley, and Zito] the Padres would have 190ish, 200, 200, and 215 IP from their three remaining + Zito; that’s 805 IP. Every pitching staff in the National League had roughly 1430 to 1460 innings in 2006.
Lastly:
Adding Zito probably subtracts 25 runs from the Padres total. If the Padres again score 730ish runs (I think they’ll improve and score more) and have added Barry Zito, they should give up somewhere in the neighborhood of 650 runs. An 80-plus run differential, should translate to 89 to 95 wins.
I’d sign him.
#49
I would prefer to not lose Linebrink, either. His numbers looked a little off last year, but throw out two weeks in laste July when he was distracted by trade rumors and pitched terribly, and he was a very good pitcher. And in 05 he was the best reliever in baseball, and it wasn’t close. As far as Marcus goes, I wonder if a)his heart trouble from last year is really not going to recur and b)if he is going to regress as much as Brian has – they’re similar players. I like Brian because of his walks and defense, but his power is gone and his middling speed is about gone, too. Marcus’ k-BB ratio is much worse than Brian’s, and he stole just 10 bases last year, in 15 tries. That’s not good, especially for a leadoff hitter, and throw in the fact that all of Marcus’ numbers dropped precipitously last year, I would be hesitant to deal a lot to get him. But if the Braves want to just GIVE him away, we could do worse.
#44
I agree that people have been predicting Soriano’s demise for a while, and he has continued to defy the stats. But here’s a little statistics for you that should give some pause. Career numbers
Player A – Age 35, Career Stats – 280/372/507, 272 HRs, 943 RBI
Player B – age 31, Career Stats – 280/325/510, 208 HRs, 560 RBI
Player B is Alfonso Soriano. Keep in mind that these stats include last season, Soriano’s best, by far.
Player A’s stats also include last season, which was subpar, plus the two previous, which were not good either, Still, player A’s stats are better, across the board, than Soriano’s, even after including 3 seasons of poor play. They might give some insight into the true quality of Soriano’s play – one that may be obscured by 40-steal seasons.
Player A? Ryan Klesko.
My Zito link:
http://padresrundown.blogspot.com/2006/11/future-padre-barry-zito.html
#55
I am with you on Zito. It’s not just that his numbers have been fairly consistent, it’s the health that impresses me. How many stud front-of-roatation pitchers have his record of staying healthy? Just Santana off the top of my head, and Santana hasn’t been at it as long.
If we’re going to spend 15 million on a player, I’d much rather it be Zito or Matsuzaka than Sheffield or Soriano.
55: I’m still unsure about Zito. Long-term $13M+/year contracts for a 29 y/o pitcher just sounds like a bad idea. His production “should” decline every year of such a deal and the last year or two could really end up hobbling the Padres.
#30. Lamar, you’re right. The Padres said they had problems with his “arm slot” on throws from second base. I think this was just a nice way of them saying they didn’t want to spend the money on someone they thought was washed up. Now that he had a productive season again last year for the Dodgers, I wouldn’t be suprised if we are, in fact, looking at him as a possible free agent pickup for our hole at 2B.
Why do I have a feeling that the anti-Zito sentiment — sound as it is — is going to be similar to a “cons list” for just about every supposed quality free agent pitcher this offseason and in the future? I bet you’re going to see few 1 and 2s hit the market, with more teams trying to lock up their pre-FA top of rotation guys when they see the Matt Morrises and Jeff Suppans get $9-$10 million a year for league-average/slightly better results. (I know that I’m ripping off some Buster Olney or Gammons column.) The Twins of all teams gave a 4 yr/$40 million contract to Santana. Probably better return than the Giants are getting from Morris. “Overpay” is going to be the most abused verb of the offseason and I’d rather pay too much for someone closer to No. 2 than No. 4.
Re:61 I think after the Klesko/Nevin era I think we all are leary of signing anyone to a big long term deal. Sure I would love to see Zito, Lee or Soriano in a Padres uni and I wouldn’t mind if the team gave them $12 mil a year but not for 5 years which is what each of them will command.
Re #35: Sorriano has Struggled in the 4 hole, granted its a small sample size but…
Slot / AB / OPS
#1 / 706 / .928
#3 / 557 / .773
#4 /41 / .617
#5 / 573 / .839
Soriano has clearly excelled leading off so I would hope the pads would keep him there (if they sign him which I still dont think will happen).
We get to play w/ 2 RFs next year because we’re awesome
Matty V. was on XX probably on monday or tuesday I can’t remember but his quote went something like… “Padres fans, I hate to break it to you but there is absolutely ZERO chance Barry Zito pitches for us next season”. I don’t know what he knows or thinks he knows working for the organization and all but he said it as if it were a fact or he would be willing to bet his house on it or something. I thought it was interesting but I have not heard anyone else talk about it yet so thought I would share.
This is just for fun but I think i figured out Boch’s ideal lineup for the Giants in 07.
1. Winn RF
2. Visquel SS
3. Finley CF
4. Bonds LF
5. Klesko 1B
6. Nevin 3B
7. Blum 2B
8. Bennett/Fick C
Re: 65, Matty V knows that Zito is represented by Boras which makes it a safe bet that the pads will not even try to deal with him.
The pads keep floating Zito intrest out there for PR reasons, San Diegans love thier own and Zito is a San Diego Kid so they have to say that they are looking at him.
The pads had the best ERA in the NL in 2006 and were 13th in runs scored. Logic tells you that they need to spend money somewhere other than pitching.
What do y’all think about Mark DeRosa? His splits were pretty even. Is someone going to give him a 3 yr/$22M contract or something crazily similar?
David two problems with that…one is that Soriano has put up very solid numbers for a longer time than Klesko…Second, tough to compare those guys b/c of the age difference when they put up the numbers.
I dunno…I like Soriano. Seems like a nice guy who puts up solid numbers year after year. Defensive liability at 2b and adequate in LF…One thing the pads have lacked (maybe forever) is a legit, scary batter. You plug his 40/40 in our line-up and we just became a force…No, I am not on the sign Soriano bandwagon yet, but I am getting there.
I maybe driving the No-Zito bus though…and no, it has nothing to do with my wife “hanging out” with him in HS.
Hanging out in quotes. Such mystery.
Re: 68 I dont think a team will give DeRosa that kind of money becaue last year was really the first year he has put up solid numbers and there is a glut of 2B with similar or better numbers on the market.
I wonder if the pads are even going to think about Loretta? If the pads can re-sign him then that makes the Meredeth/Bard trade that much better.
#69
Klesko has had 7 seasons of excellent play, Soriano 6.
As far as the age difference, the point I was trying to make was this: Klesko, through age 31, was a far better player than Soriano was through age 31. While I don’t have the actual stats of Klesko through age 31, (I could do it manually, but that’s too much work for a blog comment!) considering that his overall numbers are better than Soriano’s, despite Klesko’s 3 down years since turning 31, I would have to assume that Klesko’s stats through age 31 are far superior to Soriano’s – lets say 290/380/530 to Soriano’s 280/325/510. While everybody assumes Soriano is only going to get better, he is at the age that players start to decline. 31 is not young. And if you’re going to give Soriano 15 million dollars, at age 31, then you have to look at what he does better than Klesko at the same age. And the answer is this: Soriano is a slightly better basestealer. He stole 41 bases last year, while being caught an unacceptable 17 times. Klesko, in his age 31 year, stole 23 bases and got caught 4 times. So, considering Klesko was a better hitter at 31 than Soriano (which is statistically certifiable), and they are both terrible fielders, you’re left with an advantage for Soriano of 18 SBs. Is that worth 15 million a year? I venture to say no, it’s not.
And, postscript, the other point I was tring to make is this: Soriano looks good in a uniform, and we think he’s a great player because he is a good athlete and played for the Yankees in their heyday, but, really, at age 31 he’s equal, as a player, to Ryan Klesko. And if the Pads had given Klesko, at age 31, a 15 mil/year contract for 5 years, we would all be up in arms about it, and rightfully so. And that’s why I don’t think SD should entertain 5-year/75 million dollar offers for Soriano. He’s not appreciably better, at age 31, than Ryan Klesko was at age 31.
Just for kicks, here are career OPS+ for Klesko and Soriano through age 31:
Klesko: 134
Soriano: 115
Klesko had a higher OPS+ in each of his first three seasons with the Padres than Soriano had last year.
Rack that up as another fine trade for KT.
Also just to put it in play, I read over at ESPN that Soriano’s agent said that he needs a minimum of a 6 year deal — not 5. Agent-speak or real? If real, teams have to be really careful, or they end up with a Klesko situation.
Gary Sheffield is an asset.
Gary Sheffield is an asset.
Gary Sheffield is an asset.
Gary Sheffield is a…..nnnoooooooooooooooooo!!!!
GY – thanks for the link to the Q&A which you chose to label “general misunderstanding of Moneyball” … right on! “Moneyball” is about “bang for the buck”, and at the time the book was written, that meant “OPB” … today, who knows what it means? Well, it’s SA’s and KT’s job to know what it means today
They think it means trading JB for KK + a pitcher, I’d presume. (btw, I *like* 2-for-1 deals … depth seems an underrated attribute of good MLB teams … ie. “depth” = “Moneyball”, imo)
A team that finishes higher in the game standings than it does in the payroll standings is playing “Moneyball” … teams that consistently make the playoffs with a mid-to-low payroll are playing “Moneyball” well … “Moneyball” is the game within the game! Game on!
What would be so bad about having Todd Walker stay on and play 2nd? I can’t for the life of me remember if he’s on contract for 07 or not. I’m guessing not, or he’d get more mention here, but why not re-sign him? His bat is still good, he can glove the ball, and no long throws from 2B.
His range sucks, so that’s a negative, but much better option I think than trading away Linebrink to get Non-Orange Giles.
I’m still pounding the Sheffield-Cameron-Roberts OF drum. Sheff only costs let’s say $7MM, and assuming you didn’t have to give up one of our young SPs, that leaves you plenty o’ cash to get 1 more starter.
Not to mention the sneaky possibililty of KT standing pat on Peavy-Young-Hensley-Estes-(filler), trading Greene for a good bullpen arm and using the cash left after Sheff to get a SS. Who are the top ‘available’ SS’s this year?
If you guys are going to continue comparing Klesko and Soriano, don’t you need to figure out a way to account for where they were relative to everyone else at the same time? Klesko’s numbers at the time were dwarfed by what the rest of the leage leaders were putting up.
I did a brief check and by HR’s and SLG from ’02-06, Soriano ranked 9/14/41/12/4 in the league in HR’s and 28/40/95/47/22 in SLG.
From ’99 to ’03, Klesko ranked 86/56/39/29/69 in the league in HR’s and 56/71/54/34/130 in SLG.
I had to adjust the SLG for 100 AB’s so it is +/-, but Soriano has been in the top 15 in HRs 4 out of 5 where Klesko’s highest rank was 34 over his best 5 year span. Soriano was top 50 in SLG 4 out of 5 and Klesko was only 1 out of his best 5.
I was blown away by David’s post #56, but I think when you look how they compare relatively to everyone else, there is a little perspective.
Clayton, that pounding is giving me a headache.
JK
What you give up to get Sheffield and get the Yankees to pick up $6m of his contract? I think it would take one of those young pitchers you spoke of… In fact, I don’t think the Yankees will have to pick up much if any of Sheff’s contract. It isn’t a bad contract.
You may be right on the contract…I’m thinking Linebrink, and that may not be enough to knock enough $$ off the $13MM. Hensley either, and that’s the only SP I’d be willing to part with, albeit reluctantly, for a discount on the Sheff.
Still, I gotta find a way to keep OG (orange Giles) out of the lineup.
Wouldn’t this be a fun lineup though:
LF Roberts
2B Walker
1B Gonzalez
RF Sheffield
C Piazza
CF Cameron
3B Kouzy
SS Greene
I get goosebumps just thinking about it.
Haven’t heard any Piazza buzz lately…understand he may be as good as gone w/ Bochy out and the option not picked up, but anyone hear whether there are negotiations ongoing there?
I don’t know on the Piazza contract situation, but I agree, I’d like him back. And yes, I like that lineup, but Giles has more range than Roberts and Sheffield is NOT a GG-caliber defender as is Giles. So now while the offense is improved, the defense is somewhat compromised. And I still don’t know if Roberts is better than Giles offensively. Is he more fun to watch? ABSO-FREAKING-LUTELY! Better? I don’t think so. So the question you have to ask, is do you want style points or wins?
Piazza’a agent says he would seriously entertain coming back, or something like that. It may just be agent-speak, but I think Piazza liked it here, not just becasue of Boch.
Wins!!!!!
And hey Clayton, it isn’t easy being…..orange? oh well, you get the idea.
This from the Pad’s website
“Along with Ramirez, the Chicago Cubs’ third baseman who opted out of his contract to become a free agent, the Padres also could be intrigued with the idea of signing free agent Nomar Garciaparra to play third base. The former All-Star shortstop is coming off a highly productive season at first base for the rival Dodgers.”
and this…
“Towers indicated that the Padres are interested in retaining some of the 11 players from the 2006 club who have filed for free agency.”
and this…
“Fan favorite Klesko showed his bat speed had returned in nine late season/postseason at-bats after shoulder surgery, and he could be valuable off the bench at first base and in left field if he doesn’t find a club that wants him to play regularly.”
The above mentioned article kind of sounds like KT is toning down his “Big-Stick, Big-$” hitter a little bit and is considering on going with someone a little more middle of the road.
Hmmmm!
How do you guy’s and gal’s make a short link out of a long/ugly URL? I apologize for not linking the affore mentioned article, but it is an awful looking link.
OT, The A’s have annoucned a new ballpark in Fremont about 25 miles south of Oakland. They are even considering renaming the team something like the “Fremont A’s” or the “Silicon Valley A’s”
Fremont I could live with (but who outside of California has heard of it), but not the SV A’s, that sound idiotic. I would be going ballistic if I were an Oakland A’s fan.
I disagree. First, Kouzmanoff is the kind of hitter we would salivate over if he already had several years in the bigs. He’s good. Secondly, I still think it’s highly likely we get a “big name” player.
Mighty egotistical words coming from the mouth of Sheffield “If it wasn’t for me the first year, in 2004, we wouldn’t have made the playoffs. I went out and put up big numbers against Boston for us to win that division. … It wasn’t some mystery man. It was myself.”
Wow, do we really want that kind of ego on this team? Even if what he said is true, that he was the person responsible for the Yankees making the PO’s, he shouldn’t say it publicly. It destroys his relationship with the rest of the team.
Peter, I do too, but I think the overall tone of KT in the article sounds like he is laying the groundwork to maybe, just maybe, NOT make a “big name” move.
I don’t want a BIG NAME. I want a big-time player. Whether that’s a first year rookie (Kouzmanoff), an import (Iwamura), or the sexiest FA name on the market (Soriano)… I want what helps us most and I trust Alderson and Towers to do a better than average job.
I think if the team follows up this trade by signing Mark Loretta or Craig Counsell to play second base, it will be a net negative (barring Andrew Brown turning into Scott Linebrink, which is possible). Todd Walker would be acceptable; he had similar production to Barfield last year and could probably do the same for at least one more year. (non-orange) Giles, Iwamura, or Durham would be preferred.
On Soriano, last year the guy was a star last year. If we could get 100% of that production for two years, then a modest decline over the last three or four years of the contract, that will be a great signing. The problem is, the last two years in Texas he hit .268/.309/.512 and .280/.324.484. A five or six year huge contract is a big gamble for a player that has been a star for only one of the past three years.
#89: I use tinyurl.com. I’ve also installed a plugin on the blog that automatically truncates URLs so they won’t look ugly, so feel free to use the long version if you’d like. Go on, get crazy.
Didn’t think I’d be adjusting to LAB (Life After Bochy) so quickly. I like the Black choice, as he’s an SD guy and was the closest choice to Bochy in demeanor available.
Kouzmanoff’s back injury was due to a fall, not something chronic like a herniated disk. He’s still relatively young and his numbers suggest he has recovered. While hamstring issues can be nagging, they are more of a concern for outfielders and base stealers. Another good move by KT-SA.
I wouldn’t mind seeing a rotation of Soriano, Garciaparra, Kouzmanoff and Branyan for LF, 3B, 2B, and an occasional spell for Adrian at 1st. Have viable options if an injury occurs. Soriano would get no more than 5-yrs. (if that), and there would have to be be no no-trade clause. Still, Garciaparra at 2 years (can play 1st, SS, 3B, maybe 2B and even OF and would be a great option off the bench) seems more like a KT move than Soriano, and I’d be surprised if the Pads sign either of them.
Hey guys. Let’s take Pat Burrell off of the Phillies hands, since they are apparently really desperate to be rid of him. Not sure if he would accept a trade to San Diego, but he has been much more consistent than Soriano and he is 2 years younger. Burrell had a .890 OPS last year, with a higher OPS on the road than at home. There was talk the Phillies were going to accept Armando Benitez for Burrell, so surely we could get this done with Linebrink.
If you insist on beating the Drum for Sheff, I will have to start beating the drum for Bonds….
Bonds, Camron, Giles….Bonds, Camron, Giles….Bonds, Camron, Giles
Bochy would probably welcome that.
Bet bonds could put in the Giles porch better then the Orange Man.
98: Burrell would be a solid acquisition. I’d rather trade for Burrell than sign Sorian.