Mon, Jul 30, 2007
by Geoff Young
Off to Buffalo to pick up the wife, who’s flying in to meet me for the drive home. With luck, we’ll make it to Fort Wayne in time for first pitch of Monday night’s Wizards game. I look forward to getting my first look at Cedric Hunter…
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.
Filed under Open Thread.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Send Geoff email or comment on the article (comments are moderated).
Tags: Baseball, fort_wayne_wizards, mlb, padres, san_diego_padres
Possibly Related Posts
Your comments are welcome and encouraged. However, they are subject to moderation, which means that only the best will be published. By submitting comments, you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and agreed to abide by the Ducksnorts Community Guidelines and Moderation Policy.
July 30, 2007 at 9:08 am
Im a little surprised that the padres moved Geer up to AAA I guess they don’t see him as one of thier better pitching prospects (I know that sounds weird but the Pads want to keep all of their top guys as far away from Portland as possible).
Also Leblanc pitched an inning of relief on sat are the Pads really moving him to the pen or is that a freak incident?
July 30, 2007 at 9:09 am
Awesome pole. I’ve never had such an easy time choosing an answer.
July 30, 2007 at 9:10 am
Crap. By pole I meant poll.
July 30, 2007 at 10:37 am
1. He was pitching very well in San Antonio, 12-4 3.33 ERA, and he he could be the next guy called up if CY has to miss another start.
What you are saying is generally true, I don’t think they want Chase Headley going up there and getting into bad habits and besides San Antonio has a chance to make the playoffs - and they want to see as many guys as possible in big game situations.
July 30, 2007 at 10:58 am
1. My guess on LeBlanc is that he needed the work. San Antonio had been rained out a bunch recently.
July 30, 2007 at 11:03 am
Matt Bush pitched again yesterday, giving up his first run but still striking out three guys in one inning of work. So he’s apparently not out until fall.
July 30, 2007 at 11:08 am
I’m sorry, did I just read “with luck we’ll make it to Ft. Wayne”?
You’ve not visited Ft. Wayne before, have you?
July 30, 2007 at 11:22 am
I have a sleeper (Cinderella story) for you - Ray Chang of the AAA Portland Beavers. He is one of the youngest players on the Beaver roster. Signed out of a tryout camp, he continues to show improvement and seems to be getting stronger. Also, I like the makeup of Yordany Ramirez.
July 30, 2007 at 11:24 am
What do you guys think about going after Morgan Ensberg?
July 30, 2007 at 11:32 am
Ensberg might be worth a shot but I was surprised to learn that he was 32 years old and coming off of a bad injury. What do you think about the Padres getting Mike Lamb (to platoon with Kouzmanoff at 3b ?) . Lamb has pretty decent numbers and what I like about him is that he doesn’t strike out much, yet delivers decent power.
July 30, 2007 at 11:38 am
Hmm, a left-handed hitting third baseman. I could have sworn there was one of those on our roster, who was actually one of the better hitters on the team this year. Oh, wait, that’s right, he got cut.
Sorry, I’m still bitter. In all seriousness, Lamb would be a good pickup and is probably a better player than Branyan.
July 30, 2007 at 11:46 am
Ben, Russell has a ton of power, which is always nice off the bench to provide some late inning lightening (ig-that huge homerun he had in May to win that epic game at Wrigley) , but was he really one of the better hitters on the team ? We obviously have totally opposite views on the value of Branyan.
Oh well, another guy I wouldn’t mind getting is San Diego native Hank Blalock, though it would probably be next year as he too is recovering from a bad injury.
July 30, 2007 at 11:48 am
Re: 4 I like Geer alot and that’s exactly why I don’t not want to see him in PDX, let him play with the SA lineup and continue to develop.
Re: 5 that make sense
Re: 10 Lamb would be ok if they did not have to give up alot for him, ive heard that the astros are asking for Hensley and the padres response was a loud no.
With the day off today are the pads going to send Stauffer back down and call up Girlymouth or Hillenbrand?
July 30, 2007 at 11:55 am
I believe Stauffer is staying up for at least one more start. Hensley or Hampson would probably be the one going down if anyone does.
July 30, 2007 at 12:00 pm
Unless we are getting a guy like Glaus, (which I’m sure we are not) I think a platoon idea at 3rd is stupid. Lamb would be an ok idea for a bench guy but he isn’t going to be a real upgrade from Kouz and would just stunt Kouz’s growth in a platoon. If we got a bomber or a clear upgrade at 3rd then yeah take Kouz out but Mike Lamb is far from it? I think Ensberg would be a better option than Hillenbrand but I don’t know if he would all theat cool with a bunch role and that’s the only role I would want him in.
I don’t want to harp on the Branyan thing because a part of me really loved his potential but face it guys he was not a good PH off the bench and after that Colorado game it was pretty obvious he didn’t really have a position in the field either (I think we talked about how it seemed like Bud didn’t like playing him at 3rd a while back). Every once in a while the guy ran into some amazing homers but he struck out so much and was basically in a PH role I really can’t be surprised that we let him go.
July 30, 2007 at 12:06 pm
12: I too can enjoy a TTO player, but Branyan just wasn’t cutting it. Maybe more PT would’ve helped skew things in his favor.
July 30, 2007 at 12:07 pm
Re: 15 im suprised that the pads did not try and move Branyan to an AL team that needs a power bat, I know they would not get much for him but could they really not get anything for him?
July 30, 2007 at 12:13 pm
I am afraid the Pads wouldn’t receive an old glove and broken bat for a trade with Branyan on the open market. I think he is AAA bound for the next two to three years, if that. When the rosters expand this year, maybe someone will give him an at bat or two but I doubt it.
July 30, 2007 at 12:13 pm
I know arguments over Branyan are just differences in belief in how to evaluate players, so it’s unlikely anyone is going to change their mind, but my three main points with Branyan are:
1. A strikeout is almost never worse than any other type of out. This is especially true when Branyan’s on the bench and you can pick the spots for him to pinch hit when you don’t benefit from a productive out.
2. His type of skills are the perfect skill set for a pinch hitter late in games when trailing. OBP is the main thing you’re concerned with then because outs are so precious, so a walk is almost always as good as a single. And power is key because he can walk up to the plate as the tying run and offer a decent chance of a tie game.
3. The other guys on the bench all hit better against lefties. Branyan was the only guy with a platoon advantage against righties, and most relief pitchers are right handed.
July 30, 2007 at 12:21 pm
19: When used as a pinch hitter, you can obviously control when Branyan bats. So you use him when a k is literally no worse than a regular out … no one on, or 2 outs. With 2nd a 3rd, no outs, in a tie game, a k is definitely worse than any other out, but you can control when he hits.
Actually, I just reread what you wrote. And that’s essentially what you said. I agree!
July 30, 2007 at 12:24 pm
15: Hillenbrand isnt going to be any more happy with a bench role than Ensberg. From what I have read it seems like Ensberg understands his situation alot more and is ok with spot starting and coming off the bench this year.
19: You are right for the most part. Branyan just hasnt been productive this year like his career numbers or last years number would indicate. He was having a bad year and not doing much at all to help the team. I do think we could have gotten something for him, definitely more than an “old glove or broken bat” and I think he wont be an AAA guy for the next couple years either.
July 30, 2007 at 12:29 pm
#19, 20 - Branyan did walk and his OBP is decent when you consider how infrequently a guy like Cruz walks. Your perspective is important to understanding the game in a more holistic way.
Many, many folks on this blog have told me that Cust does not belong on this roster because his defense is terrible. If that is the case, what is the justification for keeping someone like Branyan (who the Indians have termed as being just like Branyan) on the club ?
July 30, 2007 at 12:31 pm
19, 20. Agree. The misuse of Branyan isn’t Branyan’s fault. Hairston’s a pretty bad defender with less power. Oh, and we also have THIRTEEN PITCHERS! Seems like a better idea would have been for Russell or NOG to have a 15 day illness.
Ensberg is a good idea. I hope Hillenbrand never sees the Padres clubhouse.
July 30, 2007 at 12:34 pm
21.
Like I said I would rather have Ensberg than Hillenbrand. But as for Hillenbrand he may not be happy about it but when you sign a minor league deal after getting run from your 3rd straight team in less than a season WTF do you expect? Ensberg on the other hand helped lead his team to a world series a couple of years ago, was an all-star, and just got hurt and has struggled since. I’m not saying he doesn’t sound like a good guy I just think that because he has been a starter and almost a top teir guy relatively recently he might be reluctant to come here if he is going to sit.
July 30, 2007 at 12:38 pm
22: The Padres decision to trade Cust was, in my eyes, a mistake. Said so when it happened, as did many, many folks here. But cutting Branyan is actually consistent with that philosophy. The most confusing thing about it is that a lot of our front office is supposedly made up of people who see through superficial ugliness like strikeouts.
We could have so easily had a much better bench than we ended up with for most of the year, even with the craziness of carrying 12 pitchers.
Blum
Bowen (replaced by Bard, although maybe Shakespeare reclaims his starting spot)
Cust
Branyan
Cruz
Walker
With 13 pitchers the bench is f’d.
July 30, 2007 at 12:40 pm
24: He may not have a choice. He has to get through the DFA period to turn into a free agent. He could be a pain about it if he was traded here, but I don’t think he grumbled much in Houston when they were giving his at-bats to Lamb and Loretta.
July 30, 2007 at 12:55 pm
25: Im going to assume that Branyan and Cust were dumped because of defense. If it was because of their offensive profile, I’d be pretty upset (and surprised) with the Padres FO. That being said, I didn’t really like either move, especially the Branyan one. You can leverage Branyan’s skills to make him pretty valuable if you think a little. Start him with high k pitchers on the mound, start him at 3b with a high fb guy, start him in left with a high gb guy, pinch hit him in spots like we talked about (like when a k is no worse than an out and a homer is devastating). Im guessing Bud Black really doesn’t like guys like Branyan .. but I’m just guessing there.
July 30, 2007 at 12:57 pm
26: Seems to me that the odds of Ensberg accepting a bench role are much better than the odds of Hillenbrand accepting one.
July 30, 2007 at 12:58 pm
25: Tom, on the ideal bench that you describe above, don’t you see Branyan and Cust as the same piece? I think that the Padres did, and chose to keep the player on their roster who can play 3B and 1B as well as the corner OF spots.
On the other hand, suddenly Todd Walker looks like he’d be a good pickup for this club…
July 30, 2007 at 1:01 pm
27: Branyan’s defense, and Cust’s defensive reputation, has to play a part. As many have said, there are ways around that. Their value is standing at the plate. That makes me wonder what’s going on in the halls of power. One reason they were happy to let Bochy walk was because of his somewhat un-analytical approach to things.
I wonder if Branyan complained a lot about the Linebrink trade, and they cut him partly to show who’s in charge.
July 30, 2007 at 1:02 pm
I’d rather have Ensberg than Hillenbrand. I’m surprised that Hillenbrand was even signed to a minor-league contract. He’s not very good. Probably worst than Silent L and with worse attitude as well. I was happy when the Giants got him last year and not the Padres.
I don’t see how cutting Branyan and getting Hairston for a Leo Rosales makes the team better?
Yeah, that 13 pitchers thing is bugging me a lot but it sure helped in yesterday’s game. Wait it’s an off day today.
I’m guessing that Termell is going to come up when one of the pitcher gets send down. I hope it’s not going to be Hillenbrand.
July 30, 2007 at 1:06 pm
29: Todd Walker is not a good pickup. The A’s can’t find use for him as he wasn’t hitting or getting on base either. I’d rather stay with Branyan than Walker. Of course, Walker can play 2B but the Padres have Silent L for that and he’s not as bad and can’t be worse than Walker would be on the field.
July 30, 2007 at 1:07 pm
29: I don’t mind if Cust and Branyan are the same piece. It’s a good piece. But it only works if you’re not dedicating half - or more than half - of your roster to pitchers.
My biggest problem with releasing Walker was the classlessness. He was a good player for us last year, but he had the audacity to accept arbitration (and win!) Can’t have that. I didn’t worry about the performance side, I really thought NOG would at least be average, with the chance to be a lot more.
July 30, 2007 at 1:07 pm
30: I think it’s Barrett’s fault. He told the FO to cut Branyan or else….
July 30, 2007 at 1:10 pm
31: Me too. How bad would things have to get for us to use Hillenbrand? 3/4 of the team would have to be sick with TB for us to need him.
July 30, 2007 at 1:16 pm
(Sorry this is so late.)
Padres Prospect Report
You will not see another Tony Gwynn. He was magical with a bat in his hands and heck of a guy off it.
Friday, July 27, 2007
AAA
Mike Thompson: 8.0 IP, 6 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 2 BB, 2 SO, 0 HR
Royce Ring: 1.0 IP, 4 H, 3 R 3 ER, 0 BB, 3 SO, 0 HR
AA
Matt Antonelli: 4 AB, 0 R, 2 H, 0 HR; 2 2B
Chad Huffman: 3 AB, 0 R, 2 H, 0 RBI; 2B, SO
Manny Ayala: 6.0 IP, 9 H, 6 R, 6 ER, 0 BB, 5 SO, 3 HR
High-A
David Freese: 2 AB, 0 R, 0 H, 0 RBI; 2 BB
Low-A
Cedric Hunter: 5 AB, 0 R, 2 H, 0 RBI
Nick Schmidt: 2.0 IP, 4 H, 4 R, 4 ER, 3 BB, 3 SO,
Short Season-A
Luis Durango: 4 AB, 1 R, 2 H, 2 RBI; 3B, SO
Cory Luebke: 3.0 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 2 BB, 6 SO, 0 HR
Rookie
No significant performances…
Commentary:
Cory Luebke has now thrown 24.2 innings and has struck out 26 without issuing a walk. He also has a 1.46 ERA.
Saturday, July 28, 2007
AAA
Yordany Ramirez: 5 AB, 2 R, 3 H, 0 RBI; 2 SB
Pete Laforest: 5 AB, 2 R, 3 H, 1 RBI; HR, SO
AA
Matt Antonelli: 4 AB, 1 R, 2 H, 0 RBI; BB, 2 SB
Will Venable: 4 AB, 1 R, 2 H, 0 RBI; 2B, BB, SO
Chase Headley: 4 AB, 1 R, 2 H, 1 RBI; 3B, BB, SO
Brett Bonvechio: 5 AB, 0 R, 2 H, 2 RBI; 2B, SO
Chad Huffman: 5 AB, 0 R, 2 H, 1 RBI; 2B, SO
High-A
No significant performances…
Low-A
Cedric Hunter: 3 AB, 2 R, 0 H, 0 RBI; 2 BB, SO
Short Season-A
Justin Baum: 5 AB, 2 R, 3 H, 1 RBI; HR, SO
Kellen Kulbacki: 5 AB, 1 R, 2 H, 1 RBI; 2B, 2 SO
Mat Latos: 1.2 IP, 4 H, 5 R, 2 ER, 2 BB, 4 SO, 0 HR
Rookie
No game scheduled…
Commentary:
I can’t help but wonder if the Padres see a 2008 Padre CF in Yordany Ramirez…
Sunday, July 29, 2007
AAA
No significant performances…
AA
Game postponed…
(unofficially)
Will Inman: 1.0 IP, 2 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 1 BB, 1 SO, 0 HR – Padre debut
High-A
Mike Baxter: 1 AB, 1 R, 1 H, 1 RBI; HR, 3 BB, 2 SB
Steve Garrison: 7.0 IP, 3 H, 2 R, 2 ER, 1 BB, 5 SO, 0 HR – Padre debut
Low-A
Cedric Hunter: 3 AB, 0 R, 2 H, 0 RBI; BB
Drew Miller: 5.0 IP, 1 H, 2 R, 2 ER, 1 BB, 7 S0, 0 HR
Short Season-A
No significant performances…
Rookie
Brad Chalk: 5 AB, 3 R, 4 H, 1 RBI; 2 2B, SO, SB
Matt Bush: 1.0 IP, 1 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 0 BB, 3 SO, 0 HR
Commentary:
Garrison was easily the least impressive returnee in the Linebrink trade. Naturally, he put up an impressive debut.
Good to see Matt Bush back on the mound.
July 30, 2007 at 1:52 pm
PPR = Conversation Killer.
July 30, 2007 at 1:52 pm
I guess I am about to learn something about scoring, but looking at Bush’s line, how do you give up 1 ER on 1 Hit and with 0 BB, 0 HR and 3 SO?
July 30, 2007 at 1:54 pm
RE: 38
Triple with a wild pitch?
Triple with an Error?
July 30, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Yesterday we had basically a worst case scenario with our bullpen. Stauffer had to be yanked early, Hampson and Hensley couldn’t stop the bleeding, so we had to resort to sticking in Meredith and Bell at the end of the game. And yet, even after giving up 11 runs in 9 innings, there were 3 (!) guys who didn’t get in the game: Cameron, Thatcher, and Hoffman.
This suggests to me that perhaps carrying 13 pitchers might not be the ideal use of roster space.
July 30, 2007 at 1:56 pm
38: There was a double in there somewhere. The easiest explanation would be leadoff double, advance to third on out, sac fly.
July 30, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Re: 40 thats what happens when your manager and GM were both former pitchers.
I have a feeling that if the Padres get Lamb it will be more to replace NOG more than Kouz.
July 30, 2007 at 1:59 pm
RE: 38
Pitcher Change: Matt Bush replaces Jacob Ociesa.
Miguel Alfonzo called out on strikes.
Emmanuel Solis strikes out swinging.
Michael Ortiz hit by pitch.
Offensive Substitution: Pinch runner Ronnie Anderson replaces Michael Ortiz.
Kevin Gossage doubles (2) on a fly ball to center fielder Reggie Watson. Ronnie Anderson scores.
Offensive Substitution: Pinch runner Donnie Ecker replaces Kevin Gossage.
Julio Gonzalez strikes out swinging.
July 30, 2007 at 1:59 pm
RE: 41 there was 3 SO so no sac flies
July 30, 2007 at 2:00 pm
That is what I was thinking, but I didn’t know if those are earned runs.
I came up with dropped 3rd strike, man reaches 1st before throw but SO is still recorded. Base hit (2B or 3B) scores run. There is another out recorded in the inning but it doesn’t end up in Bush’s line.
July 30, 2007 at 2:02 pm
43:
Damn, I made it too hard. I forgot about HBP.
July 30, 2007 at 2:13 pm
46: You were not alone there man. i was trying to figure it out too.
July 30, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Wow. Linebrink was adventurous yesterday:
Bottom 7th: St. Louis
- S. Linebrink relieved B. Shouse
- S. Rolen flied out to deep center
- D. Eckstein singled to left
- R. Ludwick singled to center, D. Eckstein to second
- D. Eckstein to third, R. Ludwick to second on wild pitch
- A. Pujols intentionally walked
- C. Duncan struck out swinging
- J. Edmonds flied out to left center
42: Why the need to get Lamb? He’s another lefty for the bench with no range at either 3B or 2B. His away numbers from the Juice Box is quite a bit worse and his small sample numbers at Petco and Dodgers Stadium are awful. His numbers at Coors, Phone Park and Chase are nice, though.
July 30, 2007 at 2:37 pm
RE: 48 because Lamb has a better bat than Blum, Cruz and Sledge
July 30, 2007 at 2:39 pm
40: That’s blasphemy! No, wait, it’s the opposite.
You’d think that Cameron could have been used in the 9th instead of Bell. 7 run lead with Hoffman still in the pen. And Hoffy hadn’t pitched in 5 days.
July 30, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Wow. I wrote 41, went to a meeting, and realized a minute into the meeting that Bush got three k’s. Thanks for the clarification, guys.
48: Because the bench doesn’t have any lefties right now, and he’s a pretty good hitter.
July 30, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Antonelli sighting!!!
http://www.baseballamerica.com.....64578.html
July 30, 2007 at 3:08 pm
52: Antonelli deserves to be on there-he is just on fire right now. If he continues to hit like this in AA all year, we may not need to worry about 2B next season.
50: I think that after the roller coaster of a game, Black just wanted to make sure that there was no more excitement. I’m not sure what Cameron will have to do to earn a little trust (wash Black’s car, get his daughter home on time, stop walking people–that’s probably it) but he doesn’t have it yet.
49: I agree about Lamb being the better bench bat. What about a bench of:
Cruz (All 3 OF positions)
Lamb (1B, 3B, LF)
NOG (because Loretta is starting) or Hairston (2B, 3B, OF)
Blum (Everywhere)
and Bard/Barrett (C)
I like that OK…
July 30, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Sorry for another PPR conversation killer but how can it be that “Cory Luebke has now thrown 24.2 innings and has struck out 26 without issuing a walk” when his line from yesterday was: 3.0 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 2 BB, 6 SO, 0 HR?
July 30, 2007 at 4:04 pm
54, LOL - good catch. That’s funny. My bad
July 30, 2007 at 4:14 pm
53: Except Loretta isnt on our team…
July 30, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Nothing irritates me more listening to XX than some caller who says, “The A’s haven’t won a WS, so this ‘Moneyball’ working the count thing is BS. I’d rather have someone go up there hackin’ rather then taking called third strikes.”
The guy was bringing up Alderson’s displeasure over the 74-pitch CG by Cook, but only to disagree with SA.
Then Coach Kentera and his lame response, that basically a guy such as Marcus Giles is going to struggle playing on a team that preaches patience. I bet the FO could live with Giles producing, say, a .800 OPS even if he was last on the team in pitches per PA.
Sorry, had to get that one off.
July 30, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Atlanta just traded Mark Texeira and Ron Mahay for catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia, minor league shortstop Elvis Andrus and two minor league pitchers. Apparently Saltalamachia and Andrus were the Braves top two prospects.
I am glad Texeira is not going to the Dodgers.
I think Atlanta paid a rather high price….it would kill me if the Padres trade Headley+Antonelli for Texeira. But then I have no idea about the depth of the Braves system.
July 30, 2007 at 4:15 pm
Didn’t mean to sound nitpicky but that one was a serious head scratcher. Thanks, Peter.
July 30, 2007 at 4:15 pm
I guess the trade is yet not official:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/.....id=2954457
July 30, 2007 at 5:05 pm
60: I think Texas was looking for some pitching too. But getting Saltalamachia is very cool for them. That guy can hit and he’s a catcher. I’m suprised they didn’t get more pitching out of the Braves.
Yup, glad he’s not a Dodgers.
July 30, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Some columnist in Texas was dreaming about a Teixeira for Loney, Ethier, and Kershaw trade. I wouldn’t have minded too much seeing Tex on the Dodgers at that price.
Kershaw apparently came out of his start tonight after one inning for unknown reasons, so the Dodgerthoughts commenters are really freaking out. I’m rooting for a Kershaw for Cordero or Rauch trade :).
July 30, 2007 at 5:41 pm
Loney, Either and Kershaw? That is a dream
July 30, 2007 at 6:27 pm
http://www.washingtontimes.com.....005/sports
Let’s talk about Gwynn. I don’t think there was a discussion of his greatness over the weekend.
July 30, 2007 at 6:34 pm
BPro has their base running equivalent runs up for free. NOG is one of the best baserunners in baseball this year, and the Padres as a team are the best baserunning team in baseball. Bonuses for Glenn Hoffman and Bobby Meacham!
http://www.baseballprospectus......red/?p=463
July 30, 2007 at 7:01 pm
Nice article, Kevin. I was going to make the same assertion (Gywnn was the best hitter for average in baseball history), but without any evidence to back me up. It’s good to see research to back that up.
July 30, 2007 at 7:13 pm
Yeah, Richard turned me on to that book.
July 30, 2007 at 7:46 pm
57: Dont be irratated unless you’re an A’s or A’s clone fan. The A’s are way dead last in R/G and 3rd in P/PA. Maybe being 2nd in BB’s pleases some of their fans or readers of obsolete books. 2nd in walks = last in runs, but if they somehow had some hitters ( they are next to last in BA and SLG) maybe things would improve.
July 30, 2007 at 7:52 pm
68: Moneyball really has nothing to do with fat guys who can walk. I think Lewis did a bad job of communicating this in his book.
July 30, 2007 at 7:59 pm
68: Moneyball was about succeeding through recognizing inefficiencies in the market. It wasn’t just about drawing walks. Also, I heard that caller mentioned in 57 and it pissed me off, too. What an idiot.
July 30, 2007 at 8:59 pm
71: To be fair to the caller, I didn’t even hear his entire conversation. His larger point was that it wasn’t Magadan’s fault after all. And he wanted to know the team’s BA with Mags vs. BA with Merv.
I just get annoyed because it’s such a simplistic way to look at things, as if Billy Beane’s A’s were the first team to value homers and walks, but they haven’t been to the WS, so it’s a failed system. (Uh, let’s look at some of the teams that have won championships before there was some silly label for such a philosophy.
The hosts’ weak responses to these comments are just as bad. Last year, Darren Smith suggested that the Padres’ poor clutch hitting in the NLDS mirrored the A’s own PO failings and maybe there was a connection. He even ran his theory by SA, IIRC. I told him he was crazy.
July 30, 2007 at 9:00 pm
72: To add, Smith was talking just about the ‘06 A’s.
July 30, 2007 at 9:16 pm
71: Great point. You could take any teams philosophy over the last 5 years or so and “debunk” it because they haven’t won a WS…
That’s essentially what the “anti-moneyball” folks are doing. So, since 2001 we know that spending 150 million (yanks), scouting great (braves, minn, etc), moneyball (a’s, padres, likely many other teams), etc all doesn’t work.
And that’s the thing. I’m guessing most teams are “moneyball” teams, or they at least have some moneyball in them. The Red Sox surely were. The Cards are to a degree (they hired MGL, that Luhnow guy knows his stuff).
The concept of Moneyball *certainly* isn’t just the A’s and Paul DePodesta — as it’s sometimes painted as.