Road Trip to Cooperstown: Leaving San Diego
Mon, Jul 23, 2007
by Geoff Young
After much preparation, I’m finally ready to go. I’ve got enough supplies to live out of my car for the next 10 or so days. Clothes, books, CDs, food and water.
The plan is to leave San Diego a few ticks before the crack o’ dawn and get to Albuquerque in time for the Isotopes’ game against New Orleans. The latest iteration calls for me to catch a few innings of a Rookie League game in Phoenix along the way. Hey, I have to stop for lunch somewhere.
It’s starting to hit me. Not the bit about Tony Gwynn being inducted into the Hall of Fame — that’s made sense to me pretty much since the day he retired. Just that driving from San Diego to Cooperstown and stopping to watch minor-league games along the way is, well, a profoundly stupid idea.
But actually I’m okay with that. Because, really, what else are you gonna do?
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.
July 23, 2007 at 4:09 am
Good luck Geoff!
July 23, 2007 at 5:52 am
Oh man, I can’t wait!
I’ll see ya at Cooperstown Geoff!!
July 23, 2007 at 6:26 am
Have a safe trip man!
July 23, 2007 at 6:27 am
GY - This trip will be great. Best of luck!
Changing gears, does anyone know why Yordany Ramirez skipped past San Antonio and jumped straight to Portland? Is it to give someone else more at bats in SA and fill the hole in Portland CF while Sinisi is injured? I have to think that Yordany isn’t all that close to cracking the big league club.
July 23, 2007 at 7:21 am
Good Luck G.Y.
Drive Safe!
July 23, 2007 at 7:57 am
Have a fun and safe journey, Geoff. Give out lots of Ducksnorts goodies a long the way.
July 23, 2007 at 9:15 am
Totally, utterly and completely jealous.
July 23, 2007 at 9:23 am
Not a stupid idea at all. Sounds awesome. Perhaps your exodus into the desert (for part of your trip, anyway) will purge the team of the nasty taste left from that Phillies series.
Enjoy.
July 23, 2007 at 9:31 am
Don’t be surprised if there’s a moment of silence or memorial before the Rox game tonite. One of their minor league coaches was killed by a line drive last nite during the game: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c.....ml?cnn=yes
Very sad. My thoughts are with his family.
July 23, 2007 at 9:38 am
Anybody else see this in the paper today? I didn’t expect the Padres to think closer with Latos. I am hoping it’s just some stupid article trying to link the two because I am really hoping Latos makes it as a starter. Any new news on Matt Bush?
http://www.signonsandiego.com/.....minor.html
July 23, 2007 at 9:45 am
10: I agree, I want to see Latos as a starter, I hope they arent grooming him to be a closer from the get go. I havent seen Bush in a box for a while, I know they were going to rest him a week but that was a while back.
July 23, 2007 at 9:49 am
Chicago Cubs fan here with a question for you guys.
I’ve been positively roasted in Cubs blog land for how important I feel defense at the catcher position is. I’ve been slaughtered for noticing that we went on a 22-7 tear once we got the hell rid of Michael Barrett. (We’ve now slipped since Kendall.)
What concerns you guys is… I’ve also been roasted for pointing out that the Padres are now, 4-13 I believe?, when Michael Barrett is your starting catcher. Have you guys noticed this? I’m just curious. I would think it would concern you. With Bud Black being a former pitcher, I’d think he’d have noticed also. The stat heads like to say this is ‘correlation, not causation’. I say BS.
I don’t care how desperate for offense you guys are, this guy will kill your winning percentage. I think Maddux went 0-3 with a 8 something era with Barrett. He finally went with Bard and you guys won that one 5-4.
You guys were a first place team with a fine winning percentage. With Barrett starting, you’re a .235 win %. Ouch.
Defense and leadership at catcher is really important. You guys really need Michael Barrett away from the catcher position. His best job at this point would be to DH in the AL.
Has anyone here noticed this? Does this concern you guys?
Just curious…
Mike
Bad News Cubs
July 23, 2007 at 10:00 am
Re: 12 Maddux was 0-3 with an ERA of 8 because Black left him in to long for those three starts, look at the game logs most of the runs came in the 5th or 6th inning after maddux threw over 75 pitches.
I dont belive Barrett calls for pitches in the down the middle of the plate which is what killed the padres against the phillies.
That being said Barrett has not really wowed me with the bat and I really dont think he has been much of an upgrade over Bard to this point.
The Padres are in a slump right now, they went through the same thing last year after the ASB and I really dont think you can single out one player for it.
July 23, 2007 at 10:14 am
Steve,
You may be surprised to know that the Padres are actually in far from a slump when Bard catches. Since the Barrett trade, with Bard as your starting backstop, you guys are healthy 8-3.
You can ignore this like Cubs blog land does. But it’s real.
As for where Maddux is throwing pitches late in games and all that… Maddux just gave up NO RUNS with Bard back there. With Barrett, he gave up at least 2 in the first two innings… all three games. In two of them, he yielded a 3 run inning in the first or second.
Just trying to help.
July 23, 2007 at 10:20 am
The pilgrimage to Cooperstown has begun!
GY is sitting in the Rangers/Royals stadium in Surprise, AZ as I type … so he’s on/ahead of schedule so far!
Onward … to the Hall of Fame!
July 23, 2007 at 10:25 am
RE: 14 your right about the runs (I should have checked before I said it) but that has been the problem with Maddux for most of the year.
Maddux is a great pitcher who probably knows more about the game than everyone on this blog combined, I think he would be able to shake Barrett off and not just go blindly with the which ever fingers he puts down.
I still don’t think Barrett is the problem your looking at 11 to 17 game sample sizes which is to small to make any conclusions off of. The padres cant expect all five pitchers to have CY young type starts every night.
Dont get me wrong Bard is one of my fav pads and I would love to see him be the starting catcher but I dont thinik we can pinn the lack of padres July success to Barrett alone.
July 23, 2007 at 10:31 am
16: Maddux “probably” knows more about baseball than everyone on this board combined? I’m going to go ahead and give it to him
I agree with your other points–sample size too small to blame Barrett.
July 23, 2007 at 10:33 am
12 - correlation, not causation
July 23, 2007 at 10:41 am
For what it’s worth (prolly not much), I took a look a Barrett’s catcher ERA over the years with the Cubs and compared it with the other Cubs catchers. Barrett is .17 runs worse per 9 from 04-07. A lot of the difference could probably be explained by random fluctuation and the fact that Blanco (the other catcher much of the time) is just a lot better than Barrett defensively….like at catching and preventing base stealers. A real study would have to adjust for pitchers caught, offenses faced, defense, and so on…
Anyway, Barrett does come out worse, but I don’t think it’s *that* big of a deal. You can see the post if you click my name.
July 23, 2007 at 10:48 am
Before you guys get all ’sample size’ about it… go look at the Cubs… with K. Hill & Soto (solid defensively)… vs. Barrett. Then tell me about sample size.
Well, I’ll say this for baseball blog land, it’s consistent. When there’s a phenomenon that isn’t as measurable as VORP, it all becomes ’sample size’ and ‘luck’.
You will lose with Barrett. You will win with Bard. You can call it whatever you want. Maddux has now ditched Barrett… and Peavy’s next:
Peavy was pounded by Philadelphia on Sunday and has a 5.09 earned-run average with Barrett behind the plate, as opposed to a 1.98 ERA with Josh Bard as his catcher. Padres pitchers overall have a 4.18 ERA with Barrett catching, and a 2.82 ERA with Bard catching.
I will trouble you no further.
July 23, 2007 at 11:00 am
Re: 20 even if you are right, I dont belive KT of Bud Black read this blog and or would be influanced by it if they did, so we have no power over who the catcher is.
July 23, 2007 at 11:12 am
Re: 21
(Laughing)… good point, Steve. I guess in Seattle they had some luck with their blog and King Felix.
I’m just fascinated by how the Michael Barrett phenomenon has flown under the radar. I expect both blog land and the media to take note of it but it doesn’t happen. I wanted to see if you guys had or what you thought of it. Finally, a Chicago Tribune writer noticed some of it today.
Michael Barrett finds more ways to lose games than anyone I’ve ever seen. You guys will lose with him. If Kevin Towers or Bud Black were to read this blog, you should hope they’d run across this.
I have a good friend who’s a Dodgers fan. I told him I like the Padres in the West. Then the Barrett deal happened. At that point, I told him that his team now had a shot.
God, even as a gambler or on superstition, who couldn’t notice the variable between a 4-13 record and an 8-3 one?
July 23, 2007 at 11:15 am
20: Peavy got pounded because he was getting squeezed and he made a couple bad pitches. Good hitters take advantage of mistakes in big ways. Bad hitters, not so much.
I don’t recall off the top of my head, but I believe that Barrett caught CY’s shut out. Was that all Barrett? Would Bard have fared as well (I’m willing to say “yes” since CY is a stud).
What Barrett gives the team is the ability to throw out base runners. Since he’s been a Padre, his percentage are much better than Bard’s during the year.
I’m surprised that you’re so anti-Barrett. Doesn’t the fact that you’ve switched catchers yet again since you got rid of him maybe suggest that getting rid of him wasn’t the best move?
And like Steve said above, Barrett isn’t calling for fastballs down the pipe or hanging sliders. Besides, didn’t Bard catch Boomer’s break-down on Saturday?
July 23, 2007 at 11:21 am
The problem is, you can slice and dice games however you want. You can look at a team over one strech where they go 2-8 and then over the next stretch where they go 7-3, and try to find multiple reasons why they performed that way over the given sample. Maybe it’s because Geoff Blum played in more games during the 7-3 stretch, but I highly doubt it. It’s tough to try breaking down a team game and blaming it on an individual, like you’re kind of doing with Barrett. Until you, or somebody else, comes with a lot of evidence, Im going to have a hard time believing Michael Barrett, by himself, is going to cost the Padres the division.
July 23, 2007 at 11:53 am
re 12, 14, 20, 22: You didn’t hear this griping about Barrett when he had a better catcher’s ERA than other Cubs’ catchers in other years, right? You must have some distaste for Barrett, so you just sit back and revel in this unhappy coincidence, but please don’t try to pass off your joy as some kind of serious analysis. This is an extreme small sample we are talking about here.
Barrett hasn’t been very good for the Padres offensively, but it doesn’t mean he is going to hit .208 the rest of the season for them. As far as how crummy the pitching has been when Barrett has been behind the plate, that too will not continue, and the team won’t continue to win only 25% or less of Barrett’s starts.
By the way, congrats on Kendall. Talk about an overpaid albatross.
July 23, 2007 at 12:00 pm
I find the Bad News Cubs info to be pretty interesting and noteworthy. I’m not sure what the reason may be for the Cubs red hot streak and the Padres cold streak (at least only when he catches) is, but I think there is a lot more to a catchers defense than just throwing out runners.
It is kind of funny that Zambrano, the Ace of the Cubs, chose to always work with the back up catcher rather than Barrett, and then when they did work together, they fought. Also, Maddux, who had experience with him on the Cubs, was the first pitcher to decide to switch back to Bard for his starts.
I’d rather start Bard, who everyone liked and did well with, and have Barrett be a back up and pinch hitter, and then let him walk at the end of the year and thank him for getting us the compensation draft picks.
July 23, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Wow, I can’t believe these notions about Catchers’ ERA being the same with Barrett on the Cubs. MB go look at your numbers again.
Simply take out 2006 which was an utter debacle for the Cubs, nightmare season…. and look at the rest. In 2005 and 2007, Barrett was a whole run worse in CERA! That’s unusual and rather gaping if I do say so myself.
And in 2005 I believe it was, the Cubs actually had a winning record with Henry Blanco as catcher. Something like 37-31.
Fathers, I’ve always griped about Barrett because I believe having a solid defensive catcher is one of the most important parts of a baseball team, like having a true leadoff man. I never wanted him on the team, ever. When Billy Beane took Damian Miller from the Cubs in return for Barrett, I wasn’t pleased. I’d have kept Miller.
As for ‘Congrats on Kendall’, I hated that trade too. The Cubs didn’t need help defensively at catcher with Koyie Hill and young Geovany Soto. So, we’re supposed to view Kendall as an offensive upgrade!?! The guy’s OPS is .534… 30 points below Koyie Hill’s for god’s sake. Now, I personally don’t care about offense from the catcher’s spot and see it as a bonus if you get it… but since Kendall’s worse defensively, what the hell was the point of this deal?
You guys can try and find all the ‘correlation, not causation’/’small sample size’/'bat makes up for glove’/etc. reasons in the world for Barrett… but you will lose so long as he’s your starting catcher. Just wait for the first game where he does something ridiculously stupid to blow the entire game.
July 23, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Brett,
Since you guys traded for Barrett… I’ve been waiting for you to put him back at third base. Barrett can hit, I’ll give him that. But, he’ll hurt you a lot worse defensively at 3B than at Catcher. And you guys are desperate for production at 3B, right?
July 23, 2007 at 12:22 pm
Re: 26 2 problems:
1) Barrett caught in 7 of Zambranos 12 starts before the altercation.
2) You are speculating that Maddux asked for Bard and that Black was not giving Barrett a day off.
July 23, 2007 at 12:23 pm
Since the Cubs apparently used this sort of analysis to “upgrade” their catcher from Barrett to Jason Kendall, I really hope this thinking takes hold in other front offices around baseball. It’s just laughable that bad vibes or something from Barrett have caused the other players on the team to suck. Short of evidence that he’s telling the opposing hitters what pitches are coming, there is no reason to conclude he’s torpedoing this team in any way other than with his .271 OBP. The team’s record in his games is just a small sample size fluke.
July 23, 2007 at 12:41 pm
In 2004 Michael Barrett was the everyday catcher for the Cubs. The 5 starters who threw the most innings all had ERA+ of over 100. Zambrano was 165. Several relievers were well over 100; two were over 170.
http://www.baseball-reference......2004.shtml
July 23, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Re: 29
Yeah but Barrett was not his catcher of choice. Zambrano was 2-4 and struggling in those 7 starts with Barrett. In his other non-Barrett starts this year (with Blanco, Bowen, and Hill), he is 10-2, with 1 of those losses being against the Padres when Chris Young beat him 1-0 on a Russ Branyan homer in the 9th.
I also thought I heard something that Bard will be catching Maddux pretty much all the time now. I could be wrong on that. We’ll see who starts tonight. But Maddux was awesome last time out with Bard before the bullpen blew his shutout.
July 23, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Re: 28
I don’t think the Padres want or need him at 3B. Kouz has been good since his horrible first month, and we have our #1 prospect (and a good one this time) in Chase Headley who also plays 3rd.
I don’t think Barrett is a terrible catcher, I just would rather have Bard start and Barrett be the backup.
July 23, 2007 at 12:56 pm
28: No, I dont think we are desperate for production out of 3b at all. Kouz has been great since may 1st. He is a rookie and the kid is showing great signs that he will hit and play good defense at the major league level.
To be honest I have never really like Barrett either, and I think it should be more of a platoon there. I am not going to blame our clump on one player, but Bard should be getting close to 1/2 the starts in my opinion. Barrett hasnt really been an upgrade so far.
July 23, 2007 at 1:09 pm
OT … a fun way to spend a minute …
http://www.exploratorium.edu/b.....ntime.html
July 23, 2007 at 1:12 pm
35: Took me like 20 tries but i finally hit a home run haha
July 23, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Re 28: Ooops… should have read that Barrett would hurt a lot ‘less’ defensively at third than catcher.
But, I didn’t realize Kouz has been hitting. I definitely would leave that alone.
Steve, Zambrano started pitching like Cy Young from the moment he started pitching to Koyie HIll. Now it looks like he’s going to try Jason Kendall tomorrow.
We’ll see how it goes.
Brett, you’re making good observations. I have a theory. Uber stat-minded fans give the most value to elements of baseball that are the most measurable… namely, hitting and pitching. VORP, babip, etc. They give a ridiculously low amount of value to the less measurable… defense, baserunning, and clutch hitting. Especially defense… it’s really undervalued.
So many blogs decide how many runs and wins above replacement a given player is without even examining defense! Beats me.
July 23, 2007 at 1:35 pm
35: Wow. Fun. HR on 5th try. I’ll stop now after going 4 for 5. Man, imagine having to do this every PA? I’ll be missing all the time.
BTW, the Padres should hit better this month, I hope. They are averaging only 3.056 runs/game while prior to July the team was averaging 4.405 runs/game.
All this talk about Barrett’s effect on the team gives me headache. The only thing that matters to me is whether or not his game-calling is sound.
Considering that the Padres’ pitchers have not been so good lately (4.722 RA in July vs. 3.367 RA in previous months) is this just a coincidence? I tend to think it is since both Bard and Barrett have been splitting catching duty. Going forward, unless Barrett is hitting a tons, I see the split continuing.
July 23, 2007 at 1:53 pm
37:
Im pretty sure that anyone who is serious about evaluating players has a defense component in their analysis. There have been great strides made in that area with UZR, Dewan’s +/-, etc…
There have also been some metrics to evaluate base running like Dan Fox’s measure and what you’ll find in the Bill James Handbook. You want clutch, how about something like WPA (or fangraphs’ clutch measure).
I think it’s dangerous to label all blogs or statheads because of some of the encounters you’ve had in Cub land.
July 23, 2007 at 1:53 pm
37: A lot of stat-minded fans do try to examine defense. But they do so based on more than a handful of games. They sure wouldn’t believe that somebody who hasn’t played at 3b since 2000 would hurt a team less there than he would when playing the position he’s occupied for the last 7 seasons. 3b is not 1b or LF.
Barrett was the primary catcher for a very good pitching team in 2004, which is a lot bigger sample than his stay with the Padres. Wells has been inconsistent all year and most Padre fans were just waiting for Germano to turn back into a pumpkin. They were going to have bad games no matter who was behind the plate.
July 23, 2007 at 1:58 pm
38: It does bring up interesting, but really difficult to measure issues about game-calling and catcher’s defense. I don’t know of any way to measure how good a catcher is at calling a game. CERA is interesting, but it’s difficult to really correlate it to anything meaningful. BP did a study a while back and had a hard time making any use of the statistic.
July 23, 2007 at 2:21 pm
38, 41, etc. The problem with any catcher game-calling stat is that you have to account for a pitcher’s development/regression, too. Catching Santana in his Rule 5 year is a lot different than catching him now, he’s going to lower anybody’s CERA no matter who puts down the signs.
To use Padre examples, in 1998 Carlos Hernandez looked like an absolute genius behind the plate. Does anyone believe he suddenly found this game-calling gift, or was it catching Kevin Brown, Andy Ashby, and Hoffman in their primes?
July 23, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Re: 42 well brown and Ashby were never the same after they left the Padres so…
J/K ive never been a fan of Catchers ERA.
July 23, 2007 at 2:34 pm
I think to make any sense of CERA you need to compare the starting catcher to other catchers on his team. CERA makes almost no sense when you compare catchers who are on different teams.
Furthermore, it would be smart to try to adjust for who exactly they caught, what offenses they faced, and even their defensive skills (if you’re trying to get a true “game-calling” measure). You could also try some type of matched pairs design, where you match up catchers with the same pitchers (preferably witin the same season…like, for example, catcher a caught Mark Prior 2002 10 times and catcher b did it 5 times…get a large enough sample and compare them like this).
I think if you did all this you could get a somewhat reliable look. But CERA is definitely is tricky thing…there are a lot of things to control for.
July 23, 2007 at 2:44 pm
You guys have a good blog… with smart commenters. Feel free to prove me wrong at the end of the year when the sample size isn’t as small. Mark my word, you will NOT win with Barrett starting as your catcher. You guys have been nothing but a first place team all year EXCEPT when this guy starts at catcher. Bard should be starting. Once the Cubs got rid of Barrett, they took off like a juggernaut. Now we’re only 2 back of you guys. What’s changed?
He’s a terrible leader, terrible game caller, cannot block a pitch to save his life, doesn’t present a proper target to the pitchers, will throw to the wrong base, cannot execute a rundown, cannot captain the infield and call out who should catch a popup, is a lousy baserunner… but he can hit.
I have nothing against the guy personally… I just grew really tired of him ruining games for the Cubs. You guys haven’t even seen the kind of bone headed garbage you’ll get from him. But you will.
July 23, 2007 at 2:54 pm
Re: Desperate for production at third base
Since coming out of an April slump, Kouzmanoff has been our second most valuable hitter behind only Mike Cameron.
July 23, 2007 at 2:58 pm
Re: Catcher’s ERA
What the hell are people talking about Catcher’s ERA for? Aren’t fans smarter than that by now?
July 23, 2007 at 3:02 pm
Re: 46
Another fun note about Padre hitting since the end of Kouzy’s slump (May 8), only five Padres have been hitting above league average in that time. They are Milton Bradley, Mike Cameron, Kevin Kouzmanoff, Brian Giles and Geoff Blum (Blum shockingly is hitting almost exactly at league average over that time).
July 23, 2007 at 3:06 pm
45: I can’t imagine that getting rid of one player would suddenly improved a club that much. Had the Cubs been the Devil Rays, they’d still suck. The Cubs just happened to get better results as their run differential was positive the whole season. The Cubs’ bullpen also got better lately and I don’t think that’s a product of having Barrett as a catcher unless the pitchers were throwing games for spites.
July 23, 2007 at 3:11 pm
BadNewsCubs…
You might be right and you might be wrong but either way Barret’s performance isn’t going to make or break this team. Nobody on this team hitting will for sure. Barret may need some more games to build a better report with pitchers as well who knows I think it’s really too early to tell. We didn’t get him for his glove and it’s not as if we are stuck with him after ‘07 anyways. I also like having a defensive minded catcher but we have dealt with bad catching before remember Piazza was our catcher last year. I guess all I am saying is that we have bigger fish to fry than Barrett. He hasn’t helped us a whole lot yet but right now nobody on the team is really helping either so it’s hard to pile on the new guy after just a few games.
July 23, 2007 at 3:11 pm
48: The Padres need El Hombre to hit like he did in April and May. If NOG got better, that’ll help too. I sure hope Jose Cruz Jr. will get some life into his bat when he gets the call to play.
Other than that, the bullpen happened to hit some bad stretch this month. I’m thinking it’s rather nice that it’s happening just as the offense is not going. It’ll be doubly frustrating if the bullpen had been excellent but the July record is the same. As it is, I’m looking forward to both the offense and bullpen getting better and more wins for the Padres.
July 23, 2007 at 3:13 pm
Oh, and this is funny. Fake but funny.
http://www.thebrushback.com/hargrove_full.htm
July 23, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Re 39:
MB, I have a question regarding UZR, Dewan’s, the base running thing, etc.
How much value are sabermetric folks giving to a player’s D these days? From what I understand, very little value is given to these and far more given to the hitting. What about base running?
Do Win Shares account for D and base running?
Thanks.
July 23, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Well, in general, offense is more important than defense. So more value should be given to it. Still, though, anyone who makes serious ratings wants to consider everything.
For instance, MGL has (or used to…I think he still does something similar) linear weights for offense, UZR (plus “arm” and double play ratings) for defense, a baserunning component, etc. He pretty much considers everything.
Win Shares, I believe, has steals in it because it’s in most of the newer runs created formula’s, which WS uses. It also has a defensive component.
July 23, 2007 at 3:42 pm
You might be right and you might be wrong but either way Barret’s performance isn’t going to make or break this team.
KRS1, the difference between winning and losing games can be a really fine line. Mike Piazza is the only catcher in major league history whose hitting can make up for awful defense. Michael Barrett can’t hit like Mike Piazza.
One person can make a HUGE difference when it’s a starting pitcher, a closer… or yes, a catcher.
In 2004, if the Cubs had Trevor Hoffman, they’d have been in the playoffs. The sabermetric world has gotten too caught up in VORP and Win Shares and all this. These stats say players can only influence so many games a year. It’s an abstract and inaccurate way of looking at things.
With you guys for example. If you had Vladimir Guerrero in your lineup, you’d have won more than an extra game or two.
You’ll see that it’s no fluke… Barrett 4-13, Bard 8-3. Just you wait.
July 23, 2007 at 3:52 pm
MB, I like what you did at your site… the VORP + UZR thing. That sure makes a lot more sense than VORP by itself.
At Cubs blogs, people seem to think that VORP alone defines a player’s value. It’s gotten to the point where I want to say, “Why should we even play games? Let’s just add up the team VORP’s in advance and call it a day.”
July 23, 2007 at 3:55 pm
MB, what is MGL?
July 23, 2007 at 4:01 pm
MGL is a sabermetrician, Mitchel Lichtman. It’s just his initials.
VORP definitely doesn’t define a players value. You need to consider defense, imo.
July 23, 2007 at 4:05 pm
I hope Barrett proves me wrong. I just think that Zambrano’s record with Barrett (2-4) and without him (10-2), as well as the Cubs record without him should be noticed. Yes, the sample size is small in San Diego too, but we were cruising along great with Bard as catcher, but the difference between Barrett (4-13) and Bard (8-3) is fairly substancial. I don’t put too much stock in CERA either.. all that really matters to me is winning games. I feel like the catcher is like the quarterback of the team- he’s the leader, he sets the tone, and does most of the brainwork and playcalling.
Also, who says Piazza was a bad defensive catcher.. Sure, he couldn’t throw anybody out, but I think he’s a great game caller. Pitchers like him, and he wins wherever he plays. Nobody can complain about the job he did here last year defensively or offensively.
July 23, 2007 at 4:13 pm
55.
Look dude it’s obvious that you don’t like Barrett, I get it. I think most of us realize that he has been a productive player in the past and has been here what like a month so we are still willing to give him a chance. All I am trying to say is that although a lot of us like Bard it’s not like the guy is P-Rod behind the plate. If the pitchers don’t like throwing to Barrett you will see his ass on the bench so at this point I really think you are over-estimating his role on this team.
If the Cubs had Trevor Hoffman in ‘04, if we had Vlad G. now… BLAH BLAH BLAH!!! Do you really think anyone here is mistaking Michael Barrett for either of those guys or anyone on their level? Come on dude this is Michael Barrett we are talking about not A-Rod. I am fully aware that one player CAN make or break a team what I am saying is that Barrett isn’t going to make or break THIS team. We have too many vetrans and have had too much sucess without him. The core of this team is pitching, so if the pitching is playing poorly because of the catcher I am pretty sure there will be ZERO hessitation to make a change. With HOF’ers like Maddux and Hoffman and a vet like Wells and a manager that used to pitch I am confidant that if the problems pitchers are having of late are caused by Barrett behind the plate i’m confidant it will be taken care of.
July 23, 2007 at 4:30 pm
Wouldn’t it be nice if we could blame Barrett for the Padres’ woes lately? Maybe if he stops catching Khalil will stop swinging at balls high and outside…and Mike Cameron will start getting a good jump on fly balls again…and Adrian will start hitting like it was April…and Cla and Linebrink will be back to their best…and Peavy will get that 10th win…and Tony Gwynn’s statue will come to life and bat 3rd…
Let’s at least give it a shot! What’s the worst that could happen, we lose a complete game shutout to a pitcher with an ERA of 9.00?
July 23, 2007 at 7:33 pm
Through five, limited the damage to one run. I love Maddux but take him out now!
July 24, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Geoff,
Have a blast! I can’t wait to hear the stories and see the pictures.