Friday Links (17 Aug 07)
Fri, Aug 17, 2007
by Geoff Young
Happy Friday, and welcome to an extra special “you did all the work” edition of our weekly link roundup. Enjoy!
- Meredith keeps chin up despite Year 2 struggles (North County Times). In addition to the stuff on Cla Meredith, we learn that Milton Bradley “might not be ready to start until Tuesday in New York.” Can someone remind me why he wasn’t placed on the disabled list?
- Joyner plans no major changes (Padres.com, via LynchMob in the comments). I found this quote from new hitting coach Wally Joyner fascinating:
My hope is that we can continue what Merv [Rettenmund] has already done and what they have established. It’s nothing we’re changing.
Seems to me that what Rettenmund did got him fired, but maybe that’s me…
- Reader Masticore317 has posted HOF pics. Sweet!
- Low payroll doesn’t hurt some teams (FOX Sports, via LaMar in the comments). Dayn Perry looks at the payrolls of clubs that would make the playoffs if the season ended today. The Padres (24th) and Diamondbacks (26th) have the lowest among the 10 teams. Perry mentions San Diego’s geographical desirability as a key factor in luring free agents and keeping costs down but misses the more obvious and salient point that, for the most part, the front office has done a nice job of identifying and procuring good free agents. Of course, Towers also has made some excellent trades for cheap players that have become franchise cornerstones.
- The best and worst of the NL West (Hardball Times, via Didi in the comments). John Beamer reviews the contenders in the National League’s toughest division.
- Drama at Gaslamp Ball uncovers the worst defense of the worst trade rumor I’ve heard in a very long time. Tell ya what, let’s make it Marcus Giles for Javier Vazquez and cash. Yeah, I know that’s ridiculous. Backatcha… [Tip o' the Ducksnorts cap to reader Phantom.]
- A Look Back: The Chris Young and Adrian Gonzalez to Padres Trade (Beyond the Boxscore, via Rain Delay in the comments). Mike Pinelski re-examines a franchise-changing deal. In the Ducksnorts 2007 Baseball Annual (operators are standing by!), this trade just missed the top 5 of Kevin Towers’ tenure as GM. It since has passed Brad Ausmus/Andujar Cedeno for John Flaherty/Chris Gomez, as well as Bip Roberts/Bryan Wolff for Wally Joyner/Aaron Dorlarque. In the book, I noted that “three years from now, this may well be the best trade Towers has made,” and I stand by that assessment.
- Garrison adjusts to new Padres surroundings (Princeton Packet, via LaMar in the comments). Fluff piece on left-hander Steve Garrison, one of three pitchers acquired from Milwaukee in the Scott Linebrink deal.
- Different Rules. Same Outcome. (Baseball Prospectus, via Ben B. in the comments). We had some great discussion on the MLB draft this week, and Rany Jazayerli offers his thoughts on the current slotting system. David Pinto, meanwhile, advocates dissolving the draft altogether, which isn’t such a bad idea given that the current system is pretty well failing at what it is supposed to accomplish.
- Pound (Your Head Against a Wall) Foolish (Dodger Thoughts, via Didi in the comments). Speaking of the draft, it’s not just small- and mid-market teams that aren’t paying the big bucks for some top guys.
- Baseball’s Particle Accelerator (Slate, via Padre Mike in the comments). Nice to see some mainstream love for the Gameday data revolution.
There you go. Now over to LynchMob for the PPR…
by LynchMob
You will not see all the notable performances from the night before, but you will see the notable performances from those who are actually prospects.
AAA
Paul McAnulty: 4 AB, 1 R, 3 H, 3 RBI; HR (#3), CS
Tim Stauffer: 6.1 IP, 3 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 2 BB, 4 SO (7-4, 4.69)
AA
Rained out.
High-A
Inland Empire 13, Lake Elsinore 10
David Freese: 5 AB, 1 R, 3 H, 4 RBI; 2B, HR (#15)
Craig Cooper: 5 AB, 1 R, 2 H, 0 RBI
Low-A
Cory Luebke: 6 IP, 4 H, 2 R, 1 ER, 0 BB, 9 SO - yow!
Short Season-A
No game scheduled.
Rookie
Geoff Vandel: 6 IP, 6 H, 1 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 4 SO (5-2, 3.90)
Commentary:
McAnulty is just a couple of days off the DL. Edinson Rincon’s two-game hitting streak came to an end.
Thank you, sir! The Astros are in town for three over the weekend. Old friend Woody Williams gets the start Friday night against Jake Peavy. Assume the rest to be obvious…
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.
August 17, 2007 at 8:01 am
CY/Gonzo trade will end up being KT’s best trade ever. I don’t think they’ve hit their prime yet.
We’re due for a no hitter today. Go Peavy and Padres!
August 17, 2007 at 8:21 am
Whatever Wally’s doing, it appears to be working. Although honestly, it’s feast or famine with this team. We’re either putting up more than 6 runs, or nodda.
I’m hoping we can keep the momentum going tonite and pound Woody (sorry Woody). If we can win another series, we’ll have some strong momentum going into a tough road trip.
Also, this series is extremely important as Arizona will be facing one of their toughest opponents left in the Braves. Hopefully we can pick up at least a game over the weekend.
August 17, 2007 at 8:25 am
Baseball America ranks us 9th in terms of what we spent on this year’s draftees. $5,763,500.
It’s a subscriber-only article so I won’t link it.
If you include Latos and McBryde we crack 7 million, which would still put us behind 4 or 5 other teams - based only on what those teams spent on 2007 draftees.
The money spent largely parallels the general consensus about the quality of the drafts. The teams that spent the most this year - Baltimore, Washington, NYY, Detroit - are considered to have drafted the most talent.
August 17, 2007 at 8:33 am
Here is something you might like to read as a USD alum Geoff.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/college/?p=279
August 17, 2007 at 8:39 am
#4: Sweet, thanks! Adding Blair to Matusz and Romanski could make things real interesting. Also, I saw Stonecipher play last year at the Aflac game. Not sure how good he is, but that is one of my all-time favorite baseball names.
August 17, 2007 at 8:44 am
Not sure if anyone is interested or would like to weigh in, but I’ve just posted a diary about our catching situation for the rest of this year and next year (http://gaslampball.com/story/2007/8/17/114233/552). I’ve always been a firm believer that a catcher can really set the tone for a team, so I’d be curious to see what you all think.
August 17, 2007 at 8:54 am
I think it is a little early to write off Barrett because of a bad couple months, the guy has shown the ability to hit over the past few years when he has been one of the most valuable catchers in the NL.
In 2006 he was the 2nd best catcher in the NL(McCann had a huge year) and in 2005 he was the best catcher in the NL.
I know catchers typically break down quicker, but it seems like bringing him back on something like a 2/8 deal would end up looking like a steal 2 years from now.
August 17, 2007 at 9:03 am
7 … you’re forgetting how much of an impact he makes on the team … he practically single-handedly causes any team that he plays for to *lose* … and that’s gotta count for something, doesn’t it?
August 17, 2007 at 9:05 am
re 7: I guess you’re not going to like the next part of my fixing the offense series-signing Bonds on a 1 year deal for LF
August 17, 2007 at 9:07 am
7: I was one of the biggest supporters of the Barrett trade when it went down, but I have been very disappointed with the returen we’ve gotten out of him. His on-base skills make Khalil look like Brian Giles. I don’t know where I can find P/PA numbers, but his have got to be pretty low.
August 17, 2007 at 9:29 am
I was ready to write this team off in the top of the 5th, but they came back and held on. Maybe there is some hope. Be nice if AZ cooled off. They are going to cool off, airn’t they?
August 17, 2007 at 9:32 am
The score of the game is an excellent innovation, LM. Thanks for that.
August 17, 2007 at 9:36 am
12 … truth be told, that was GY’s innovation … he be *the man*!!!
August 17, 2007 at 9:40 am
6 … thanks for the link, Phantom … I’m with you that catcher is key position on any winning team … I’m hoping Hundley continues to develop … but he does appear to still be a ways away … Bard does look to be a solid piece of the catching corp for 2008 … but rest will have to be catch-as-catch-can (pun intended, boo).
While over at gaslamp, I saw this link posted …
http://www.xxsportsradio.com/c.....0f5e4a71b/
… to an interview on XX with KT yesterday … good stuff!
August 17, 2007 at 9:46 am
Adrian Gonzalez is quickly working his way up my list of “concerns” … it’s looking more and more like 2006 might be his “career year” at the plate … I’m hoping the issues right now are health-related … KT said something about him being tired and/or having a “timing issue” … his defense is amazing and valuable … but his .700 OPS in June + July was *brutal* … he’s back at .875 for the first half of August, but the report I’m getting from a friend who watches most every game on TV is that he’s not looking good …
August 17, 2007 at 9:58 am
15: Agreed about Adrian. He’s certainly been less than what I’d hope this year. People get all over Khalil for swinging at sliders low and away, but Adrian really seems to struggle with pitches down and in or those that are about shoulder high.
This could just be Adrian’s “sophmore slump” as he adjusts to the league and vice versa (and I certainly hope it is). We need 2006 A-Gon to be successful.
August 17, 2007 at 10:23 am
10: I’ve been glad that Barrett in on the DL. You are right, he’s P/PA is horrible.
http://tinyurl.com/37hbd3
I think Shakespeare should come back as a starter for 110-120 games.
August 17, 2007 at 10:30 am
17: How sad is it that in almost 80 fewer ABs, LaForest has already created more runs than Barrett?
August 17, 2007 at 10:36 am
16 … good point … I’m going to start hoping that what we’re seeing is mostly AG’s “sophmore slump” … combined with a minor injury …
August 17, 2007 at 10:38 am
Will Az cool down?
AZ schedule for the next fours weeks is tough. They go Atl, Mil, Cubs, SD, Co, SD, Stl, all of who are above 500 cept Stl who are playing better. They end, however, with SF, LAD, SF, LAD, Pitt, Co; not as tough especially with Sept callups. If they are going to slow a bit, it could happen in the next month, hopefully.
August 17, 2007 at 10:44 am
I was one of the loudest supporters of the Barrett deal, so I’m pretty disappointed in how he’s played so far. That said, everyone has rough stretches, and Barrett has a great track record as a hitter. Maybe the time on the DL will give him time to rest and get his head back on straight.
As far as Gonz is concerned, he seems as lost on defense as he is on offense. I will not be surprised if I read an article in March 08 about how he was secretly playing through an injury. He’s reminding me quite a bit of Eric Chavez in the specifics of his regression.
August 17, 2007 at 10:46 am
The Philly series next weekend will be important for the wildcard.
August 17, 2007 at 11:02 am
#21: Interesting point about Adrian. For the most part I’m not too concerned, although it’s worth noting that guys with his skill set don’t always age well:
http://www.baseball-reference......amp;age=25
I’m looking specifically at Greg Walker, Brad Fullmer, and Ron Blomberg.
August 17, 2007 at 11:04 am
LM, any chance doubles could get (#00) treatment that home runs are given?
August 17, 2007 at 11:06 am
6. I agreed with most of what you wrote. I think Barrett is on his way out because unless he can convince the Padres he should be the everyday catcher, there is no way the team is going to pay him a million plus to be a backup.
So far I like what I’ve seen from LaForrest too, and even though I’m an OPS guy, a .230 batting average in the PCL is a little scary - but right now I like him a lot more than Barrett in the backup role.
Also Barrett’s defense, arm aside, has been pretty bad especially on balls in the dirt.
I like Hundley too, and his bat is starting to finally come around - pre-all star game .241/.308/.453 and post - .282/.396/.609 - he’s a very good defensive player, but more of an option for 2009, than ‘08.
3. TW you may want to add in the bonuses that the Padres paid to Mat Latos ($1.2 million) and Jeremy McBride ($250,000) to the total spending for the draft, the number then comes too $7,213,500
August 17, 2007 at 11:08 am
LaForest has actually already had more value than plenty of guys who had more PA: Ensberg, Bocachica, Mackowiak, McAnulty, Barrett…
August 17, 2007 at 11:10 am
24 … good idea … yes, i’ll do that (because the # is in the box score) … i just have to do it for another week or so … then i’m sure peter will be happy to keep doing it after that
August 17, 2007 at 11:16 am
25-3 … that is what TW said in #3 … I’m not as hung up on $7M vs the $10M that they said was their budget … who knows what the scope of the $10M was … what I see is that they spent a lot of money on signing a lot of players … I’ll bet the 2007 signing class turns out to be “above average” … ie. it will help the Padres over the long-term to win more games than they lose … are those expectations too low? Remember, MLB is a zero sum game … it’s being “above average” in *many* facets of the game and the business that results in winning over the long haul … and that appears to be the path the Padres are one right now …
August 17, 2007 at 11:18 am
25: Thanks for the prospect analysis John. I fully agree about Barrett needing to take the job by the reigns if he wants to stay here. Also, thanks for the analysis on Hundley. Hopefully he’ll be ready by ‘09.
What’s the current status on Colt Morton? I know that he started the season in the AZL, but hasn’t he been rapidly progressing back up the ladder?
August 17, 2007 at 11:31 am
I read in one of the articles talking about Merv getting fired that he was sick for most of this year. He’s usually really energetic in the dugout with the players, but they said that he hadn’t been quite the same this year.
That makes sense to me. Wally’s going to keep the same approach but be able to bring a little more energy to the dugout for games.
August 17, 2007 at 11:32 am
#30: Thanks, Chase. I hadn’t heard that…
August 17, 2007 at 11:41 am
I wonder if Adrian is out of gas, he played in the mexican league all summer and never really had an off season. It would explain why he came out of the gate on fire and has since cooled off.
August 17, 2007 at 11:42 am
32.
That is a good point.
August 17, 2007 at 11:43 am
Another advantage to LaForest is that he hits left-handed, allowing him to form something of a platoon with Bard since Bard seems much more comfortable righty now.
August 17, 2007 at 11:52 am
32 … if Adrian has been playing in the mexican league all *summer*, then we do have an issue I was unaware of
August 17, 2007 at 11:53 am
25: I did.
28: It’s easier to achieve better-than-average if you’re shooting for great. A great minor league system can make up for something bad at the major league level. They didn’t really spend “a lot” of money. To sign the draftees from the last two classes they’ve spent about 12 million, which puts them in the middle band. The two real sore spots are not drafting Harvey and then not signing Toledo.
What’s the question about “scope?” Towers clearly said they could spend 10M on draftees this year. If it had been a bad class I wouldn’t expect them to sign all their guys, but they could have signed Toledo, Ovens, and Colon and not spent 10M. That assumes Colon was asking for back of the 1st/2nd rd money as was reported earlier.
34: LaForrest reminds me a bit of Mickey Tettleton, but not a switch-hitter. Often unpretty BA, good discipline, plenty of power, not the best defender but far from the worst.
August 17, 2007 at 11:54 am
All I know about the hitting coach situation is that I’d hate to be Wally around the all star break of next year
August 17, 2007 at 11:55 am
35: The Clonus Horror.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078062/
August 17, 2007 at 12:00 pm
37: OG will be following him around whispering “Tick tock, tick tock….”
August 17, 2007 at 12:00 pm
32/35 … Adrian played in 25 games … 88 ABs … for Mazatlan this past off-season …
http://www.venadosdemazatlan.com/estadisticas.htm
August 17, 2007 at 12:05 pm
John Manuel is chatting today (right now) on Baseball America about the draft.
http://www.baseballamerica.com.....d=1#bottom
August 17, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Nate Silver looked at the draft slotting system in his article at BPro today. He finished with this paragraph:
“Frankly, all that the rigid slot structure is doing is impeding the talent from being distributed to those that most need it, because the teams that refuse to go above slot are usually the teams that are–how can I put this nicely–economically illiterate. It’s bad for the competitive ecology of the sport when the Pirates draft a mid-first round talent with the #2 pick because they want to ensure they have a prime seat at Bob DuPuy’s Christmas Gala. Some clubs need protection from themselves.”
August 17, 2007 at 12:11 pm
RE 15: From yesterday’s chat with Adrian on Padres.com:
RandyJ: Your batting average is down and your strikeouts are up relative to last year. How are pitchers pitching to you differently?
Gonzalez: They’re not pitching me any differently. I created a bad habit in June and went into a bad slump. My strikeouts in June and July were off the charts because of this bad habit and my average went downhill because of the same reason. My RBIs, home runs and doubles are still on pace to be greater than last year. So that is something that I do look forward to.
August 17, 2007 at 12:40 pm
38 …
36 … re: “shooting for great” … I gotta think they are “shooting for great” … *and* they have made a decision to follow the “MLB slot guidelines” … and I’m OK with that … I’m assuming that you think the 2 things are mutually exclusive … OK … that’s where we disagree …
re: “middle band” … in #3, you said $5.8M puts us #9 for 2007 … so it doesn’t seem like spending anohter $6.2 (to get to $12M) would lower us in the ranking … and I’d not say that #9 is “middle band” … close, I s’pose … 1-10 = “top band” … 11-20 = “middle band” … 21-30 = “bottom band” … and I’d guess that the “top band” will be the clubs that decide not to follow the “MLB slot guidelines” … so of the clubs that do decide to follow the “MLB slot guidelines”, looks like the Padres are solidly in the “top band” …
re: “scope” … what I was hinting at is money spent on other players such as “international” … and/or whether the scope of that money included the “camp” / “complex” that they’ve talked about setting up in DR … etc … and then we also don’t know their perspective on how much of the $10M they think they spent … and what they will do with any of that that is unspent … like I said before, it doesn’t bother me that they said $10M and now appear to have only spent $7M … I see the Padres organization as headed in a positive direction … they have been winning for a couple of seasons now … and they seem to have a base of players that can keep on winning in the future …
August 17, 2007 at 12:43 pm
43 … awesome question … awesome answer … lets hope Wally can help rid AG of the “bad habit”!
August 17, 2007 at 12:49 pm
How honest do you want the Padres to be in what they say publicly? I’d prefer that they say whatever they decide best helps them both win on the field and be profitable in the bank … they are private business … not a “public interest” … even though we, the public, are very interested …
I’m confident in the integrity of Sandy Alderson based upon the times I’ve seen and heard him in person … and that’s not much, I’ll admit … but it’s enough for me …
Beyond that, it’s all a “game” …
August 17, 2007 at 1:05 pm
44: You’re not going to accumulate maximum talent by following the slot guidelines. They’re incompatible. Spending the most of the teams that followed slot is like dating the prettiest girl in class - the prettiest girl with braces.
We’re in the middle band over the last two years. Anybody who wants to count Latos/McBryde’s bonus towards the 2007 spending has to take that talent away from the 2006 class. When 2 of the best picks from “this’ draft were actually taken last year, it seems reasonable to combine them. This year we’re top 10.
The “we decided to spend money elsewhere” argument sounds very like the “we’ll reinvest the savings we reaped by drafting Bush” we heard in 2004. Corporate budgets aren’t drawn up on cocktail napkins. They shouldn’t spend 10m just to spend it, but their own scouts identified Toledo, Colon, and Ovens as players worth being drafted. Their own process led to that 10M budget, which was stated multiple times as being for the draft - not for international players, who other teams pay more, not for running the DR complex, not for paying cell phone bills.
August 17, 2007 at 1:13 pm
46: What’s to be gained by publicly quoting a figure higher than you intend to go? It hurts your leverage with players, because their agents can add, they know how much you’ve said you’ll spend. It hurts your reputation with fans who follow the team closely.
I’m not quite sold on Alderson’s integrity, but he’s a smart baseball operator.
One of the things that bothers me the most about this draft was Towers’ comment that “it’s all a crapshoot anyway.” After months, even years, of marketing the idea that the Padres are going to be smarter than the competition, that we’re going to follow a process, it’s the ultimate cop-out. It’s like saying “Yeah, we had a process, we identified talent, we made offers, but in the end it’s all a roll of the dice, so nobody criticize us.”
August 17, 2007 at 1:23 pm
#41: Manuel’s comment on Tommy Toledo et al.:
#48: Yeah, sometimes I wonder if maybe the FO should just keep their mouths shut altogether. IMHO, that would be less interesting, but it might cause less aggravation.
August 17, 2007 at 1:40 pm
[...] some discussion in the Ducksnorts comments about what’s wrong with Adrian Gonzalez. It’s been a disappointing year for A [...]
August 17, 2007 at 1:43 pm
49 … I hope they choose to keep talking and being interesting … and I’ll choose to not be aggravated …
I’d like to think that I’m in a can’t-lose situation … either they win and I’m a happy fan … or they lose and I get better seats (because I’m still going to be both a baseball and a Padre fan) …
But the reality is that they haven’t ever won … and yet more and more people keep going to the games paying higher and higher ticket (and cable TV) prices … so I don’t get to celebrate a WS victory or enjoy soliditude behind home plate … what’s up with that?
48 … my guess is that whomever issued the $10M figure regrets that now … ie. I agree that their doesn’t seem to be any point to it … uh, how about this … the Padres announce $10M … agents assume that the Padres are a cheap-small-market-org and do the math and come up with a value for their players which is therefore inflated thus making the other 29 teams pay inflated costs for the players they acquire (on average) while the Padre remain very careful to only draft the players they think/know they can sign at their true value … thus getting a competitive advantage out of the draft … hey, it’s a stretch … but now that I’ve spelled it out, I kinda buy it …
August 17, 2007 at 1:46 pm
Re: 49 maybe the 10 mil was taken out of context maybe the FO said “We have a $10 mil dollar draft budget as long as thats what it takes to sign everyone for slot money”
August 17, 2007 at 2:04 pm
49: If Colon only wanted 3rd/4th money, I’m surprised we didn’t get him. He was rumored to want a 1st/1st supp/2nd rd bonus.
A solid draft is exactly how I see it. With all those picks and all that money, we had a legitimate shot at a great draft.
Part of the problem isn’t the front office talking so much - although they could stand to be less specific - but their shock when people pay attention. The Towers “crapshoot” comment really irks me in that regard. All the procedures they’ve talked about, all the due diligence they do (or claim to do), all the rationalized effort they told us about going into the draft, and then to try quieting people down by saying none of it really matters.
August 17, 2007 at 2:15 pm
51: What’s the advantage for the Padres of other teams signing the players they draft? If the Cubs or Orioles spent 2 million more on their draftees than they wanted, it doesn’t hurt them in any way.
August 17, 2007 at 2:22 pm
#53: Talking less would solve most of those problems. They wouldn’t tell us about process up front or have to try and explain themselves after the fact. Come to think of it, being less forthcoming with the public might help improve organizational efficiency.
August 17, 2007 at 2:24 pm
54 … every team has a budget, don’t they? Prolly the Cubs and O’s budget is >> Padres … but it’s still a budget … and so any $$ that comments made by the Padres cause other teams to spend on the draft means they have fewer $$ left to spend elsewhere … like I said, it’s a stretch, but it makes some sense to me … to say “it doesn’t hurt them in any way” seems too simple … $2M is a lot of money no matter how you slice it!
August 17, 2007 at 2:48 pm
One more response from Manuel in the BA chat:
August 17, 2007 at 2:54 pm
56: 2 million is tiny in baseball terms. And the teams that are paying more are teams that can afford to. The teams that consistently spend more on their draft and farm system are also big players in free agency.
55: They wouldn’t need to be less forthcoming if they were more forethoughtful.
It’s not the telling us about beforehand that bothers me. It’s telling me about one process, doing something else, and then acting like the process wasn’t really important in the first place.
August 17, 2007 at 2:54 pm
Re: 57 I have no idea how signing Latos has anything to do with signing Toledo. The Pads had the budget to sign him they just didnt want to pay him over slot and he had the leverage of going to college and trying again in 3 years.
August 17, 2007 at 2:56 pm
#55: My proposed verbiage would be, “A plan has been developed for that purpose, and we intend to execute it to the best of our abilities.” I think that response would cover just about everything.
August 17, 2007 at 2:59 pm
#59: I dunno, but at least one expert doesn’t seem to think Toledo deserves the attention he’s getting.
August 17, 2007 at 3:01 pm
57: It wasn’t an either-or decision with Latos and Toledo. We already had Latos. Our scouts thought enough of Toledo to draft him in the 3rd round. We paid last year’s 3rd rounder 415,000. It doesn’t matter what “some teams” thought of Toledo, it matters what the Padres thought of him. If they saw him as a 160 pounder with little projection, why’d they pick him? Harvey was still there. So were a bunch of college pitchers.
August 17, 2007 at 3:06 pm
61: The organization that expert works for ranked Toledo the 151st best draft prospect.
Nobody’s said he’s a can’t-miss prospect. Most of the guys we drafted, including the polished college pitchers, won’t see the big leagues. That would seem to make it even more important to hoard talent.
August 17, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Not signing a third round draft pick seems like a funny thing to make such a big fuss over.
August 17, 2007 at 3:32 pm
27: Cool, thanks.
August 17, 2007 at 3:39 pm
Re: 64 I think people are upset that they had the budget to sign him and they didn’t. not signing a third round pick is kind of important when your team is trying to re-build through the draft and not FA. Like TW said most players drafted never put on a big league uni so every pick you have increases your chances of getting a future big league player.
August 17, 2007 at 3:49 pm
62/63/66 … all true … they drafted Toledo because they thought he was both worth slot and would sign for slot … they thought wrong … it was a risk/gamble and they lost … how many teams made the same risk/gamble with the same result with their 1st round pick? Also, it’s not quite apples-to-applies to simply call him a “3rd round pick” … since he was the 9th player the Padres drafted. How many other teams signed the first 8 players they drafted? My point is more than just “the Padres did better than average” … it’s that it’s factor’d into the planning/process that not every player you draft is going to sign … Toledo’s not the first, won’t be the last … yes, it’s true that “every pick you [sign] increases your chances of getting a future big league player” … but it’s also true that the Padres have made a decision to follow the “MLB slot guidelines” (probably for several reasons, not the least of which is their overall budget decision) … Toledo got a “take it or leave it” offer, and he moved on and the Padres have moved on …
August 17, 2007 at 4:16 pm
#58 — “forethoughtful” Nicely turned.
August 17, 2007 at 4:35 pm
OTOH … here’s another arguement in favor of signing Toledo
Jennings can’t win, but payday awaits
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/ne.....;type=lgns
… yow … ouch … biff …
August 17, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Anybody else worried about tonight’s game?
Opposing pitcher with losing record and high ERA facing our ace at home…a recipe for a Padres loss.
August 17, 2007 at 4:48 pm
64: Somebody told me a couple of months ago that I shouldn’t worry about the pitching, either. He was one of the only big upside picks they took and they lost him for a fraction of the draft budget they had left.
67: Several of the first 8 picks we made were selected because we knew they’d sign. It’s not like we stretched the budget on the first 8 players and then needed to have a fixed cost on Toledo.
The Padres have moved on, short a talented player who would have been an asset to the organization.
How many other teams signed their first 8? SF signed their first 24. Colorado signed their first 13. Arizona signed their first 15. LA didn’t miss until 5. I could keep looking, but the NL West is sufficient for my purposes. 3/5 of our most immediate competition didn’t let ANY of their top picks slip away. None of our immediate competition missed the opportunity cost of the 117th pick.