Why Bother?
Tue, Aug 21, 2007
by Geoff Young
Things just keep getting worse around here:
| Year | W | L | Pct | GB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Statistics are courtesy of Baseball-Reference. | ||||
| 1999 | 55 | 68 | .447 | 16.0 |
| 2000 | 60 | 65 | .480 | 12.0 |
| 2001 | 62 | 62 | .500 | 10.0 |
| 2002 | 53 | 73 | .421 | 27.0 |
| 2003 | 49 | 79 | .383 | 28.0 |
| 2004 | 65 | 57 | .533 | 7.0 |
| 2005 | 61 | 62 | .496 | - |
| 2006 | 63 | 62 | .504 | 3.0 |
| 2007 | 66 | 57 | .537 | 3.5 |
I dunno; that’s what I hear, anyway…
AAA
Brady Clark: 4 AB, 2 R, 2 H, 0 RBI; 2B (#1), BB, SO - USD represent!
Craig Stansberry: 4 AB, 2 R, 2 H, 3 RBI; HR (#13), 2 SO
AA
Matt Antonelli: 3 AB, 1 R, 1 H, 0 RBI; 2B (#9), 2 BB, SO
Tim Brown: 3 AB, 1 R, 2 H, 1 RBI; BB, SO
Cesar Ramos: 7 IP, 10 H, 3 R, 3 ER, 1 BB, 2 SO (11-9, 3.60)
High-A
No game scheduled.
Low-A
No game scheduled.
Short Season-A
Mitch Canham: 4 AB, 1 R, 2 H, 0 RBI
Kellen Kulbacki: 2 AB, 0 R, 1 H, 0 RBI; 2 BB, SO
Jeremy Hefner: 6 IP, 2 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 2 BB, 8 SO
Rookie
Shane Buschini: 3 AB, 0 R, 1 H, 2 RBI; BB, SO - another USD guy
Edgar Garzon: 3 AB, 0 R, 2 H, 2 RBI; SO
Jose Mayi: 4 AB, 2 R, 2 H, 0 RBI
Edinson Rincon: 3 AB, 2 R, 2 H, 0 RBI; BB - born 8/11/90
Commentary:
Antonelli is profiled in a piece by Chris Constancio over at Hardball Times.
The Padres begin a three-game series against the NL East leading Mets at Shea Stadium Monday evening. We’ll have the IGD up and running by 3 p.m. PT or thereabouts. Go Padres!
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 21, 2007 at 8:11 am
Numbers don’t lie. We have more wins in 2007 at this point than any other year in the Petco “competitive” era. Let’s bring it to the Mets tonight. Bradley back. Go Padres.
August 21, 2007 at 8:17 am
Thanks for the PPR, GY
August 21, 2007 at 8:19 am
G.Y. I think your taking peoples critiques of the team a little to hard. I see more people getting involved and putting in their two cents on how the team can improve as a good thing, it shows that once again people care. Back in 99 -03 no one cared enough to even follow the padres let alone talk about them so they fell into an irrelevant state. The Padres success over the past 3 years has woken up San Diegans and reminded us that we have a baseball team, and once again the Padres are relevant.
In 99-03 a Padres loss did not affect people because they were already 23 games out a Padre loss now kills us (fans) because we know that we are one more game back from where we want to be. Fans will never stop critiquing we know our trade ideas and FA signing suggestions will never happen but its still fun to talk about.
The Padres are doing well but they could be doing better, yes its nice to have a relevant baseball team in San Diego but part of being a relevant team is that you will once again have fans who want to see the team win it all and are not just satisfied with being competitive.
August 21, 2007 at 8:25 am
#2: Not a problem.
#3: I get where you’re coming from, Steve, but I respectfully disagree. The folks critiquing the club are not the problem; the folks calling for management’s head because they won’t field a competitive team are. This has nothing to do with anyone here, it’s just what I hear on talk radio, and it drives me crazy.
August 21, 2007 at 8:30 am
BRe: 4 Well most XX callers are idiots but it still adds to my point of how many Padres calls did XX get in 2001? I think alot of problems would be fixed if SA banned all comunication between anyone in the FO (including Moores and KT) and the media.
August 21, 2007 at 8:31 am
Re: 5 XX was not around in 01 so 690
August 21, 2007 at 8:35 am
Geoff, you certainly can go crazy from listening to what spews from sports talk radio. However, you, like most of the rest of us, probably have a different understanding of competitive than the loons who call in to talk shows.
For them, competitive means being favored to win the division on a regular basis and getting to and winning the World Series at least semi-regularly, while signing recognizable big name free agents on a regular basis, keeping all of the team’s good young talent for the duration of their careers, all the while ignoring the business side of baseball, and, if anyone dares explain it to them, they claim that it is all lies and management is “cheap”.
August 21, 2007 at 8:36 am
4: Which is why it’s more of a reason to not play into their hands. Talk radio are crazy bunch generally and they drive me nuts, too. Get off the ledge, Geoff. We are here for precisely this kind of perspective to show how the team has improved over the years under the current management.
See, as your chart shows the team is more competitive than ever and we just need more people to realize that. Shoot, somebody show this to Peavy, stat. Wow, I can’t believe the Padres were 7 games back with a similar record in 2004.
August 21, 2007 at 8:37 am
But isn’t the NL West more competitive this year? But I’m statisically disabled, so I don’t know.
Speaking of management, KT commented in the paper this morning that MB will play, but then added that he could have played last weekend. Obviously a jab at MB. KT, please don’t do that. MB is sensitive that kind of thing. If you don’t like MBs work ethic, let him know after the season. Sending messages now will blow up in your face. I understand that there is no crying in baseball, but MB is different. Once slighted, he holds a deep grudge. Best to ignore the guy and let him help us if he can. He certainly won’t help us if he thinks management is busting his balls, even if he deserves it.
August 21, 2007 at 8:38 am
#7: Right, so they can go follow the Red Sox or Yankees.
August 21, 2007 at 8:38 am
Re: 8 the Dodgers and Giants were stacked in 04.
August 21, 2007 at 8:39 am
3: Agree. I don’t see how “They could do some things better” gets turned into “Things are terrible.” Or how being 1 game better than we were at this point three seasons ago represents such fantastic improvement as to render any critiques invalid.
August 21, 2007 at 8:39 am
I say if they are complaining and pissing and moaning on radio, they care.
August 21, 2007 at 8:40 am
Re: 10 Have you read the Post or the Globe? Yankee’s and Redsox fans are 10x worse than padres fans.
August 21, 2007 at 8:40 am
GY and the Fathers: I totally agree. I typically listen to the post-game show when I drive home on the weekends (I didn’t make it to the game on Sunday but still left about when the game ended so I had the whole show on the way home). My fiance always asks me why I listen to it as I end up getting so pissed at the loons they put on the radio.
Things actually weren’t too bad on Sunday until some guy called in saying that he loved how Jake gave Sandy the finger with that article. He continued to go on about how SA engages in double-speak and that he knows nothing about baseball (to which I looked at Rebecca and said, “Yeah, ‘cuz it’s not like he worked for MLB or anything…”.
I’m with you though about people complaining that this team isn’t competitive enough. Hell, ask Dodger fans if they think they have a better FO than we do? The few Dodger fans that were willing to talk to me the last time I was in Chavez Ravine (without inserting slurs) were lamenting the contracts to Pierre and Schmidt. The Dodgers clearly spend more money, but that obviously doesn’t mean they do it wisely.
August 21, 2007 at 8:41 am
4: Well, now I feel like crap re:12.
August 21, 2007 at 8:43 am
#14: We are closing the gap.
August 21, 2007 at 8:43 am
9: I didn’t read KT’s comments as a thinly veiled critique of Bradley. I more interpreted them as KT saying, “really, he’s gonna play. We promise.”
Also, if it’s a critique of anyone, it’s a critique of the team’s inability to get it done without Bradley against a team like the ‘Stros. I could be wrong, but I definitely didn’t see it as an indictment of Bradley.
August 21, 2007 at 8:44 am
Re: 15 they put on the Idiots because its not good radio if they let all the people on that say “every thing is great keep up the good work” controversy sells.
August 21, 2007 at 8:45 am
Re: 17 comes with being relevant again
August 21, 2007 at 8:47 am
#20: True, but that isn’t much consolation.
August 21, 2007 at 8:50 am
Re: 21 I would rather have a relevant team with a few Idiot fans than a team thats 27 games out at this point in the season.
August 21, 2007 at 8:51 am
18: Me either. I saw it as “If this was early September, he’d have played,” but that they were still confident they can reel in Arizona without putting him at risk.
August 21, 2007 at 9:14 am
Did we really blow it by not getting Iguchi? Sounds like Philly got him for cheap, and we really could have used a second baseman…
August 21, 2007 at 9:23 am
24: That trade went down very quickly within a few days after the Phillies lost Utley. I’m not sure the Padres even had a chance.
What we need is for the hitters to be more confident hitting with two strikes. I’m not sure that’s something Joyner can teach.
From CBS on the Rockies, here’s an excerpt:
————–
Padres general manager Kevin Towers says the Rockies without question own the division’s best lineup, and Colorado’s .351 team on-base percentage — second in the NL — is another reason why Hurdle’s club finally remains relevant as the stretch run approaches.
“It’s been a focus point the past three seasons,” Hurdle says of the high on-base rate. “We need to be aggressive. You’ve heard all about the Athletics and Twins and their success. It’s just old-school baseball. The more times you’re on base, the more opportunities you have to score. We had to understand that.
“Some of these guys know now they can hit with two strikes. That’s an area we struggled in in the past — they didn’t want to hit with two strikes. But people needed to get over that because, you know what? Pitchers make mistakes, too. You’ve got to have confidence you can hit with two strikes.”
————–
Don’t I wish the Padres lineup can be that patient. Having Jenga back will help a lot, I think. OG, Jenga, El Hombre, Shakespeare, Cameron, Greene, Kouz, Silent L/NOG. I think that can work.
August 21, 2007 at 9:30 am
I’ve always wished the folks you like to constantly complain would at least be more constructive. Instead of saying the Padres don’t spend enough and they’ll never win, give me some evidence as to why teams who don’t spend a certain amount can’t win in the playoffs.
Instead of saying the Padres are cheap in the draft, give me some evidence as to why going cheap and/or the down the college route is not the best idea.
Instead of saying this team is doomed because of the offense, give me some evidence as to why teams with below average offenses (and great fielding and pitching staffs) struggle in the playoffs.
While I don’t really expect people to go through all that work, it’d be nice if it looked like they actually wanted the team to win, rather than just complaining because it’s easy to complain. I don’t think this really apllies to people here, but it does to others for sure.
August 21, 2007 at 9:36 am
That was supposed to read “who like to constantly complain”
Sorry!
August 21, 2007 at 9:43 am
My perspective as a much more casual fan than most people here: The Padres don’t seem like a winning team.
Without looking at the standings, I would guess the Padres were at best a .500 ballclub. I’d guess they win when Peavy or Young starts, maybe half the time Maddux starts, and lose most of the rest.
I would look at the talent level of the players on the field compared to opponents’ line-ups and assume the Padres’ front office has not done enough to build a strong team - other than the bullpen that is overworked and constantly asked to be perfect because the offense can’t score runs.
Those things may or may not be true, but I imagine the perception is common.
August 21, 2007 at 9:47 am
That sounds a lot like a guy who called XX yesterday saying he wished the Padres were more like the Orioles(who haven’t had a winning season in over 10 years) because at least the Orioles have Tejada who he has heard of…..he hasn’t heard of anyone on the Padres. I guess 1st ballot hall of famers in Maddux and Hoffman don’t count.
Back to the same thing we’ve talked about over the past 2 years-this general perception is going to continue until the Padres have a legitament all star position player, I hope Adrian becomes that guy quickly.
August 21, 2007 at 9:53 am
28: Wouldn’t you have to give credit to the front office for putting together a winning ball club — even if they aren’t perceived as one?
Their record is above .500. Their run differential suggusts a record of above .500. Many preseason projections had them at over .500. By golly, they are probably better than .500, even if they don’t look like it. I guess it comes down to what you want — flash or results?
August 21, 2007 at 9:59 am
30: A club over .500 isnt really enough anymore to most people
August 21, 2007 at 10:05 am
Should a club over .500 be enough? I mean should we be satisfied with that? I know I’m not, I wont be satisfied until they win the World Series. I will continue to fallow and support the team if they don’t but I don’t think I will ever be satisfied with a season unless the win 4 big games in Oct/Nov.
August 21, 2007 at 10:06 am
Re: 32 follow not fallow sorry
August 21, 2007 at 10:10 am
You do realize that the team is actually 9 games over, right? I mean you guys are talking like the team is walking the .500 tight rope when they are the 3rd best team in NL right now.
August 21, 2007 at 10:13 am
32: I think I’m satisfied by the process the FO takes overall.
Heck, you could assemble a near perfect team — let’s say a 115 win team, and they coud go down in the playoffs. If the process is correct, year after year, the results we want (a WS) may very well come. But I can’t say I’m dissatisfied because of a 5 game series in October. Then again, I want a world series title too.
August 21, 2007 at 10:18 am
It is kind of funny that the average fan is complaining about 2 main things right now:
-Lack of playoff success
-Peavy possibly leaving in 2.5 years
Last I checked Peavy has been terrible in the playoffs, we’re talking about 13ER in 9IP bad. Not that either one isn’t valid, but I do find it kind of humorous.
August 21, 2007 at 10:25 am
I just think people need to separate the management team (KT, DePodesta, Fuson, Gayton, Alderson) with ownership (Moores).
Yes, Alderson has a minor stake in the club, but he’s not setting the budget. And yes, Alderson/KT are the PR guys, and they are AWFUL at Public Relations. But in the end, management has done very well with the budget they have.
I do think it is ridiculous that we are not spending to $70MM or more this year. With the Dbacks much younger than us, I feel like our window is strongest this year. Although we can and will contend in the future, you need to go for it when you have the chance. We aren’t, and that’s on Moores.
August 21, 2007 at 10:29 am
Re: 35 I never said I was not satisfied with the front office (im not but thats another thing all together) I said I would not be satisfied with the season as a whole.
I’m not pointing blame I’m just saying every year I want to see the Padres win the world series, last time I checked that was the ultimate goal for all MLB teams right (I know its not but is should be)? So if the ultimate goal is not met then how can you be completely satisfied with the season?
I know its unrealistic for them to win the World Series every year but what’s the point of being a fan if you don’t want to see your team be on top ever year?
August 21, 2007 at 10:30 am
37: Awful meaning he doesn’t always say what you want to hear?
August 21, 2007 at 10:32 am
Geoff, good chart. Just curious - what would the 98 team look like on that list? I’m guessing they were in 1st on 8/21/98 and had a *lot* more wins than any other Padre squad since then.
August 21, 2007 at 10:35 am
38: I think some of us just get annoyed that these irate XX callers and U-T letter writers always harp on spending $$ on big names, always harp on supposed Petco campaign promises, always demand that Moores sink money from his other biz ventures into the payroll (and when he says he does, they don’t believe him). They just become anti- cliches. I can pretty much predict what they are going to say every time. Their perspectives seem distorted (see Geoff’s graph). Oh, and darnit we already had a good proven second basemen (who happens to have a .596 OPS this season.)
August 21, 2007 at 10:38 am
36: I would actually say that’s encouraging, that fans know Peavy gives them the best chance to reach and succeed in the playoffs even though he’s had two bad games. It would be worse if they wanted to trade him for Jeff Weaver.
40: AZ is getting stronger. It bothers me that we didn’t try for more talent last winter, but I can understand where they were coming from. They probably didn’t expect AZ to be this competitive this soon, our farm system still wasn’t strong enough to make big deals, etc. It will bother me a lot more if they go with that route next year. I mean, our payroll is up from where it was on opening day, but it’s a lot better to have the players on opening day instead of halfway through the season.
August 21, 2007 at 10:41 am
#40
The ‘98 club was 82-46 on 8/21/98 (according to http://www.baseball-reference......ched.shtml)
August 21, 2007 at 10:47 am
There are quite a few good opinions here, and MB it is nice to see you over here, but most of your arguments come down to this.
The people that were calling in the other day on the Mighty XX, write letters to the UT and pollute message boards tend to be the more casual fan. They won’t read anything more complex than a batting average or a pitcher’s won loss record, repeat such tired mantra’s as “minor league players aren’t major league players” and believe in signing players more on what they once were compared to what they are and could become.
In reality you can’t blame the Mighty XX, its what talk radio is for - long on knee jerk reactions, short on thinking. In essence, the guys who called in are part of a demographic that prefers to have opinions before they know the facts.
Sadly, as in many other facets of life, the idiot that makes the most noise tends to get the most attention.
August 21, 2007 at 10:48 am
42: Instead of 40, meant 37.
43: I don’t know how many current Padre fans became Padre fans in 98, but that was such a dominant team it could really imprint a high standard on your brain.
August 21, 2007 at 10:49 am
30: I’m not talking about the reality, I’m talking about a general fan’s perception of the team. Regardless of the team’s record or the front office’s acumen, the Padres don’t feel like a good team.
I know it doesn’t make any sense, but think of it this way: Which player can the average fan look forward to seeing come to the plate with runners on base? Nobody. That’s why the average joe wants the Padres to sign a big name. Without a Gwynn, Vaughn, Finley, Caminiti-type guy in the line-up, there is little to keep fans excited.
Who gets excited when Channel 4 goes to commercial and the due-up graphic features a heart of the order of Greene, Mackowiak and Sledge?! Does that sound like a winning team?
August 21, 2007 at 10:50 am
#45
The most amazing to me about that club was that the only time they were swept all season was the World Series.
August 21, 2007 at 10:51 am
BTW, the Giants and the Dodgers both have the highest payrolls in the division, and right now they are in 4th and 5th place.
The D-Backs are in first, and last in the NL West in salary.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/.....s?team=sdg
So many of their signings parrot what talk show host tend to blather on about, the need for a big prove bat (Luis Gonzalez) a pitcher that knows how to win (Zito). Take a look at the Giants payroll, its all about players whose best years are behind them.
August 21, 2007 at 11:06 am
Alan made a great point over at the Fanstop board, the Padres have been getting below replacement level production from both 2B and 3B….magically enough for KT the teams 2 most major league ready prospects play those same positions.
Sometimes lucky is better then good, especially when it saves you enough cash to have 30M to spend on FA’s.
August 21, 2007 at 11:20 am
46: The average fan wouldn’t get excited over a lot of players. I’ll bet if you throw out Hanley Ramirez to the average fan, they’d shrug. That’s because the average fan only know the SUPERSTARS as defined by ESPN.
I don’t care if our lineup inspires confidence in the fan base as long as the team keeps winning. If my reading our the schedule is correct, we’ve been 9-7 since Bradley has gone down. That’s pretty inspiring to me since he brings A LOT to this team, both offensively and defensively. As long as Bradley can stay healthy and Blum continues to hit, this team should be fine.
August 21, 2007 at 11:22 am
#49
Why is it lucky to know what you have in your farm system?
August 21, 2007 at 11:24 am
49: If we move Kouzmanoff to LF, the demands on our CF go up. Which is manageable, but important.
My fanboy half loves the idea of a Headley-Greene-Antonelli-Agon infield. My wary realist half knows we’re unlikely to survive Kouzmanoff-like Aprils from two rookie position players.
August 21, 2007 at 11:29 am
re 51: It isn’t lucky that they know Headley/Antonelli are their 2 best prospects and MLB ready ones at that, BUT it is lucky that they both happen to be MLB ready at the 2 positions they need, the exact time when they are needed.
Do you think KT/Alderson/Fuson saw that far ahead when they were drafted?
August 21, 2007 at 11:32 am
re 52: Not sure it is fair to assume both Headley and Antonelli will get off to a start like Kouz’s…..I think it is fair to assume that both are better prospects then he was in April of this year.
August 21, 2007 at 11:40 am
54: I’m not predicting it, but it’s a possibility. Neither will have any AAA time, whereas Kouzmanoff had already been in the majors. If Alex Gordon can struggle, Antonelli and Headley can.
August 21, 2007 at 11:47 am
54.
I don’t think 52 was an assumption more than it was just a statement of possibilities. Rookies come up and struggle a lot and it’s just something I think we should be prepared to accept if we go young next year. If things turn out to be different then consider it a bonus. We can hope they come up and hit like Ryan Braun or Hunter Pence have this year but in all honesty that’s probably not going to happen. To be fair though Kouz’s skid was really really bad.
August 21, 2007 at 12:04 pm
56: Kouz’s skid was awful. He hit incredibly badly in April. Since May 1, he’s been a league average hitting third baseman (.345 wOBA), but he’s actually below the overall league average of .334 on the year (.308) because of April. Please don’t point out his excellent May as the only reason for his rate stats since then. His wOBA from July 1 - Present is .344. Also note that these numbers aren’t park adjusted.
August 21, 2007 at 12:11 pm
A lot of the problem with Kouz is that his defense has been bad, very bad.
They are going to have some serious decisions to make this off season.
August 21, 2007 at 12:18 pm
57.
I only referenced Kouz’s struggles. I think he has had a pretty decent year outside of his recent defense and his early struggles. He hasn’t been great but he has been a complete bright spot at 3rd compared to last year. It helps that Barfield is not lighting it up for Cleveland as well.
August 21, 2007 at 12:20 pm
57: League average isn’t what the team should be shooting for, though. Kouz has been acceptable at third base. He should get better with more playing time, but he’s not going to stand in Headley’s way. Now, if we trade Headley in a big deal (Santana, Cabrera), he’ll be just fine at 3b.
August 21, 2007 at 12:24 pm
323-286 (.530) . This is the Padres record starting with the 2004 season. Which mlb clubs have a better record in this same time span ?
Last year at this time, the Pads were basically right at the .500 mark and went on to have a 88 win season. If we play at the same clip as last year down the stretch we will win 92 games. If we hit a more realistic mark of 24-15 in the last 39 then we win 90 games. So, 88, 90, and 87 win seasons in three of the last four years. In 1978-1995, I would have given almost anything to be a fan of a Padre team that accomplished this. Be critical but temper the criticism - please don’t portray this or characterize this ownership as not concerned about winning group. Go back to the Tom Warner led fire sale and see the years directly following to see what a failing ownership can do to a team.
August 21, 2007 at 12:24 pm
re 60: Kouz has been acceptable at 3B…..ummm not so much if you want to continue to win.
According to BP Kouz has been 17 runs below average with the glove(ouch!!!) while only being 1.2 runs above replacement with the bat. As nice as his recent months have been they haven’t come even close to making up for April.
That D isn’t going to get any better and a .280/.340/.470 hitter isn’t going to make up for it.
August 21, 2007 at 12:24 pm
58: Yikes, Kouz has been TERRIBLE at third? I think that’s a bit of an over-statement. He’s done fairly well at third IMO.
OT, but I’m listening to the audio from Sandy’s interview yesterday. He handles the utter stupidity and venom of some of these callers amazingly well.
Also, could anyone point to the fabled ‘98 promise of winning a WS in Petco? People keep saying, “Yeah but they said we’d be better.” Please reference the above chart. Move along.
August 21, 2007 at 12:27 pm
#58 . Kooz’s defense has , in my opinion, not been bad at all. Average at best, great at charging balls and throwing on the run, decent range but tends to not set himself when throwing after a dive.
August 21, 2007 at 12:28 pm
It’s too bad things went the way they did for the Padres in Petco, if they would have just signed Vlad instead of trading for Giles the community would have an entirely different perspective of the team.
August 21, 2007 at 12:33 pm
re 64: I don’t think I can find a single stat which shows Kouz to be even average
August 21, 2007 at 12:34 pm
#65 My only gripe this past off season was there non attempt in trying to sign Carlos Lee. They could have got him last year (rented him last year down the stretch) and they should have stepped up and signed him last offseason as their big marquee FA pickup. Lee is a total stud –could fall out of bed and hit — and until a recent injury has proved to be quite durable.
I will acknowledge that the Padres need to take a few more risks with a couple of FA picks in the next 2 to 3 years which I believe they will.
August 21, 2007 at 12:34 pm
More review material for folks here, but once again, MetsBlog has done a Q&A with me:
http://www.metsblog.com/blog/_.....71654.html
August 21, 2007 at 12:37 pm
#66 sometimes stats (especially fielding stats) don’t tell the whole story. KK is simply not a bad fielder. Average, yes. but not bad.
August 21, 2007 at 12:37 pm
62: Yea, if you trusted those defensive numbers, Kouz is something like 16 runs below replacement level, which is awful of course. I don’t really trust those fielding numbers, though. UZR had him at 6 runs below average, although that was last updated like a month ago.
If we say he’s 10 runs below average, that still makes him like a win below replacement level, overall. Any way you slice it, he hasn’t been very good. And he sure has logged a lot of playing time.
August 21, 2007 at 12:37 pm
67: Except for Lee clearly said in multiple places that he wouldn’t play on the West Coast. So no, we could not have gotten him.
August 21, 2007 at 12:45 pm
#62 Totally agree with you about KK’s bat though - let’s face it, he has been a mild disappointment this year. KK is hardly a lock to develop into a big time player though he certainly has a shot. I also know that this season is NOT over the club still has 23% of its game to go and lately KK has had some really nice at bats. He gets hot and hits 20 blasts for the season with 65 rbi’s, then I feel a tad bit better about KK. As it is now, I would like KK to get 300-500 more at bats as a Pad before I judge him with any finality.
August 21, 2007 at 12:49 pm
#71 O.k, didn’t know that Lee did not want to play on West Coast. Think the Pads would have stepped it up anyway ? Maybe not, which leads me to my tempered,balanced critique of the Pads of the brass not taking more risks –I want a Garvey or Hurst type signing in the next one to two years.
August 21, 2007 at 12:51 pm
#53
I think they would have some idea of ETA for their top prospects, including those they have just drafted. I’m sure they have different timetables for Cumberland and Canham.
August 21, 2007 at 12:56 pm
Kouz always looks solid on defense when I watch him, but the numbers aren’t pretty. His fielding percentage is a pathetic .932; only Ryan Braun has been worse among MLB regulars. He’s tied for fourth in errors among 3B, and the guys above him all have much higher assist/error ratios apart from Braun.
In Kouz’s defense, he has improved, and can continue to do so. He has a strong arm and his technique looks solid. But if not for Ryan Braun he would be quite easily the worst starting 3B in baseball in terms of fielding in 2007. If he doesn’t improve, it would be a mistake to not give him a look in the outfield.
August 21, 2007 at 1:08 pm
62: I should have been more specific, I was speaking only of his bat.
August 21, 2007 at 1:08 pm
73: Steve Garvey made $975,000 in 1985, and Bruce Hurst made $1,733,333 in his first season with the Padres. It was a lot easier to sign a star player in the collusion era than these days.
I’d love it if the Padres would spend more money, and I’m sure we all would. But I personally don’t think the Padres are a Carlos Lee or a Gil Meche away from perennial World Series contention. I think you have to build something that’s working and will continue to work, and then you supplement it with a difference maker.
August 21, 2007 at 1:25 pm
60: I was only trying to show just how bad those struggles you referred to were. Nothing else.
August 21, 2007 at 1:27 pm
60: League average (and again that’s league average for a third baseman, not league average period) before park adjustment pretty good for a rookie in PetCo Park.
August 21, 2007 at 1:28 pm
79: Although, I do agree that Headley eventually takes the position and hopefully Kouz can play left field.
August 21, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Nice, Geoff getting some love in the big apple. Well, blog love anyway. OK. I’m hoping we go 500 on this roady, then return to SD for 4, 3, 3 againts AZ, LA, AZ. That will be a big week no doubt. If we can come home just a couple back, that first 4 with AZ will be playoff intensity. Lets not get down now. Its time to stay loose and let it flow. I hoping Brian and Marcus can keep the clubhouse nice and relaxed. Prehaps some nude hyjinx are in order. This from a guy who has jumped off the bandwagon many times, but I’m changing my attitude. Going all Tommy Lasorda all the time. Believe, believe, and you can achieve.
August 21, 2007 at 1:48 pm
77: Those salaries were still in the upper echelon for the time. Hal McRae was a better hitter than Garvey and made 800K in 1985. Don Baylor made less and he was signed by the Yankees.
79: It’s not a slight on Kouzmanoff. But a team can’t keep getting league-average production from multiple positions if it wants to win consistently. Viewed strictly in terms of a young player’s development, Kouz has been all right. Viewed in terms of the team, relying on league-average production at so many positions is one reason we’re looking up at Arizona.
August 21, 2007 at 2:22 pm
82: League average numbers from a hitter in PetCo Park is above league average production.
August 21, 2007 at 2:24 pm
77: The fact that they were in the upper echelon of that era means that salaries shouldn’t have been a concern for anyone in that era, when the owners were doubtlessly making money hand-over-fist.
In 1988 the Yankees had the highest payroll in baseball at $18,909,152. The Padres were near the bottom of the league then, just as they are now, but with a total payroll of $9,878,168. It’s easy to ask a team to spend a little more when that little a difference separates the top and bottom of the league.
August 21, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Whoops, I meant 82!
August 21, 2007 at 2:28 pm
I’d be happy with Moores went back to having a payroll 1/2 of what the Yankees spend….think about having 50M to spend this off season
August 21, 2007 at 2:41 pm
84: Owners are making money hand-over-fist now. Revenue has exploded. The Yankees have also aggressively sought to maximize revenues, while the Padres have largely stayed in their box. Alderson’s statement that we get no revenue from Mexico, 10+ years after Lucchino wanted to target that market, should be the beginning of a new campaign, not an admission of defeat.
83: What are his numbers including June? From July 1 to now is about 7 weeks. So he’s been terrible for 4 weeks, great for 4 weeks, pretty bad for another 4 weeks, then slightly above league average for 7 weeks. I’m glad he hasn’t buried himself, even if his OBP remains terrible. But we need more from 3b. To be fair, we need more from almost every position.
August 21, 2007 at 2:50 pm
Have you seen the wait at the border coming north lately? I wouldn’t