Busy, busy, busy…
- Scouting Jake Peavy (Baseball Analysts, via Jim Parish in the comments). Joe P. Sheehan dissects the repertoire of Jake Peavy.
- Brian Giles has surgery on knee (San Diego Union-Tribune, via Tom Waits in the comments). Brian Giles, who has been having trouble with his right knee since April, is expected to be ready for Opening Day 2008. Also, the possibility of Matt Antonelli leading off next year is mentioned.
- Overachievers, ey? (Friar Forecast). MB isn’t impressed with Nick Canepa’s latest. (Neither is Dex at Gaslamp Ball.)
- Coming up short: Padres were a good team, but couldn’t overcome obstacles (North County Times). Dan Hayes looks back at the season that was and offers suggestions for the future.
- Bradley won’t be suspended for incident (Los Angeles Times). Quoth Bob Watson: “If his manager hadn’t gotten him, we’re talking a whole different situation.”
- Hoffman accepts blame for defeat (Padres.com). Quoth Trevor Hoffman:
You can’t really point to any other factor than my performance tonight. It’s a burden I’m going to have to deal with.
Actually, you can point to many small failures throughout the season. This is not on any one moment or person.
- Rockies Celebrate… But He Still Has Not Touched Home Plate! (San Diego Spotlight). Not to dwell on it, but Rich offers his thoughts regarding the Matt Holliday/Tim McClelland fiasco that ended the Padres season. Be sure to read the comments; unintentional humor is the best kind.
- Speaking of which, by request, we now have Waiting for Holliday shirts available. I’m going to do some housecleaning at the store over the next few weeks, so if there’s something you’ve had your eye on, now might be a good time to get it.
- California League Top 20 Prospects List (Baseball America, via Peter Friberg in the comments). Antonelli checks in at #4, while left-hander Wade LeBlanc is ranked #12. No love for Kyle Blanks.
- 101 Best Baseball Blogs of 2007 (LA Snark, via Gaslamp Ball). I’m overjoyed to be ranked #44, which as we all know has been retired by the Padres in honor of Willie McCovey. Furthermore, it’s the number Peavy wears.
- 2008 Baseball Free Agents (Knuckle Curve). Calling my own number here; I’ve gathered a few links for tracking potential free agents this winter. Might come in handy while we’re trying to figure out how to shore up the Padres’ various holes.
- OOTP league and Sunday softball openings (Friar Watch). Anthony is looking for softball players. I’m in, if that makes a difference.
Most Commented Posts
On another note, someone was asking about this the other day; here are the top 5 non-IGD threads at Ducksnorts:
- Blum, Bocachica, and a Slice of History (June 7, 2007)
- Jake the Efficient (September 27, 2007)
- Padres Poised to Pop Pitcher (June 6, 2006)
- Till It Hurts, Kiddo (September 27, 2006)
- Padres, Mets Swap Spare Parts (November 16, 2006)
I love that our fifth most heavily commented thread ever came in November. We are such geeks. 
I’ve also been reminded of an old thread about which ballparks we’ve visited. I’ll need to update my list to include the parks I stopped by on the way to Cooperstown this summer. Feel free to hop on over and add your own if the spirit moves you.
And as always, we’ve got a boatload o’ links at del.icio.us. Happy reading…
43: I don’t think you’re ever going to hear someone explain the value you derive from bad players. However, when you have no real farm system to speak of, there is value in drafing guys that may be less likely to become stars, but are more likely to proceed through the levels.
Put another way, a player’s value being held constant, the greater his upside, the greater his risk of being a bust. When you have a well-populated farm system, you can afford to take more chances on those guys.
45: The story, which may have grown a tiny acorn, was that the Padres didn’t want their good minor leaguers exposed to the Portland atmosphere. It seems as if McAnulty, Robles, and Hensley (those were the names I heard) were pissed about being sent down and made this feeling known.
46, 47: He could have pinch-hit instead of Sledge and Myrow in September.
Re: 51 I agree we 100%, but we dont know if that is the Padres plans or not. We had this discusion before the draft and we thought this was the year they were going to take some risks and they stuck with college guys. Thier one risky pick (Toledo) they did not sign because he wanted above “slot” money.
41.
Why?
Re: 54 he will only cost them $6.5 mil next year and they still have controll of him in 09.
Also with it being Maddux, Hoffy’s and Giles last year on team I think they are going to keep the same core of guys together for one more run. Offering Jones a one year deal kind of shows that as well.
re 43: Interesting that MLB characterized $225 million of the debt financing to be McCourt’s personal obligation and not the team’s. Regardless, the Padres should be happy that MLB approved the sale to McCourt. He still has substantial team and personal debt, which coupled with the debt service rules, have in fact acted as a restrictor on Dodger payroll.
Since McCourt has owned the club, the team’s payroll ranking has been consistently below their revenue ranking. They are just now re-starting to spend on a level with the Mets, which should scare Padres fans if Coletti ever figures out how to spend it wisely.
Like others, I too could see a Padre 4th place finish next year if the Dodgers acquire Santana and if they can adequately replace what they lose in such a trade. He has been and is currently that good and can make up the difference in the standings. I could also see the Padres finishing 1st, 2nd or 3rd next year
51: That’s a false dichotomy. As we’ve seen with two of our last three first overall picks, a safe college pick may be anything but. A lot of busts don’t bust until they hit AA or AAA, so there’s no substantive difference for most of their minor league careers between the safe pick who flames out at AAA and the high-upside pick who does it at AA.
39: I think they want to move Mauer for his health, not really because they dont have a stud 3B prospect. This what I hear from Twins fans.
I would be ok with the low risk, low reward draft strategy if it was producing something besides injured pitchers.
52: Wow. McAnulty, a guy with no real defense who never really showed anything at the ML level, and Hensley and his injured shoulder thought they were owed a major league gig?
Not sure why Catcher would be a problem since Bard was the 7th most valuable C in all of baseball last year.
People don’t appreciate what he does well, very well actually. He gets on base, I know that’s a foreign concept on this team and most people in San Diego would probably think paying Ivan Rodriguez 10M next year would be a good idea……but they need more players like Bard, not less.
re Hensley, Robles and McAnulty….that doesn’t even make sense….all of those guys were hurt for significant portions of the year and would have been rehabbing in Arizona, not Portland.
Seems like someone is making up stories about specific guys instead of saying that the team in general sucked and was disfunctional.
Where did you see those specific names?
57: The direct relationship between risk and reward isn’t exactly a groundbreaking theory. You misinterpret less risk with no risk. Once again, I don’t think you’re ever going to hear someone explain to you that a AAA bust is more valuable than a AA bust. The point is that a high reward player is more at risk to bust. A low reward player is less likely to bust. The minor league level of the bust is irrelevant. I don’t think this theory is really up for debate. The issue is whether you believe the Padres’ strategy is the appropriate blend of risk and reward, and the quality of the picks within the strategy.
59: And thus not so low risk. Jeff Allison’s addiction or a college pitcher with a borrowed ligament in his throwing arm, neither one of them are doing you any good.
That was just the rumor making the rounds. I do not vouch for its accuracy. If I was PMac, I’d be a little aggravated that the Padres hadn’t found a way to use me after I’d hit .300 in the minors for what seems like 20 years.
59: Agreed, the question is whether those were bad picks within the low risk/low reward strategy or the Padres just getting burned by bad luck and small sample size. My faith in the FO leads me to the latter, despite the benefit of hindsight, but that’s just faith, no expert opinion
61: No, all those guys were first sent to Portland.
McAnulty got 233 at-bats in 63 games, about half a season, in Portland.
Hensley pitched 13 games for Portland, again about half a minor league season’s worth of starts.
Robles talked about going to Mexico when he was sent down. He didn’t, but he did spend 28 games with Portland.
55.
The way I see it Jake’s value is at it’s highest now. Any team that trades for him will have 2 years of service at really below market cost for 2 seasons. If we hang on to him we risk him getting hurt or actually going on and winning another CY Young. If he gets hurt then we have to reluctantly pick up an $11mil. option and hope he bounces back in 2009. If he wins another CY or has another great year his FA price goes through the roof and teams will not give up as much for what is most likely a 1 year rental.
Who knows what the front office is thinking but with the holes we have we could potentially get some really premier young talent in return for a player like Peavy. Especially when we know he will not be signed by the Padres for what he will get on the open market.
62: Are you defining bust as failure to reach his projected ceiling? Because taking a kid with a low 80s fastball and no curve who’s willing to sign for $100, then watching him get destroyed in rookie league, would seem to qualify as “not a bust” because he did exactly what you would expect him to do. But the pick itself is a bust because it failed to generate any value for the club.
64: Rany J. looked at draft outcomes in detail and found virtually no difference between college and high school pitchers in the value they provide. Yet we continue to act as if college pitchers are far less likely to flame out. That suggests we’re acting on skewed data.
The last 3 drafts they’ve had the opportunity to take approximately 150 players. They’ve reached for less than 10, and signed….what, Peter, 3? Latos, Miller, Breit? I could easily be forgetting a few, but they had 100+ other picks to “stock the system.”
re 65: Maybe we’re talking about 2 different things, but how can 3 guys who weren’t even in Portland for more then half the year each be responsible for ruining the team?
Additionally, why would the Padres call up Robles and Hensley late in the season when they clearly had other options at least as effective(at least in Robles case) if they had causing that much trouble?
I’ll ask again, where did the names come from? Friend? Co-Worker? Newspaper article?
Re: Santana
I too see the Padres in 4th next year whether LA gets Santana or not. I just can’t imagine that KT can pull enough rabbits out of his hat to do much better than that, certainly not enough to make a run at the division – though I’d love to be wrong.
So, thinking that a window has closed on us, I’d just as soon LA make a deal that helps them in 2008, at a cost farther down the road. I just hope that the Twins strike a hard bargain for as many good Logan White prospects as they can.
Factor in the uncertainty that always comes with pitchers, I’m okay with it even more.
66: What the Padres will get for Peavy may not be equal value anyway since teams know that the Padres will not sign Peavy to such high contract. No sense trading him (getting rid of an ace) for a couple of players to fill holes in the lineup.
We don’t know what the FO will do with Peavy, nor do we know that Peavy will leave as a FA for sure.
70: I meant that other teams suspect the Padres won’t sign Peavy to a long term high dollar contract.
66.
You say we risk him actually winning another Cy Young like it’s a bad thing. If he wins another CYA next year, then chances are extremely likely that the Pads are in contention yet again. In fact, I’d say it’s almost a given. I see no problem with being worried about a future that you are clouldy on, but not when you have a true shot in the present. I would mortgage the future anyday for a sure(r) thing now. And the chances of a pennant in the next two years decrease dramaticly with no Jake.
After all, with this payroll and club history, how often do the Padres actually have a playoff window. We’re not the Pirates, but we are sure not the Braves with a years after years run either.
68:
Pmac was sent down in mid-April. He was back and forth, then sent down to Arizona in late July.
Robles was sent down at the end of March, recalled late April, sent down again early June.
Hensley went on the DL in early May, was sent to Portland for rehab mid-May, was optioned to Portland June 1.
There was plenty of overlapping time, and the Portland team as a whole wasn’t doing well. I don’t believe I said they ruined the team, just that they significantly contributed to the crappy attitude. How do you go from “were pissed about being sent down and made this feeling known” to “ruining the team?”
I expect they called them up because they wanted to win more than they wanted to play Big Dad. They weren’t even sure Robles was going to be healthy in time, one reason they called him up was to use him as a DL placemarker for KRod-ish promotions, if needed.
Source: Somebody associated with the Portland team.
71.
Teams know that they can get the best pitcher in the National league for less thatn $18mil over the next 2 years they don’t care about knowing if the Padres are going to sign him or not. Nobody expects the Twins to sign Santana back but that won’t effect their trade options.
I really expect the Padres to take a step back for a year or 2 so if we got a good bounty back I would be okay with it. It all depends on what the Padres could pry away from someone. If we could a top outfield or pitching prospect back you would have to seriously consider it.
67: No, I should have been more clear, I mean someone that doesn’t contribute to the ML team.
All I’m saying is that when you have no real farm system to speak of, I think it makes sense to employ a low risk/low reward strategy. When that system is well-populated, it makes sense to increase your level of risk. The past few drafts have led me to believe they may be employing such a strategy and this is the year they increase the risk. They very well may not be following this strategy, or perhaps they should have adjusted the risk/reward of past drafts.
Carrillo and Schmidt also present a separate issue. Is that the Padres bad luck and small sample size, low risk doesn’t mean no risk, and their careers are far from over. Or are they doing a poor job assessing the risk/reward of players they draft?
75: And I use the terms “low” and “high” in a relative sense with regards to risk and reward
75: Counterpoising what the Padres said about the draft beforehand, and what they actually did, leads me to believe they’re locked into the low-risk, low-reward strategy for good. They’ll take the occasional flyer, but that’s what it will be, a flyer, an outlier. And if the risky picks want more than slot and we refuse to pay it, it’s just like not taking them.
72.
If the Padres are in contention next year great. Do I expect them to be? No! I guess you put more faith in the 2008 team then I do. I think right now things are very questionable for next year. If they go out and pay for some FA talent or trade some prospects for help it might turn around but since that neither one of those options is really the FO style I remain skeptical about next season.
Peavy winning a CY doesn’t cement that we go to the playoffs by any stretch it doesn’t cement contention. It would help for sure though.
Re: 66 I agree with your Logic but trading away peavy for prospects means that the Padres are pretty much throwing in the towel for next year.
Re: 71 It wont matter if teams know the Pads won’t re-sign him, teams will be competing against each other to get him, ie what happens to top players at the trade deadline.
77: I’m afraid you may be right
79.
A lot of fans will see it that way (if that happens) but it’s really easy to look over at Colorado and Arizona and see the sucess they are having as we speak with kids they developed or traded for. It’s obvious to me that we need to get younger if we want to compete with those guys. They will be good for a long time I’m afraid.
78, 79: Yeah, if moving Peavy for prospects is the main move of the winter, then the 2008 season is the longest of shots. At that point, don’t call ANY valuable prospect up until September, because you’re only starting their service time clock early.
I can see ways it would work, as long as there are other moves…..we trade Peavy for a very high-upside AAA pitcher, a solid #4, and some eye candy hitting prospect. The two pitchers work out, the prospect fails. Chris Young stays healthy all year, Maddux has another good year, and Tomko has the best season of his life in the 5th spot. Kouz builds, Antonelli and Headley contribute, and oh yeah, one of the other moves was signing Andruw Jones, who bounces back big. That team could take the NL West. No dominant starting pitching, but good from top to bottom. Still, the odds of those things happening…..not so good.
74, 79: I forgot about that fact. It’s not that teams are competing with the Padres but that they will compete against one another to get Peavy from the Padres. Seems like a good situation for the Padres.
I still don’t like the idea of trading Peavy, though. I’m with Steve C in this one, trading him = less chance of success next year.
81: Colorado has a good young team, but (and I don’t want to sound bitter at all) they also got incredibly lucky at the end. Any winning streak of more than 8 games, you’ve got Lady Luck on your side. They lose one more in that span and we’re talking about how they came up just short. Bradley doesn’t get hurt and we probably don’t just compete with them, we beat them by a few games and maybe take the division.
The NL West is a much tougher place to compete than it was, but we can still do it without full-blown rebuilding. That’s why the draft worries me so much. It’s going to be extra-hard in this division to win with a 70M payroll and drafting mostly college players who will sign for slot.
78.
While it would not make it a lock, typically MVP and CYA winners only come from teams in contention. There are exceptions (Ernie Banks and ARod with Texas for example), but it is usually the norm.
As for how much faith I have? With how Petco plays and considering games in Coors as well, I happen to feel that everything is going to depend on what they do in CF, and to a lesser degree, 2B. A great defense up the middle can cover for a whole lot, especially when it is the primary focus of your team.
Having any faith at all is a tough call for me now though. Every single one of my teams lost last weekend (Pads, Rams, Oregon) and, as a Trailblazer fan, I’m still dealing with Oden’s injury.
84.
I agree with you that Co got lucky to be where they are but their long term over look at this point looks much better than ours do you agree?
I just think that almost every good team around sucked for a while before they were good. It’s almost the norm. I want to win a World Series more than anything and unless the FO is going to go out and purchase us the best players available then we need to build a little for our future. I guess the real thing I wish was that this FO was in place before PETCO. We have already been through this and because of poor planning or managment or drafting or payroll or every thing top to bottom we are facing it again.
OT: I’m working on the player section for next year’s book, and I’d like some feedback. Does anyone have time to look at Adrian’s entry and give comments? There’s no great sense of urgency on this, I just want to make sure the presentation is reasonably clear. Drop me a line if interested…
If they move Peavy for prospects this winter(I think there is a better chance of San Diego being struck by earthquake and becoming a small island floating off the coast of Santee) then I cancel my season tickets.
I’m sure I wouldn’t be the only one to have that reaction. Yeah having 6 years of Phil Hughes, 6 years of Joba Chamberlain and 4 years of Milky Cabrera would be nice and all, but Peavy is a heck of a lot more valuable over the next 2 while he is signed.
85: I absolutely agree that CF is the key to next year and beyond. If we somehow obtain a top tier CF we can get by with a replacement level 2B and Hairston/Bradley in LF. If there was ever a time to roll the dice and overspend on a free agent, this is it. At the very least we need great defense out there, and I mean Gold Glove quality.
Re: 81 I agree that trading Peavy for prospects is a good idea I just think they should do it after the 08 season. I know its a risk that he could get hurt but I think it would be worth it.
Also who knows what could happen over the offseason, Moores could decide to expand the budget for this year because the Pads are going to re-build and go on the cheap for 09 and 10. The could offer jones a 1 year 18 mil contract and trade for Dunn and compete for the division again.
Re: 90 who would you want to overspend on? none of the guys out there really excite me except for jones who is coming off a down year.
85: Non-baseball….is Oden the oldest-looking 19 year old in history? He’s got the face of a guy getting ready to retire from the NBA. Maybe his knees look the same.
89: It would bother me a lot, too, but I have no season tickets to cancel. Most DSers seem to agree with the front office on their needs – the back of the rotation, a true CF who provides some offense, no black hole at 2b. Those do not seem like insurmountable goals. If they gave up before even trying to get another great year out of Peavy, it would be very disappointing.
Just for S&Gs, if they got Igawa out of NY, signed Tomko, signed Prior for insurance/depth, and used Antonelli at 2nd, with some combination of Hairston/Headley/Kouzmanoff/Giles/Bradley on the corners (depending on injuries), the budget would seem to have room for a real CF, ranging from Cameron/Rowand to a one-year deal for Jones.
OT … it ain’t just the Padres … check out what the Indians just did, down 1-0 to the Yanks …
- G. Sizemore tripled to right
- A. Cabrera grounded out to pitcher
- T. Hafner struck out swinging
- V. Martinez struck out swinging
… yuck …
anyone watching the Indians vs Yankees?
Ive never seen that many bugs in my life
The amount of insects in the game is insane.
I’d probably cancel my season tickets as well if the traded Peavy. I wouldn’t be super upset or anything, but I wouldn’t like the fact of paying all that cash for a season where the team wont even compete.
Unrelated, anyone going to check out the Az Fall League? I’m kinda interested in seeing team China.
95: Steve C, Kind of gives new meaning to a “fly” ball.
For the second time in today’s comments, I’ll say how much I despise the idea of letting Jake go. I think he is exactly the kind of guy we should loosen the purse strings for… this team has been lucky in a sense. With Tony and Trevor, we have gotten two high quality “face of the franchise” guys in a row. From both a baseball and a business POV, I see Jake as a good risk. He could be the Padres marquee player for years to come. The only real problem with that is he’s a starting pitcher. That means he only plays one out of five days.
I would resign Jake and I would stretch the budget to do so. From a purely business standpoint, I think the reward outweighs the risk.
Also, I like Rowand for center field. I think he is the kind of player San Diego would embrace and would show good return on investment. Like Eric Owens but with more talent.
I love Cameron, but feel he is on the decline.
OT: I just did a software upgrade. If you notice anything broken, please let me know.
#99: Okay, looks like there was a problem with the comment preview function, so I installed a different plugin that does the same thing a slightly different way.