Operation Center Field: Home, Home on the Range
Tue, Nov 6, 2007
by Geoff Young
When last we examined the center field situation, we formulated a series of questions to consider before moving forward. Now we’ll look at the first of these: What do the Padres need in a center fielder? Today we’ll cover the defensive side of the equation; tomorrow we’ll hit the offense. I think you see my priority for the position already.
Why Defense First?
Greg Maddux has agreed to a 1-year, $10 million contract with the Padres. MB offers analysis of the deal, while I’ll just say, “Woo-hoo!”
We’ve now had four years to watch the Padres play at Petco Park. We saw Jay Payton do an adequate job patrolling center in 2004, Dave Roberts struggle mightily in 2005, and Mike Cameron play it beautifully (except for the first 5-6 weeks of 2007) these past two years. With 81 games at Petco, and 9 more each at the challenging Coors Field and PhoneCo, the Padres ideally should have a center fielder who can cover a lot of ground, and preferably someone who is durable.
The defensive metrics currently available make my head spin. Not only are they sometimes confusing, but often they are contradictory as well. None of this, of course, is a valid reason for ignoring the available data. With that in mind, here are the top big-league center fielders of 2007 according to various metrics, with a few other names thrown in for good measure:
Revised Zone Rating
The Hardball Times’ revised zone rating (RZR) is “the proportion of balls hit into a fielder’s zone that he successfully converted into an out.” There were 17 qualifying center fielders in 2007; here are a few of interest:
- Andruw Jones .921
- Curtis Granderson .921
- Carlos Beltran .915
- Melky Cabrera .910
- David DeJesus .910
- Coco Crisp .909
- Mike Cameron .894
- Torii Hunter .891
- Aaron Rowand .861
Out of Zone
Out of zone (OOZ) represents “the total number of outs made by a fielder on balls hit outside of his zone.” This is a counting stat, not a rate stat:
- Ichiro Suzuki 97
- Curtis Granderson 85
- Andruw Jones 80
- Aaron Rowand 69
- Chris Young 66
- Coco Crisp 58
- Mike Cameron 53
- Torii Hunter 47
- David DeJesus 46
Ultimate Zone Rating
Ultimate zone rating (UZR) was devised a while back by Mitchel Lichtman. It’s a bit complicated — read the full explanation if you’re so inclined.
Complete rankings are unavailable for 2007, but Tango et al. at The Book have provided the top and bottom three from each league by position. Here are key center fielders:
- Grady Sizemore +26
- Curtis Granderson +18
- Aaron Rowand +14
- David DeJesus/Coco Crisp +13
- Calros Beltran +8
- Mike Cameron +7
- Gary Matthews Jr. -8
- Dave Roberts -26 (shock)
Range Factor
The original. Range factor (RF) is (assists + putouts)/game. ESPN lists 18 qualifiers at center field for 2007. Again, we examine the usual suspects:
- Coco Crisp 3.07
- Curtis Granderson 3.04
- Melky Cabrera 3.02
- Nook Logan 2.98
- Ichiro Suzuki/Gary Matthews Jr. 2.90
- David DeJesus 2.70
- Torii Hunter 2.68
- Andruw Jones 2.67
- Aaron Rowand 2.64
- Mike Cameron 2.52
Scouting Report, By the Fans, For the Fans
This isn’t a defensive metric; this is based on visual observation and might help provide a counterpoint to all the other madness. From Tango’s 2007 report for center fielders (n = 52):
- Ichiro Suzuki
- Carlos Beltran
- Felix Pie
- Andruw Jones
- Torii Hunter
- Mike Cameron
- Curtis Granderson
- Coco Crisp
- Aaron Rowand
- David DeJesus
- Dave Roberts
- Juan Pierre
Okay, So What?
First off, we’re looking at only one year of data. You could repeat this exercise for previous seasons and really make a mess of things, er, I mean, gather more evidence, but we’ll stick with ‘07 numbers for now. They’re the most recent available, and I doubt that additional data points would help enough to offset the cost of looking for them.
Second, I’m not satisfied with any of these metrics. That said, we can’t just bury our heads in the proverbial sand. It is my belief (hope?) that by attacking the question from multiple angles, using different tools that make an honest attempt to measure what we’re looking for, we’ll see some patterns.
Those bulky caveats out of the way, here are a few observations I’m comfortable making:
- I don’t see evidence that Andruw Jones has slipped defensively. Although he isn’t universally regarded by available metrics as an elite defender, there’s nothing here that should be cause for alarm. His numbers were roughly the same in 2006 and 2007, both of which marked improvements over 2005. I’m not dismissing claims of a decline out of hand, just saying that if it’s happening, he’s doing an excellent job of disguising it.
- Curtis Granderson can play center field. Also, he’s young and he can hit. This isn’t the first time I’ve wished we were the Tigers.
- For all his other failings, Coco Crisp did good work in the field in ‘07. Depending on which metric you use, his performance fell somewhere between above average and great. The downside is that this is out of line with his previous defensive numbers. Did he improve because he stayed healthy most of the year? Did he come into his own at age 27? Was it a fluke? We don’t know. We just know he played a good center field this year.
- Torii Hunter’s reputation probably exceeds his ability at this point, and he ain’t getting younger. Fine ballplayer, but for the money he’s likely to command, he should be at the head of the class as a defender. He isn’t.
- Aaron Rowand is all over the map. Look at his numbers to understand why I hate defensive metrics.
I could keep going, but you get the idea. Tomorrow we’ll deal with the offensive side of the equation.
Winter Leagues
- Saguaros 4, Surprise 1 (box | recap). Nick Hundley batted fifth and DH’d; he went 0-for-3 with two strikeouts and a sac fly. Will Venable started in right field, singling twice and doubling in four trips to the plate out of the #6 hole.
Dominican scores weren’t available as of this writing. No games were scheduled in Mexico or Venezuela.
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.
November 6, 2007 at 7:10 am
The one thing I keep wondering about is how much of the RZR and OOZ are affected by the coaching…Was Ichiro better at OOZ because his bench coach positioned him better? Is some of the discussion about Andruw’s decline in the OF covered up by good direction from the bench?
November 6, 2007 at 7:51 am
I’ve read in 2 different places now that the Pad’s have interest in Kaz Matsui and that the rocks are not planning on using him.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/
November 6, 2007 at 7:52 am
Sorry, that last post should have had this as the other link
http://www.denverpost.com/rockies/ci_7379873
November 6, 2007 at 7:55 am
Hot off the press from MLBTR, Jose Giullen exposed for buying $20k worth of HGH from 2002 to 2005.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/
November 6, 2007 at 8:49 am
The interest in Matsui makes sense. KT reportedly liked him when he was first coming over from Japan and at about 3M he doesn’t affect the budget at all.
I hope they do realize that he’s probably a .700OPS guy away from Coors, which is about what I would expect out of Antonelli this year. Is delaying Antonelli’s arbitration/FA one year worth 3M….probably but I hope they don’t view Matsui as much of an upgrade over what we watched last year….he does have some more potential though just because his defense should be much better then Blum’s.
Glad Maddux got done so quickly, finding 2 pitchers is going to be hard enough in this market, having to find 3 would be a disaster.
November 6, 2007 at 9:01 am
5.
If anything at least Matsui wouldn’t cost a ton, he knows the NL West and he is a better and more athletic back-up SS than Blum is. He doesn’t excite me a ton but unless Antonelli lights up spring training I expect he starts the season in Portland and Matsui if he actually can hit outside of Coors could have a good year in Petco. If he can hit the gaps, with his speed he might be a doubles and triples machine. I don’t know he excites me more than most of the other alternatives we have heard.
November 6, 2007 at 9:08 am
I think it’s funny to see what Cub fans have to say about a FG fo Pie trade.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/.....l#comments
Personally I think if KG played half his games in Wrigley (with all those day games and you know Khalil loves day games) he would hit over 40 bombs.
November 6, 2007 at 9:24 am
Off the cuff, it seems to me that the newer defensive metrics indicate defensive performance is variable year-to-year, somewhat like BA is. I haven’t looked closely into this; it is just a general impression picked up from reviewing the numbers at various times so I could be mistaken.
I’m glad it’s being taken up as a statistical study, but it’s really in its infancy right now and will take time to develop. For example, I don’t know if any of them have the ability right now to take into account where a player is positioned when the ball is put into play, which as CM pointed out is significant when it comes to documenting performance and comparing performance between players.
Still, it will be a lot of fun and very interesting over the next 5, 10 (20?) years to see how things develop. Hopefully something solid, verfiable and legitimate will become available in the public domain as time passes. UZR disappeared for a while when MGL went to work for the Cards, which is why I say “available in the public domain.”
November 6, 2007 at 9:34 am
#8: The assumption that, unlike other skills, defensive ability remains static has always bothered me. As you say, this stuff is in its infancy. It seems like progress is being made, but it’s going to take a while. In addition to positioning, other factors that will need to be addressed include park effects, impact of different types of pitchers, and probably more that haven’t been thought of yet.
November 6, 2007 at 9:39 am
Count me in on the DeJesus front although the dropoff in power and poor base stealing is somewhat disconcerting.
It looks like the Royals do have some OF prospects who are ready, but I don’t know if they play CF. Butler DH’ed for them last year, but looks like he’s being moved toward a DH/corner IF so he probably does not. Lubanski should be ready soon and is an OF. Maier is old and has never played CF; too bad. Huber rakes, but is definitely not a CF. These are just the guys listed as OF and as Top 10 prospects by BA.
Maybe the Royals would be willing to let Lubanski play CF and develop at the ML level if we can give them something they need in exchange for Dejesus? Any of the more Minor League savvy posters know if Lubanski plays CF?
November 6, 2007 at 9:41 am
9: Most definitely. Regarding park, for example, there is always controversy over Manny’s D and how much The Green Monster impacts his numbers in the modern metrics like UZR.
November 6, 2007 at 9:50 am
10: The replacement for DeJesus in CF would be Joey Gathright.
November 6, 2007 at 10:03 am
Love the fielding discussion, Geoff. How about translating each stat into runs, so they could be compared to each other and to offense?
November 6, 2007 at 10:43 am
Have not heard anyone talk about Carl Crawford of the Devil Rays as an option…his combination of speed, power, and defense should play here. He also may cost a pretty penny…Probably start with Bell, Headley, and Venable…in the end even more than that, especially since the Rays could use some ML ready pitching.
November 6, 2007 at 10:45 am
Gee, Geoff, thanks for all the links/support. When I started my blog I never thought the best Padre blogger would even give a crap about it, but you’ve been just the opposite. Along with being a great writer/analyst, I can see why you’re so good at this …
Okay, enough of that … well, a little more … great post, as usual!
John Dewan released his +/- leaders for 07: http://www.fieldingbible.com/ … click on plus/minus then 07 leaders. Some notables:
Beltran: +25
Jones: +24
Crisp: +22
Granderson: +21
Ichiro: +4
Roberts: -19
Also, Dave Pinto’s releasing his PMR soon I think and SAFE may be the best overall method (once some adjustments are ironed out)but it’s not updated. Google “SAFE fielding” for that.
Regarding positioning, some analysts I’ve read think it’s important while others think it’s not so much. Of course none of the methods have any way of adjusting for positioning (that I know of). If positioning is a player skill then I don’t think it’s as important to know because it’s just like speed/route running. If it’s more reliant on coaching than it could certainly be an issue. In the end, the goal is to catch the ball, and positioning is one of the factor’s involved in doing that. I guess we need to know ow much of positioning is based on players and how much on coaching.
I agree that one year fielding stats are pretty unreliable and that you should probably take 3+ years to get the best estimate.
Also, one other thing to consider is the difference between data sources (baseball info solutions and STATS). For the most part, they’re pretty similar, but there are definitely some real differences there, too. (UZR is stats; Dewan/RZR are BIS).
November 6, 2007 at 10:50 am
14: I don’t see that package coming close, no offense. Crawford’s a very good-to-great player with a reasonable contract. Longoria is a better 3b prospect than Headley, Bell’s still just a reliever, and Venable probably wouldn’t crack their top 20 farmhands.
November 6, 2007 at 10:53 am
14.
IMO we don’t have nearly enough to get Crawford. They don’t want Headley when they have Longoria and Iwamura. I think it would probably take a top pitching prospect or two to get him and those we do not have unless people around the league are interested in Latos at this stage in his development (I think he is still a good year away from becoming a legit top end prospect). I do think something could probably be worked out for Baldelli but my own personal dream is maybe they could some way pry BJ Upton away. I think he is going to be a really good Center Fielder once he gets a little more time. He is a right handed stick with pop and it would be fun to watch him and his brother go at it against each other in the future. Then again I think the same applies to him as with Crawford, we just don’t match up well with the Rays.
November 6, 2007 at 10:54 am
15: I don’t know much about the underlying principles of the advanced metrics, but it seems reasonable that positioning is accounted for by the various zone concepts. It doesn’t seem likely that any of these systems would fault a CF for not catching a 200 foot bullet to dead-center when his coaches had swung him around to left center. His zone would probably be X feet around his starting point when the pitch was delivered or the batter made contact.
If your team is good at positioning, you might get a lot more in-zone plays and relatively fewer out of the zone, even for great defenders.
November 6, 2007 at 10:58 am
17: Yeah, the Rays have prospects coming out their ears, position and pitching both. We’re not going to get Crawford for anything we can afford to give up.
We’ve mentioned Baldelli before. Big risk, but possibly big reward.
November 6, 2007 at 11:00 am
Tom/18, I don’t believe that any of the metrics take into account where the fielder started. So if he’s swung around to left center, and there’s a ball hit to a spot in center where he would usually be standing, it wouldn’t know that he didn’t start there. Therefore, what should be an automatic out will possibly turn into a hit not because of actual fielding, but because of positioning (the fielders numbers will take a pretty big hit because he “should” have made tha play).
What I am saying is that the zones are determined regardless of where the player is positioned to start that specific play. At least that is my understanding.
November 6, 2007 at 11:06 am
TW…that is why I said “starting with”…I would be stoked if we landed Baldeli and would do back flips if we could land Crawford.
Re: 20…I think that is the inherant problem with defensive metrics…a lot of teams change positioning with every pitch, every batter, and every situation…others, not so much. That could be a HUGE zone rating problem.
I have cited KG’s zone rating in the past as a weakness…(*I have also admitted that this year was his best defensive year) but that may have more to do with Bochy and his staff poorly positioning him and Bud Black doing a better job. Just a thought.
November 6, 2007 at 11:09 am
21: I just don’t see anyone in that package having much value to the Rays. We can’t just throw players at them, especially players like Headley who they can’t do anything with. Bell’s the only guy who would actually register, the others might as well be John Does.
Unless we’re giving up Peavy or Young, we’re not getting Crawford. We could empty the minor league system at the Rays and they’d pass.
November 6, 2007 at 11:11 am
22: Would involving CY in any trade be completely out of the question?
November 6, 2007 at 11:13 am
21: Yea, I think the analysts are doing about the best job possible with that data available, but that data probably isn’t as good as you’d like (nothing against those companies … they do a great job it seems). I know that people like Tango have advocated for “hang time” to be tracked, which makes a lot of sense.
Also, it should be noted that the +/- numbers that I posted are in plays not runs. I believe to get that to runs for outfielders, you multiply it by something like .7.
November 6, 2007 at 11:37 am
Re: 23 no but the team that gets him would really have to over pay for him. Would you guys go Young for Crawford straight up?
November 6, 2007 at 11:38 am
20: You’re right, at least for RZR. I emailed Dave Studeman and he responded with….
“In Revised Zone Rating, the zone is predetermined, based on all areas of the field in which fielders have turned at least 50% of batted balls into outs. I believe the 50% threshold is based on the previous year’s stats.”
Maybe it’s like fluke base hits, a small enough sample that it comes out in the wash, but that could help explain some (not all) of the yearly variations.
November 6, 2007 at 11:40 am
22, 25: I don’t think I’d do it for Crawford, but I’d use CY in a deal to get Santana or Cabrera. Crawford seems to have settled in at the Very Good level. Santana and Cabrera are Great players.
November 6, 2007 at 11:50 am
25.
I probably would trade the 2 straight up but I would be scared as hell to go into the season with Mad Dog as me #2. We would have to probably have another deal ready to go for a #2 type.
November 6, 2007 at 11:55 am
So, what does everyone think about that Khalil guy anyway?
Just surfed over to DS and thought, man what could inspire 134 posts on a Monday in November? Then figured - must be the Maddux signing. Nope, it’s yet another religous debate about whether God is one or three…er, whether Khalil is a good SS or not.
November 6, 2007 at 11:59 am
Geez, if Gathright is your replacement, I don’t see how you trade DeJesus.
On a more serious note, I’m still curious about Lubanski’s OF position. Anyone?
November 6, 2007 at 12:06 pm
#13: Ugh, that sounds like actual work.
#15: Thanks for not sucking.
#30: Lubanski played LF exclusively in ‘07:
http://minors.baseball-referen.....i?pid=8596
Bear in mind that most of his gaudy offensive numbers have come at High Desert and Wichita; I haven’t looked it up for this year, but traditionally those have been two of the most favorable hitting environments in baseball.
November 6, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Here is some old old old stuff on Lubanski from his draft year 2003.
http://www.baseballamerica.com.....i0304.html
November 6, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Weird thought of the day…Could Hank Blalock play 2B?
Anyone have any thoughts on Cameron Maybin for CF? He is young…very young…but has seen time in Detroit and might be able to be had.
November 6, 2007 at 12:15 pm
UZR translates fielding performance into runs per 150 games, at least on the 2003 to 2007 spreadsheet I have. It has DeJesus at 11 RP 150G in CF (it’s only a partial 2007 season) over 319 games from 2003 to 2007.
For the following CF over the same period:
A. Jones 0
T. Hunter 11
A. Rowand 16
C. Crisp -1
M. Cameron 13
The sample size, of course, varies for each guy in terms of the total number of games played in CF during the 2003 to 2007 time period, but they all look pretty even, factoring in Jones’s superior offensive production (last year being the exception), except for Crisp who is subpar both offensively and defensively.
An interesting note is that Crisp at 13 in 2007 was -13 in 2006, both seasons in Boston as the home park, and in 2003 he was 1 and in 2004 he was 7 while in Cleveland. An example of what I was talking about with regards to performance in these metrics changing from year-to-year.
November 6, 2007 at 12:17 pm
#33: Maybin is a sick, sick talent. We have a better chance of landing Crawford (which I don’t see happening either).
November 6, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Thanks GY and KRS1 for the Lubanski insight.
And, Geoff, I’ve got you covered on converting those metrics to runs, at least for UZR.
November 6, 2007 at 12:32 pm
33.
There is next to ZERO chance Maybin could be had. Let alone from a team with no superstar prospects.
November 6, 2007 at 1:00 pm
There was a time when I would have loved to have Hank Blalock in a Padre uniform and it makes sense on a couple of levels:
-the guy would love to be back in San Diego(no he’s not wearing a Padres shirt under his uniform like Cole is, but heck every family member the guy has lives in either RB or Poway….side note his parents lost their house in the fire)
-The Rangers thought he might be able to play 2B in the past
-Had shoulder surgery so the shorter throw might be better
The organization might feel there are more negatives though:
-Have you seen the guy lately? He hardly looks like a middle infielder any more
-Hasn’t really hit outside of Arlington ever(.853OPS Home, .669 road over the past 3 seasons)
-LH hitters who hit a ton of fly balls haven’t seemed to like Petco much
By the way, it is a creative solution, but it does block Antonelli which means it isn’t happening.
November 6, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Re yesterday’s discussion: I’ve been out of town the last week on business. Nothing cures homesickness like logging into DS and seeing the weekly KG debate. It’s makes it almost seem like home.
November 6, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Maddux wins another GG. http://mlb.mlb.com/news/articl.....p;c_id=mlb
I have no problem with Russel Martin winning his first. Derek Lee at 1B seems dubious to me. As does Rollins at SS. That should have gone to Vizquel, Tulo, or even Khalil. No way should that have gone to Rollins.
Any thoughts?
November 6, 2007 at 2:01 pm
30: I’m not a big Gathright believer, but I could see where KC wants to use him. He’s a 25 year old speedster with a career 402 OBP in the minors, possibly a Willie Wilson type player with a better batting eye. And DeJesus isn’t going to be the difference between KC (now) and KC (respectable).
November 6, 2007 at 2:02 pm
40.
You know what I didn’t watch enough games of the other guys to really be able to vote but this seems like another popularity contest to me. It could be worse though, I mean at least Eric Byrnes didn’t get one.
November 6, 2007 at 2:09 pm
#42: Or Rafael Palmeiro.
November 6, 2007 at 2:09 pm
40, 42: A lot of Gold Glove votes are based on the batting line and the reputation. Once you win one it can be like tenure.
November 6, 2007 at 2:16 pm
42, 44: I totally understand that it’s a popularity contest, I just think it’s crap is all. I know the Fielding Bible awards are supposed to be more defensive-minded, but I even felt that a lot of those were based on popularity when I looked at them this year.
November 6, 2007 at 3:20 pm
40: I think Yadier Molina should have won in the NL. He’s both the best at nailing runners and preventing them from running (because he’s so good at throwing them out). I don’t think Martin’s a terrible pick, but I think Molina should have clearly won.
I don’t understand why people can’t separate hitting from fielding when they vote on this stuff (although I’m sure that they don’t all the time … like Jeter winning all those ones in the AL).
November 6, 2007 at 3:59 pm
41: I agree with Tom that there is a bit of upside to Gathright that KC might want to try and tap. I don’t know that DeJesus is the perfect answer for the Padres, although it is encouraging that his OBP barely declined in a year when his batting average was way off. I think that I’d prefer Willits to DeJesus–but I could be swayed.
19: What do you all reckon that it would take to get Baldelli at this point. He’s still a huge talent with a relatively affordable long-term contract. Would LeBlanc and a minor prospect get it done (i.e. are they just done with him?)? Would it take someone from the ML bullpen? I think he’s interesting, but I do worry about he and Jenga healthwise. Will Carrol always says that health is a skill and some players just don’t have it. Baldelli and Bradley are exhibits A and B.
November 6, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Here’s what Tom Krasovic (UT) has to say about what KT might be thinkin’ going into the GM meetings …
http://www.signonsandiego.com/.....adres.html
November 6, 2007 at 4:06 pm
48 … the first thing in that article that caught my eye was this …
When trade-averse GM Bill Stoneman left the Angels last month, it increased the chances Towers will barter with the Angels for outfielders such as Reggie Willits and Nathan Haynes. Willits has almost no power, but he had a .391 on-base percentage last year. The strong relationship between Padres manager Bud Black and Angels manager Mike Scioscia increases the chances the two franchises could strike a deal.
November 6, 2007 at 4:10 pm
48 … and I’m surprised that he didn’t mention Fukodome … I sent him an email to see why not …
November 6, 2007 at 4:12 pm
48 … oops, sorry … just realized this article is from Nov 4 … so it’s “old news” that I’m just catching up on …
November 6, 2007 at 4:15 pm
48 … one more thought from this article … here’s one of the more astounding things I’ve ever read …
Geoff Blum, the Padres’ regular second baseman over the final two months, is a free agent whose market value may align him with the Dodgers, leaving the Padres with less-expensive utility men such as Oscar Robles and Luis Rodriguez.
… really??? Geoff Blum “too expensive”??? And so expensive that he’d go to the Dodgers???? Be still, my heart!!!!
November 6, 2007 at 4:31 pm
47: I like Willits, too. Not sure I buy that the relationship between Black and Sciosia means anything when it comes to the GMs, but anything that helps.
Here’s a name for a second base stopgap: Brooks Conrad. Maybe somebody already mentioned him. Obviously not ideal, but there’s some chance he’d be as good as the Iguchi / Matsui free agent types for a lot less money. Money which could then be spent on starting pitching or an OF.
http://www.thebaseballcube.com.....nrad.shtml
November 6, 2007 at 4:43 pm
Dont worry about stop gaps at second. Matt Antonelli will be just fine
November 6, 2007 at 4:51 pm
54: I’m a professional worrier.
How close is Boston to Peabody?
November 6, 2007 at 4:59 pm
53: I’m also doubtful about the relationship factor…just something to write about is my guess.
Matsui doesn’t upset me. I do appreciate that he’s a backup SS as well. I do remember Towers being in on him when he was posted. He wouldn’t be a terrible one-year option–but I doubt that he’s taking a one-year deal. That .220/.304/.333 line away from home might scare people away though…maybe it scares me away
November 6, 2007 at 5:05 pm
56: Someone else mentioned this when Eckstein was brought up for 2b….it’s nice to have a built-in backup SS. Both Eckstein and Matsui fit that.
November 6, 2007 at 5:13 pm
20 minutes north
November 6, 2007 at 5:17 pm
58: Ah hah. I sense a connection. Or perhaps just a rooting interest. Don’t get me wrong, I loves me some Antonelli, but I wouldn’t mind him getting some more experience at second. Might be better for the team and him, keep him from getting plowed on a DP.
November 6, 2007 at 5:20 pm
tell you the truth Im Matts dad I understand everyone is worried he might not be ready
November 6, 2007 at 5:24 pm
60: On behalf of DSers everywhere, I say welcome!
In the interest of full disclosure, I was awfully skeptical of Matt in 2006. But in my defense, I did try to wallop Keith Law about the virtual head and shoulders when he refused to acknowledge Matt’s great 2007.
November 6, 2007 at 5:28 pm
I have already had my say with Mr Law. I dont understand how he can not give Matt any credit on the year Matt had after only 1 year of pro ball.
November 6, 2007 at 5:36 pm
I ‘m glad that we aren’t talking about the Gold Glove Awards as they are completely meaningless. I’m surprised that they didn’t vote Jeter for another one, he’d fit in well with the rest of this list. There are four awful one is the NL and two in the AL. Maddux can’t be the best fielding pitcher in the NL unless the voters think that holding on runners isn’t part of fielding although I would assume that it is. He’s certainly not the worst choice in the NL but he doesn’t deserve one. The truly horrible winners are Russell Martin over Yadier Molina, Derrek Lee over Albert Pujols or even Todd Helton, and Jimmy Rollins over Troy Tulowitzki. I doubt that there is even one GM in baseball that would take the winner over the other players strictly for fielding. How Grady Sizemore and Torii Hunter make it over Granderson or even Crisp is a mystery to me — but I guess I watch too much baseball to be a GG voter.
November 6, 2007 at 5:37 pm
Hey, I talked to Steve Garrison’s mom on my blog (although, she was initially pretty pissed at me).
It’s awesome to see you here, Jack.
PS: I had Matt as my third best Padre prospect in May, but now I think he’s clearly #1 : )
November 6, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Thank You MB
November 6, 2007 at 5:43 pm
I really believe Chase Headley is Number 1 He had a great year this year He should be starting in 2008
November 6, 2007 at 5:47 pm
I feel that if the Padres give Matt the opportunity to start at 2nd in 2008 he will do a nice job The 2nd half of the year Matt showed how much he has improved
November 6, 2007 at 6:14 pm
63: I don’t think that this GG was as bad as some (the Palmeiro choice was just indefensible), but there were issues. I probably wouldn’t have given Tulo the GG over some other SS in the NL, and 1B is pretty silly. Pujols is head and shoulders above the field there. However, I do think that Maddux still deserves the GG. He doesn’t hold runners, but that’s not really a part of the GG consideration. For everything that happens after bat meets ball, I’d rather have Maddux playing defense than any other pitcher in baseball.
November 6, 2007 at 6:16 pm
There’s a nice summary of CF options at Aaron Gleeman’s site. He doesn’t have the Padres in mind, but the Twins are in a bit of a similar situation post-Torii.
http://www.aarongleeman.com/
November 6, 2007 at 7:12 pm
60 … WOW … yes, welcome aboard, Jack!
If Matt starts the year at Portland, you should come out and visit some time … give me a jingle (I’m in Corvallis, OR) and I’ll go to a Beaver game with ya!
A coupla questions for ya … how’s Matt liking the AFL? … why does he appear to be struggling? … what’s his plans/schedule for after AFL (ie. between then and report to ST)?
November 6, 2007 at 7:32 pm
OT … Yo, the World Cup starts “today” …
http://mlb.mlb.com/usa_basebal.....ld_cup.jsp
November 6, 2007 at 7:33 pm
71 … OK, so it’s not “the” World Cup, I s’pose … but it is to me (and any “baseball” fan
)
November 6, 2007 at 7:36 pm
71 … here’s a bully arm that I’ll bet KT gets an eye on …
http://mlb.mlb.com/usa_basebal.....ure_110507
November 6, 2007 at 7:38 pm
I don’t think holding runners on should be part of the Gold Glove Award.
November 6, 2007 at 7:48 pm
http://insider.espn.go.com/esp.....=Neyer_Rob
November 6, 2007 at 8:01 pm
74 … I do … because I think the award is for “defense” = “preventing runs from scoring” and I think “holding runners on” is a part of that for pitchers (and catchers) … what am I missing (ie. what’s the argument against)?
November 6, 2007 at 8:04 pm
#36: I saw that, Pat; thanks much!
#40: Two thoughts. First, congrats to Maddux; second, the writers made this award a joke years ago.
#60: Let me join the welcome wagon; thanks, Jack, for stopping by and saying hey.
November 6, 2007 at 8:44 pm
Now to the Padres 2005 Media Guide, p. 234-236:
Retired numbers are clearly listed: Garvey, Gwynn, Winfield, Jones, Jackie Robinson.
There is a also a Padres Hall of Fame: Buzzie Bavasi, Nate Colbert, Jerry Coleman, Gwynn, Jones, Ray Kroc, Winfield.
Two separate honors, with some overlap. Also seems like some overkill for a franchise with a history that isn’t that storied.
November 7, 2007 at 7:04 am
The NY Times quoted Kevin Towers in their article about ARod this morning…
Kevin Towers of San Diego, said: “Do I have interest in him? Absolutely. Do I think we’ve got a legitimate chance to sign him? No. I’d have a hard time paying one guy a third of our payroll. We wouldn’t be able to compete.”
The article can be read here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11.....ref=sports
November 7, 2007 at 7:10 am
Any discussion of Matsui finding his way to man 2B for the Padres in ‘08 should be tempered by the comment in this article:
http://www.denverpost.com/rockies/ci_7389144
“Matsui is looking to double his $1.5 million salary after hitting .288 with 32 stolen bases. The Cubs are interested, but Padres GM Kevin Towers said he would fill their need internally. Other teams cannot talk specific salary figures with the Rockies’ free agents until Tuesday. ”