Friday Links (14 Dec 07)

Quick word on the book before we get to links. I’ve completed drafts of three chapters; two more are very close to being done, another is at about 40-50%, and I’m just getting started on “2007 in Review.”

On that last point, I’ve gone through the past 14 months or so of blog postings and highlighted some of the most important points. From that, I’ve created a rough outline. Next steps are to flesh everything out, follow up on research inquiries I made several months ago, etc.

The outline is a bit ambitious, and I’m not sure I’ll be able to give everything the attention it’s due, but I shall do my best. To that end, and kind of the point of me telling you all this, we’ll be entering “terse mode” (for those of you who played “Zork” and other such games back in the day) over the next several weeks.

I’ll keep posting every day, but because my focus needs to be on the book right now, sometimes it will be little more than a prompt. Other times, it might be an excerpt of a draft I’m working on at that moment. I’m not sure. I just know that I may not be as “visible” for a while, and… well, now you know, too.

Okay, that wasn’t very quick. Links, anyone?

Mitchell Report

This whole thing disgusts me. So many questions. So many visceral reactions, so few considered responses. I find myself wondering, among many other things, what, if any, impact the recent actions against Marion Jones might have on the course MLB chooses. But mostly I’m just irritated with everyone involved, myself included (hey, every ticket I buy helps support the system).

Finally, for a bit of levity on a Friday, I present the timeless Cindy und Bert (thanks to my friend Alan for the heads-up). Happy happy, yo yo.

Tagged as: , , , , ,

126 Responses »

  1. 98: Well the outfield is by far the weakest part of the team. The infield, rotation, and bullpen should all be above average. An infield of Kouz, Greene, Iguchi, Gonzalez, and Bard makes me want to buy tickets. A rotation of Peavy, Young, Maddux, Wolf, and whoever makes me want to buy tickets.

    99: That’s a little harsh. He’s hit very well at all his professional stops. When Kouzmanoff was 23 he split his season between low and high A, so there’s a precedent for someone like Freese to make it to the majors and help.

  2. I watched Freese hit from college to every level with the Padres. I know he is 25 but you still have to hit and he did.

  3. 99, 101: Had the Padres not held Headley back the whole year in San Antonio, Freese would have played the second half of the season in AA.

  4. I’m not saying he’s useless but the chances of him being a major league caliber starter aren’t very good. 17 HR and a 489 SLG just aren’t good enough for a 3B, especially playing in the California League. I don’t think he’s a defensive wizard either and isn’t athletic enough to be a utility man. He skill set is probably similar to Kevin Kouzmanoff, except at the same age Kouz was hitting 379/437/656 in AA and AAA.

    I wonder how much money the Cardinals are sending to the Padres? I’m hoping it’s a lot because judging by his stats the past two years, it doesn’t look like Edmonds has much left in the tank.

  5. I hope the Edmonds deal is pending a physical.

  6. Wow, great scoop ET90210! Now, get a real username!

  7. I like this deal, all things considered. I’m just glad they didn’t make us throw in Headley or Kouz for Rolen…..

  8. This seems to be about the right amount to pay for Jim Edmonds, and I’m something of a Freese fan (perhaps because of a little too much time spent around Peter…). Edmonds, if healthy, is a CF which is what we needed. We can find a 4th OF type that can cover him defensively and in late innings. I agree that a Hairston platoon might not be far-fetched. The bottom line is that we needed a CF and Edmonds is still likely to be better than the McLouths and Nook Logans of the world.

  9. re 107: Sorry ET90210, I wasn’t being sarcastic. I had not seen that story yet.

  10. Lets face facts. Freese wasn’t one of our top prospects and we’re pretty set at 3B any way you look at it. Plus, he was way old for his level. It seems worth a gamble on Edmonds, IF he can stay healthy he’s certainly better than what we currently have in the OF.

  11. #98 You simply cannot ignore Hairston. We are virtually post Giles anyway so you must include him in outfield mix

    A lot of strikeouts again next year but also a load of power.

  12. I’d be very happy now with a Jenkins/Hairston platoon.

  13. I don’t think this is a terrible deal, and i dont really see edmonds being worse than cameron. Hell probably k less and hes a short term solution. KT et al clearly didnt want to give up headley or antonelli, which probably handcuffed us a bit negotiation wise

  14. KT or SA said on 1090 that they talked to KC but not about DeJesus. I think it was SA during one of his winter meeting spots. KC wouldn’t have needed Headley, not that they couldn’t have flipped him.

  15. 114: Cameron is pretty clearly a better player. Cameron’s had higher OPS+ the past two years, is 3 years younger, and has had 200 more at bats each year. Two years ago Edmonds struck out 101 times in 400 PA, which is basically the same rate Cameron strikes out at. Edmonds was once a great player, but injuries have ruined his effectiveness. It’s hard to see him suddenly staying healthy this year as a 38 year old.

  16. 116: Maybe we can get him on a “program”.

  17. 112: I dont know where you get “a load of power from” looks like a pretty slow and powerless OF to me

  18. We still need a 5th starter. I really dont get why Rusch was even offered a contract. He was never a good pitcher. At least Estes had glimpses, but his days are over.

  19. I’m expecting Josh Towers to be #5.

  20. 119: Rusch was a good pitcher in 2004 and 2005. ERA+ of 127 and 97 in those years, Estes hasn’t been that good since 2001. But I don’t want either one of them, or Josh Towers, getting 33 starts for the Padres.

    A trade for Igawa, Reyes, Bush, etc. would make us much better. The division has gotten stronger. Nobody can seriously believe that any arm works in Petco, can they?

  21. Cameron is in steep decline offensively. I feel he will continue that decline, and I won’t miss his 160 K’s. Edmonds is a low-risk, high upside move. I’m in favor of the deal. It’s not perfect, but it’s not bad.

  22. Steep decline?

    All of the sudden, Coco Crisp doesn’t seem like such a “eh” idea.

  23. I am a CDFO (“Continual Defender of the Front Office”), and believe they have a plan for all this. That said, “I’m just not seeing it.” (Line from Hoosiers)

    I’m guessing that Antonelli and Headley are the fall back positions for left and center, respectively. It gives them some time in Portland to get some experience in different positions, in the event they’re needed out there. (Given Edmonds injury history lately, MA might want to shag a lot of fly balls.) I’m looking for one of both of them by the ASB.

    Regrettably, kind of the same theory as last year, win with starting pitching, bullpen and defense and hope to win those one run games at home. I’m getting too old to sit through all those nailbiters here, though. Some offense would have been nice.

  24. After sleeping on it, it really looks like the Padres have decided to close their eyes and hope for the best this year. Edmonds could catch lightning in a bottle for the final time in his career, but at least with the outfield, it sure looks like the team is just hoping for the best and plan on going young there in 09, with perhaps Headley and Huffman the options at the corners with Kulbacki maybe a year behind them. Antonelli could be in CF, and along with our infield, that’s a team to possibly get very excited about, especially since we know that Jake and Young will still he heading the rotation.

    But yeah, it does look like the Padres are planning on seeing if they can hang around the division long enough and then see if there is a move to made mid season…

  25. “and then see if there is a move to made mid season…” where have I heard that before?