Familiar Refrain
Thu, Feb 14, 2008
by Geoff Young
On pages 141-143 of his 1985 Baseball Abstract, Bill James launches into a discussion of whether baseball dynasties are a thing of the past. This is technically his essay on the San Diego Padres, who were the defending National League champions, although only two paragraphs focus on the Padres:
I do not see the Padres as a great team, and I do not see them as likely to repeat. They’ve got three infielders that I wouldn’t put in the top fifteen men at the position. With Terry Kennedy’s defense and baserunning, he’s got to hit a whole bunch before he can help you, and he hit .240 last year. Their bench is thin. They’ve got a couple of great young outfielders and real good depth in the pitching staff, and, as mentioned, they do an outstanding job of keeping hit balls from becoming base hits. But if Atlanta, Houston or Los Angeles plays up to potential, I doubt that the Padres will be able to keep up with them.
It is tough to repeat; it has always been tough to repeat. That doesn’t change any because it is time now to have somebody repeat as champion. It is a tribute to the San Diego players that they were able to play so well together that it masked their individual weaknesses.
Now, 23 years later, you could remove many of the particulars from James’ comments and distill the following, which I think describes the Petco Park era Padres quite well:
I do not see the Padres as a great team… It is a tribute to the San Diego players that they were able to play so well together that it masked their individual weaknesses.
This is why, when I hear someone (Joe Sheehan in this case) telling the world there’s nothing to see here (hat tip to MB), my response remains constant: Yeah, what else is new?
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.
February 14, 2008 at 8:11 am
Well you’d be hard pressed to convince me either Adrian or KG isn’t in the top 10 at their respective positions….remember defense counts in real baseball!
February 14, 2008 at 8:20 am
1: Totally agree. I think either of them cracks top 10 - easily.
Actually, I also think that Bard and Kouz would crack the top 10.
If you look at the IFs (inlcuding C) in the NL, I think you could make a convincing case that the Padres have the best IF in the NL. I’d also put them up against just about any complete IF in the AL.
February 14, 2008 at 8:24 am
Well to be fair we’d trade infields with the Phillies and Mets without thinking twice about it.
February 14, 2008 at 8:38 am
3: Really? Adrian would hit like Howard in Philly. Utley is a stud. Khalil would hit better than Rollins there. And there’s no doubt Kouz is better than Feliz.
As for the Mets, Delgado is done. Castillo doesn’t inspire much confidence either. Their left side is pretty great, but that doens’t make up for thier weaker right side.
February 14, 2008 at 8:49 am
4: I’d say that the Tigers probably have the best IF in baseball, by the way.
February 14, 2008 at 9:03 am
Quick article about the best division in the NL: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/articl.....p;c_id=mlb
February 14, 2008 at 9:25 am
4: Howard and Rollins still have an edge, using any measure that adjusts for the ballpark. Greene might be one of the few players for whom that’s not fair, but then again, Rollins’ speed and line drive rate might play very well in Petco. Howard’s advantage isn’t just the HR he gets at home (and I don’t think Agon matches his raw power, anyway). He’s got a big edge in OBP, largely based on walking 40-50 more times a year.
Kouz is a better hitter than Feliz, but the defensive separation the other way is pretty big.
I’ll wait and see on Delgado. 2007 was his first year below a 900 OPS since 1997.
February 14, 2008 at 9:39 am
7: GY posted a road comp the other day that had Khalil rated higher than Rollins for SS with over 1000 ABs. Obviously that’s only road rates, but that’s something.
I also think that Adrian is vastly superior to Howard defensively, which closes that gap. If it can close the gap between Kouz and Feliz, it can do the same here.
And I’ll give you Delgado. He did seem to fall off the planet last year though.
February 14, 2008 at 9:45 am
I had to finally register at SignOnSanDiego to post comments. Krasovic writes this whole piece talking about ballpark effects, especially on hitting, and the same ol’ posts start about feeble offense and superior pitching.
February 14, 2008 at 9:54 am
9: I know precisely how you feel. I saw thsoe comments this morning and my first thought was, “Some people just never learn.” I think Geoff has done a pretty good job of putting that meme to rest, especially when it comes to the DS 2008 Annual. Some of the previewed material he has published in advanced really puts that myth to rest.
As much as it frustrates me as a Padres fan, I think it’s better to get disrespected by the national media and have people assume that were the pop-gun Padres. The team flat-out rakes on the road and can hold their own at home. The more people assume we’ve got no offensive prowess, the lower the expectations of opposing teams (of course, I sincerly doubt that many big-league pitchers get their scouting reports from newspapers).
February 14, 2008 at 9:56 am
Well if you look at VORP for 2007 it isn’t really close:
A couple of points, I think the continued improvement of Kouz and Adrian makes this closer next year, but that infield in Philly is crazy good…especially because outside of Howard they’re good defensive players as well……Howard is just a monster offensively.
Philly:
Howard: 53.6
Utley: 68.8
Rollins: 66.1
Feliz: -2.7(lol this was your FA signing?)
Ruiz: 13.0
Total: 194.8
NYM:
Delgado: 15.5
Castillo: 17.7
Reyes: 46.2
Wright: 81.1
Schneider: 2.4
Total: 162.9
SDN:
Adrian: 38.4
Iguchi: 8.5
KG: 23.0
Koooooooz: 18.6
Bard: 22.5
Total: 111.0
February 14, 2008 at 9:58 am
GY,
Congrats on the book. I’m sure it will be even a greater success than last year. Missed the chance to post yesterday, so I thought I’d pass it along today.
Anybody else got a general malaise about this year’s team? I’ve noticed a flatness this year, at least with me, that I haven’t had for the past several. It’s not necessarily a bad thing, I guess, since my expectations are lower.
I trust the front office, but still . . . . . . . .
February 14, 2008 at 10:06 am
11: I’m really surprised that our guys are rated that low in terms of VORP. I don’t know much about the stat (and I don’t know how it’s calculated), but does it take park effects into consideration?
12: I really am actually quite confident going into this season, maybe mistakenly so. I would have preferred to get someone like Livan Hernandez for our fifth spot (which is still our most glaring hole), but in general, I feel pretty good. I know that a lot of people are concerned about Giles and Edmonds, but I think Giles will be better this year (since he played injured for much of last year). I don’t expect it to be a signigicant improvement, but an improvement nonetheless. As for Edmonds, if he plays 130 games, we’re probably in great shape. If he plays 100, we’re likely in trouble. A lot of our success this year depends on how well we can fill in for Edmonds when he’s not playing. I think that we probably have the guys capable of doing so, but Edmonds’ health will really be an important consideration for the team this year.
Otherwise, I see all of our IF maintaining or improving on last year’s performance, and LF should be better than people expect.
February 14, 2008 at 10:18 am
I think the problem with everyone complaining about park effects all the time, is that they aren’t mentioning the same for our pitching. Sure our offense was better than the stats show, but look at the road splits for pitching. How can anyone argue that our pitching staffwas really that great? This year we have Peavy and Maddux, and a bunch of guys who are injury prone.
February 14, 2008 at 10:22 am
Yes VORP takes park effects and defense into account.
February 14, 2008 at 10:22 am
14: I think that CY and Jake are legit studs. Maddux was greatly helped by PETCO last year, and I’m not sure about our fourth and fifth starters.
The bully seemed to be pretty good, regardless. I know that Meredith exhibited some extreme home/road splits (which is odd, given that he’s a GB pitcher). Overall though, I think we really DO have a good pitching staff. And I think our offense is much better than people believe.
A general apology for the rapidity of my posts today. I’m stuck in training and appreciate the diversion DS offers.
February 14, 2008 at 10:27 am
I think that people forget that baseball is a team game - hence why I think that the Padres will surpise alot of people this year.
Interesting post on mlbtraderumors.com and the Padres outfield situation … it is about McAnulty and Macias. I’d be interested in your opinions.
February 14, 2008 at 10:32 am
17: I saw that too. I don’t really know enough about either of them to offer much in the way of an educated opinion, but I’ve always pulled for P-Mac to have success at the big league level. I’ll never forget his walkoff in 06 to dead center (off the Rox I believe). I’d love to see P-Mac get a legit shot (and he seemed to be on the fast track last year before he got hurt). He might not have the defensive prowess necessary to man LF in PETCO, but I would hate to see him become another Jack Cust (although I was never that bummed about Cust since he had no business being in PETCO’s OF).
February 14, 2008 at 10:34 am
Yowza! Good stuff here. First of all, my take is that saying any of our IF is in the Top 10, when there are only 16 teams in the NL, is not saying much. You could be Top 10 and be solidly average at #8 or #9. You really would have to expand it to all of MLB and then take a look at how they would rank.
And, yes, we should/would trade IF with either the Phillies or Mets without a second thought. Wright and Reyes are two of the best young (just 25 this year!!) players in MLB, not just at their position either but overall. Rollins, Utley and Howard are 3/4 of an IF for the ages and absolutely dwarf our comparables. No disrespect to Adrian is intended, but even he doesn’t stack up to Howard.
February 14, 2008 at 10:37 am
15: No, VORP does not take defense into account. WARP does, but I think BP’s defensive stats have been pretty well discredited/outdated by other metrics. Still, Adrian’s 1B defense, good as it is, will likely not makeup such a huge offensive advantage by Howard because 1B, although the most important corner defensively, imo, is still not on par with those defensive positions up the middle in terms of impact on runs saved.
February 14, 2008 at 10:43 am
20: Thanks for the information on VORP and WARP. I’m still pretty unfamiliar with the more advanced sabermetrics (inclduing the D stats), so it’s always good to get an explanation of them.
I think that so much of Adrian’s defense is lost in translation, just because he makes the rest of the IF look better than they are. As good as Khalil is defensively, Adrian has saved him numerous times. There aren’t many 1Bs in baseball with Adrian’s unique combination of slick fielding and a sweet swing.
February 14, 2008 at 10:48 am
17: Yes, baseball is a team game. But what does that mean? Isn’t my team still made up of individual players? And if the individual players on my team are better than the individual players on your team, won’t my team still win most of the time?
I understand that personalities can rub other people the wrong way and create distractions. But these guys have been playing baseball since they were kids. They’ve gone through progressively more difficult leagues and levels of competition and developed the mental skills to deal with distractions. They’ve made it to the major league level by developing both tremendous physical skills and great mental skills and focus, or else they would not have succeeded to this level.
I just don’t believe that chemistry/personality is enough to overcome the combination of mental and physical skills that major league players have. Yes, having a good group of guys personality-wise on a team will make it more fun, but winning is fun, too, and having a dick who is one of the best players in the game on your team is going to add more wins than a nice guy who is replacement level every time, imo.
February 14, 2008 at 10:51 am
21: Great point about 1B defense. The ability to save outs is why I rate it as the most important corner position. I guess 3B might surpass it due to greater opportunities for fielding balls in play, but I’m not entirely convinced of that becasue 1B is the recipient of so many putouts. I wonder if any of the newer D metrics (+/-, UZR, etc.) take saves on throws into account. I would certainly think Adrian would look very good if they do.
February 14, 2008 at 10:56 am
23: It would be really intersting if someone was able to come up with a stat like that, but also extremely difficult I would imagine. How do you create an objective way of measuring whether or not the 1B “saved” a throw, or if he just did his job. I think it would be a great thing to track, I’m just not sure how one might standardize it across the board. Are there any stats out there now that normalize relatively subjective situations? How have they accomplished this?
February 14, 2008 at 11:08 am
Rally has done some preliminary work with 1b and saving errors:
http://lanaheimangelfan.blogsp.....rrors.html
Gonzo, believe it or not, comes out at -4 per 1000 throws. Of course, it’s a new methodology that could probably be improved and Gonzalez hasn’t had that many throws yet.
February 14, 2008 at 11:12 am
Who says Keith Law dislikes the Padres? Today in his chat he said, “I like their pitching staff, and they could sneak into first place if Wolf and Prior combine for, say, 45 starts. I’m an unabashed Wolf fan, though, so take that with a grain of salt.”
Hmm, wait, Prior and Wolf combining for 45 starts? So basically what he’s saying is, we have no chance.
February 14, 2008 at 11:17 am
26: I think we could get close to 40 out of them, but 45 seems like a little much. Again, it all depends on how healthy they actually are.
25: That is pretty surprising. Adrian seems to be especially adept at scooping balls out of the dirt.
February 14, 2008 at 11:30 am
Hey guys…I visit often but never post. Like what you got going on here. Anyways, here’s a great article on espn about Tony Gwynn Jr’s hit against us from last year:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/.....d=tab2pos1
February 14, 2008 at 11:46 am
8: Like you say, KG comes out on top only when you limit it to road rates. The normalized numbers all favor Rollins, almost entirely because KG’s OBP has been abysmal most of his career. It’s not a giant gap, but it’s real. And the defensive difference between Agon - Howard doesn’t appear to be in the same neighborhood as the difference between Feliz and Kouz. In fact, this last season Howard ranked ahead of Agon in RZR.
Greene might be that rare guy who is perfectly unfit for his home park but would see almost all his weakness disappear somewhere else. No way of knowing, really. And it’s not like Rollins would turn into Rey Ordonez in Petco.
I’d trade infields with the Phillies in a heartbeat, then send Feliz to whoever wanted him and use Headley at 3b. But on a cost-production basis, which is critical for the Padres (like it or not), the Pads have to be #1.
February 14, 2008 at 11:59 am
29: Once you include out of zone performance, Gonzalez kills Howard: http://spreadsheets.google.com.....&gid=1
February 14, 2008 at 12:30 pm
28: Welcome, AJ. Thanks for posting that article. A few people commented about that that yesterday. It’s a damn good article. It reminded me of how funny fate plays trick with us. Yeah, I’m glad Jr. is as professional as his dad but it didn’t seem right that the Padres should lose that game. Then again, that’s why it’s so memorable.
re: Edmonds, I don’t see him starting more than 110 games in CF. The best case scenario would be for one of the plethora of OF to emerge as a competent CF with enough bat to stick there and field, and then, moving Edmonds to LF with his powerful bat and have another OF as floater to give rest to Edmonds and OG.
Trade P-Mac (have bat will travel) to AL for a couple of arms.
Yeah, I’m dreaming.
Time to wake up, pitchers and catchers report TODAY.
February 14, 2008 at 12:32 pm
22. I take you argument as saying that individual statistics are more important than wins and that it somehow equates to the total the number of wins for a particular team. I would counter by saying that baseball is a game of individual players who collectively have to do enough to beat the opposing team. … It is the little things like running out ground balls, defensive positioning, taking pitches, moving runners over, etc … all factors needed to win. I would submit to you that the best stat in baseball is the total number of wins by a team. The remaining stats are nice, but that stat gets you into the playoffs and ultimately a shot a title. The simplest example of individual statistics not being very relevant is in the homerun category. Bonds hit a ton of home runs, but where did that get the Giants? I believe the difference lies in the term “chemistry” and why I believe it is important.
February 14, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Chemistry might be important, but to blame Bonds for anything that went wrong with the Giants is nonsensical.
The other players sucked…that was their problem.
February 14, 2008 at 12:51 pm
32: It’s the aggregate of the individual stats that lead to wins. You could have a team full of Tim Flannery types who do all those little things right and they’ll lose 100 games.
33: Exactly. SF has been a bad team the last 3 years, but Bonds almost singlehandedly kept them above 70 wins. And when the rest of the team was good enough, they won 4 division titles in 8 years and finished 2nd the other four. The Padres had a lot of gritty overachievers during those years who finished far under .500 most of the time.
February 14, 2008 at 12:57 pm
30: Yeah, I focused on RZR because I suspect OOZ performance tends to fluctuate more from year to year. Could be wrong about that.
Agon also played 17 games more than Howard. That matters, but didn’t he have more chances to accumulate OOZ plays because of that? It’s similar to the way he created more runs (RC) than Howard despite Howard’s superiority in rate stats. You get 720 plate appearances and see duty in 161 games, your counts go up.
February 14, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Phantom, I think you hit the nail on the head again. I don’t know how you would measure it in an objective way, but I agree Adrian’s work around the bag with both his feet and his glove do appear to be excellent.
February 14, 2008 at 1:22 pm
12 … LaMar … I think what you’re saying aligns with what JoeS @ BP said about the Padres in his NL West preview yesterday … http://www.baseballprospectus......cleid=7133
13 … I still think our most glaring hole is backup-SS (and backup CF, as you mention) …
February 14, 2008 at 1:25 pm
17 … here’s a link to McAnulty rumor … http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/.....ng-to.html … which references this UT article … http://www.signonsandiego.com/.....dkeys.html
February 14, 2008 at 1:26 pm
32: You take my argument incorrectly then. It is individual performance and skill, of which statistics are only a post hoc method of measuring or attempting to measure, which are the components of team performance and, by extension, wins.
“I would counter by saying that baseball is a game of individual players who collectively have to do enough to beat the opposing team.”
Naturally, which is exactly what I meant when I said the team with better players (plural) will win more often than not, not counter to what I said at all.
Running out groundballs is indeed a little thing, and I believe you would be extremely hard pressed to show it does anything toward contributing to winning baseball games. However, the other things you mentioned are not little things at all, but I fail to see how they are “team” only and not also individual. Yes, a coach may make a positioning adjustment, but so may a well studied, alert player. It is definitely an individual player who takes a pitch (or works the count) and who moves a runner (preferably by not making an out).
Well, my point was really that chemistry is not as important as player performance. If I misunderstood what your intent was in saying baseball is a team game, which I assumed was to emphasize the importance of chemistry, then I don’t think we disagree. Your example of Bonds is not counter to my argument that a team with superior players (plural) will defeat a team with inferior players more often than not. Bonds, many times, was not surrounded by other quality players.
And really looking at HR’s as a predictor of team success is not reasonable. OBP, SLG, OPS are much better measures of runs scored, which is indeed an excellent predictor of W-L. And then there’s pitching and defense as well.
February 14, 2008 at 1:27 pm
37: I’m pretty confident that Robles or Stansberry will be more than capable backup SS. I’d love to have a guy like Robles on the team, somoene who could lay down a sweet bunt if we ever need it.
Backup CF may or may not be an issue, it really just depends on who the team carrys on the bench. If someone like Macias knocks people’s socks off, he might have a shot at making the roster as a backup CF.
I’d really like to see Hairston play CF a couple games in ST to get a sense of his abilities there. I don’t think Antonelli in CF is a good idea, but it will be interesting to see how DaVannon and Gerut fare there as well.
As for pitchers:
Anyone know the status of Hensley and Estes? What about Rusch or the guy we picked up from the Nats?
February 14, 2008 at 1:30 pm
37: Lynch, let me fix your post for you because I’m sure instead of “13 … I still think our most glaring hole is backup-SS (and backup CF, as you mention) …”
you meant to say, “13 … I still think our most glaring hole is backup-SS (and STARTING CF, as you mention) …
February 14, 2008 at 1:38 pm
31 … “plethora of OFers”? I think the issue is that we only have 2 solid OFers and both of them are “red light” healthy (Giles & Edmonds) … I’m optimisitic about Hairston, but he’s not a lock to have a successful 2008 … Gerut & DaVanon seem like decent players to give a look-see to (one of them may turn in an “average” season) … but beyond that …
All I’m saying is that the Padres do not have upper-level OF players that seem like good options to play OF in MLB in 2008 … it’s a weakness in the organization right now …
February 14, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Tom/35, the link I gave adjusts for that by looking at balls in zone as an estimate for balls out of zone. So there are opportunities for each, so playing time isn’t a factor.
Although, there’s still work to be done with that stat (ie, the defensive stat from the HBT). I bet it does fluctuate quite a bit and there’s been some discussion of using something else as the proxy for balls out of zone. So yea, take it with a grain of salt. But then again, just in zone balls probably aren’t getting us where we want to go either. The better metrics (UZR, Dewan, etc) do a better job with this stuff.
Anyway, here’ exactly how that’s done: http://jinaz-reds.blogspot.com.....-data.html
February 14, 2008 at 1:44 pm
41 … yo, not an Edmonds fan, huh? I’m not ready to call CF a “hole” unless/until I see what Edmonds does in ST … he was a stud player … I’m hoping he will be better in 2008 than 2007 … I’m rooting for him, and I think my expectations (and those of the FO when they traded Freese to get) are reasonable …
And it’s my concerns for the risk that he’ll perform more to your expectations than my expectations that cause me to be worried about our backup CF situation … because even if he meets my expectations, the backup CFers will get significant playing time …
February 14, 2008 at 1:52 pm
44: I was really just trying to be lighthearted about things, but I am sincerely concerned about Edmonds. To me his mid to late 30’s surge absolutely screams PED’s. This believe, coupled with his recent injury history, leads me to believe there is little to no hope of his having a bounce back (shy of his getting back on the juice, of course).
Wasn’t trying to dog you at all!
February 14, 2008 at 2:02 pm
45 … woof
February 14, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Pat, good to know that you think ages 30-34 are mid to late 30’s, what ages are your early 30’s then? 27-29?
One thing I hate is the baseless accusations of steroid abuse by looking at a player’s stats. Edmonds’ peak years came from 2000-2004 (ages 30-34) which coincidentally started after he was traded from the Angels to the Cardinals. He did improve greatly from his supposed peak years (26-29) but that might have more to do with getting out of Anaheim then in any steroid use.
Also, 45 starts out of Wolf and Prior doesn’t seem that unlikely. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect 30 out of Wolf and 15 out of Prior. Probably unlikely, but it’s not like there’s zero percent chance of it happening.
February 14, 2008 at 2:26 pm
47: Mostly agreed. I definitely think we can get 30 out of Wolf, but like you, I have no idea how much we’ll get from Prior. What was the consensus on Prior for OBG08? If it’s around 75 innings, that works out to 12.5 starts (assuming 6 IP/start). Not horrible, but pretty good.
February 14, 2008 at 2:39 pm
47: Gee, I feel so chastend for having included the adjective “late.” I’ll be sure to check my facts more closely next time. In case you’re missing the sarcasm, Shlom, blow me.
February 14, 2008 at 2:49 pm
47: How unlikely does it have to get to be unreasonable? ‘Cause Wolf hasn’t made 30 starts since 2003. He’s had a couple of significant surgeries since then. I’ll be glad if we get 150 innings from him. That could still be 30 starts, but almost half the game is on the pen.
48: It’s not Prior’s 75 innings that would be the problem, as long as he’s healthy enough to make them decent. It’s the 225 innings we need on top of that (125 for Prior, maybe 100 more for injuries to Wolf or Young) from the inhabitants of the Island of Misfit Pitchers.
February 14, 2008 at 2:57 pm
50: I really hope that Hensley steps up and performs like he did late 06, and forces his way into the rotation. I, like you, believe that both CY and Wolf will miss some starts, but I’m hoping they’re more of the “9 days off” variety as opposed to the “15-day DL” kind.
In terms of starters we haven’t considered much, any real chance of Geer or LeBlanc providing league average innings at some point this year?
February 14, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Expecting 45 starts from Wolf and Prior is unrealistic…but the national guys acting like they are only getting 10 starts between them is more unrealistic.
I’d say a good over/under for the pair would be 30.
Combine that with 30+ from Peavy/CY and Maddux and you only have to fill another 35 starts from everyone else.
10 or so from Henlsey
10 from LeBlanc
10 from Germano(who Pecota thinks is league average by the way)
Things aren’t so bad with the staff. Of course any time you can have Peavy/CY and 100 league average starts….that probably puts you in the post season.
February 14, 2008 at 3:05 pm
49 … you’ve very clear (to me) when you’re being lighthearted versus dog’in’ … don’t let the dog in you bark too much
51 … re: Geer or LeBlanc … I gotta think that there’s no “real chance” of that … if Padres are out of it in September (which I do not expect, at least not until late-September (such as the 30th to 34th
) ), then perhaps these guys get a few starts … and perhaps at that point in the season it will be versus teams that are similarly “playing for next year” and they do well … but I don’t think falls under what you are wondering about …
February 14, 2008 at 3:07 pm
51: Can we count on a guy who is coming off labrum surgery to cover for guys coming off shoulder surgeries?
I have more faith in LeBlanc than Geer, but not much hope in any rookie. Phil Hughes was league-average last year and he’s a much better prospect than either.
I’m a little surprised Geer is still a Padre property. His K numbers should be setting off some alarm bells in a statistically minded front office. Maybe they think he can get more K’s at higher levels. I guess that’s not completely unprecedented.
February 14, 2008 at 3:12 pm
54: I’m not really familiar with the details of labrum surgery, so I guess I’m going mostly on blind optimisim here.
52: If we’re setting the over/under at 30 for those two, give me the over. Call me a complete fool, but I think that Wolf is going to be a big pickup for us this year.
February 14, 2008 at 3:12 pm
OT … BP @ SI … Top 100 Prospects …
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c.....index.html
#23 = Chase H
#39 = Matt A
#61 = Matt L
February 14, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Quick reminder about the Comments Policy. Item #1: Attack positions, not people.
Thanks,
Dad
February 14, 2008 at 3:16 pm
55 … you’re “a complete fool” … and I mean that with all due respect … i’ll take under … here’s the prop: if it comes in over, i’ll buy you a 2007 Annual and if it comes in under, you buy me a 2009 Annual … deal?
February 14, 2008 at 3:25 pm
#58: 2009 Annual? Now there’s some blind optimism.
February 14, 2008 at 3:34 pm
58: Works for me.
February 14, 2008 at 3:45 pm
The PMac situation goes along with what I mentioned yesterday with too many AAAA type guys.
February 14, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Incidentally, I’ve updated the spring training roster in the right sidebar, grouped according to whether guys are on the 40-man roster or NRI. Note that Drew Macias was DFA’d to accommodate Tony Clark, which seems odd.
February 14, 2008 at 3:59 pm
59 … I believe … in the power of high expectations! I was hopin’ you’d notice that … now get back to work … I want to get my hands on the 2008 book ASAP!
February 14, 2008 at 4:01 pm
62: That does seem like a bizarre decision. Hopefully nobody picks him off waivers.
February 14, 2008 at 4:01 pm
62 … so Drew Macias won’t even be NRI’d? I guess I don’t know what “designated for assignment” means in terms of his status for ST …
February 14, 2008 at 4:02 pm
61: How can you say PMac is a 4A guy when he’s only had 77 major-league at-bats? He’s hit at every stop in the minors. He’s a good enough hitter to play for a lot of clubs. He’d be more valuable than many players who will make big league rosters. But he’s still very unlikely to be an average starter in LF.
It’s not his fault the Padres went with other options last year or the year before. In 2006 he did everything he could, and the Padres still went with Sledge in 2007. I heard something about McAnulty sulking in Portland, which isn’t good, but I can’t really blame him.
February 14, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Pat, all I was trying to say is that you need to be very careful about throwing out accusations of steroid abuse. If you look at Edmonds’ numbers and his age during his peak, it certainly doesn’t scream out steroid abuse, at least to me. Now if he hit his peak much later like Barry Bonds, I could understand it. Just looking at statistics aren’t enough, especially if you are misrepresenting them.
February 14, 2008 at 4:06 pm
OT … the mystery of Gaslamp Ball is explained …
http://gaslampball.com/story/2.....commenttop
… yup, that seems a good analogy they’ve got goin’ there. Me, I’m a Ducksnorter … but it’s a big world out there … even Padre Nation is broad and high and deep in many ways … onward … to 2008!
February 14, 2008 at 4:14 pm
66: P-Mac is quoted in the bottom of the ST article on Padres.com today, saying that he’s trying to earn a starting gig out of ST: http://sandiego.padres.mlb.com.....mp;c_id=sd
I was really impressed with P-Mac last spring, but he just got derailed at the worst possible time by that injury. Hopefully he can replicate his performance from last spring and force the issue.
February 14, 2008 at 4:24 pm
People think steroids is a more likely issue for Edmonds, rather then his post concussion syndrome? Interesting, but considering guys like Koskie and Matheny are basically out of the league because of it, giving Edmonds a year to recover seems like a good idea before drawing any conclusions.
February 14, 2008 at 6:26 pm
I was just looking up McAnulty’s stats. He was drafted in the 12th round in 2002, not too many other good players drafted around him although the Twins drafted (but didn’t sign) Jeff Clement out of high school. In the 13th round, Matt Harrington was drafted by the Devil Rays. Do people remember him? He was drafted 7th overall in 2000 but held out, the Padres took him with the 58th pick the following year, in 2002 he went 374th, in 2003 1301st, and in 2004 1089th. That’s quite a fall. Maybe he should signed the first time he was drafted…..
February 14, 2008 at 8:59 pm
No mention of Callix Crabbe as a back up center fielder?
February 14, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Adrian: 27 win shares
Iguchi: 15
Greene: 19
Kouzmanoff: 15
Total: 76
Phillies
Howard: 26
Utley: 28
Rollins: 28
Feliz: 10
Total: 92
I think Gonzalez is better than Howard, but that’s about where it ends.
Mets
Delgado: 14
Castillo: 14
Reyes: 24
Wright: 34
Total: 86
Catchers are not members of the infield, but:
Bard: 16, Schneider: 11, Ruiz: 13.
Their addition makes no difference.
February 14, 2008 at 10:34 pm
72: Corey Brock at Padres.com has written two articles recently that mentioned Crabbe as the next most likely lock for the bench after Barrett and Clark because he can play second, short, third and the outfield. One article emphasized that he was likely to make the club because he has speed and can play center. Maybe Corey could clarify what he’s hearing if he stops by any time soon.
February 14, 2008 at 10:53 pm
42: does plethora imply quality? If it does, then, I’m mistaken. The Padres got quantity with some past quality which in no way predict future quality. Isn’t that fun?
Hmmm….no Macias then. Well, go Jody Gerut and Jeff DaVannon.
February 15, 2008 at 3:45 am
Strange about Macias. They seemed to be high on him lately.
February 15, 2008 at 5:54 am
Morning from Peoria. The Padres like Crabbe for several reasons, he can play anywhere in the infield (other than first) and some center field. He also has something no one else on the team has: speed. Since he’s a Rule 5 guy, that means they will also take a real good look at him since if they don’t keep him, they would have to offer him back to the Brewers. That said, he won’t just be handed a job this spring.
February 15, 2008 at 6:01 am
73: Adrian’s extra win share is because he played 21 more games than Howard in 2007. That’s not insignificant, but if you’re looking for who’s going to do more given relatively equal time, it’s Howard. He contributes more per-game and per-AB. Unless we assume that Howard is likely to miss time each year while Agon isn’t, I can’t see how the latter is better.
It’s almost all because of their plate discipline. RH has reached base 67 more times the last 2 seasons, despite almost identical plate appearances.
In 2006 Howard beat Gonzalez by 14 WS.