Q&A with MadFriars.com, Part 1
Mon, Mar 3, 2008
by Geoff Young
I recently had the opportunity to chat with Denis Savage and John Conniff from MadFriars.com about their Padres prospect rankings for 2008. Sit back, relax, and enjoy!
Ducksnorts: You mention the challenges inherent in comparing players at different stages of development. What are some of the strategies you use to meet those challenges?
Denis Savage: I feel like Mia Wallace in “Pulp Fiction.” Good question, Vincent Vega!
There are a lot of factors that go into comparing, analyzing and ranking players. It is a combination of projection and stats — but one thing John and I have learned through the years is nothing beats watching a player live. By going to the field four hours prior to the game, we can see work habits, how they hustle when the lights are dim, and what they take into a game. It may seem minute, but pre-game workouts can define a player’s potential and ability to reach that potential.
There is also an eye for scouting involved. Is he flawed mechanically? Can he be taught properly? Does he have the makeup to take a lesson and stick with it, despite having struggles adjusting early on? The prospects who take instruction and have smaller tweaks to make can meet the projections quicker.
Then there is the raw projection. Simon Castro may not be ranked today in the top 20, but he has tremendous tools to be among those we see in the future. Think Jose Ceda — another raw kid who was traded to Chicago and will be in the majors this year.
On the stats side, John and I both weigh them a little more when a prospect is at a higher level in the system. At some point, you have to produce. That isn’t necessarily true in rookie ball but definitely true by the time a prospect is in Double-A. Age also plays a role, and future projection always has a place. There are so many little things we take into account that and blend together to make the most complete and honest analysis.
John Conniff: I think that is one reason, and it hurts my ego to write this, that the best rankings that we do are the ones that combine both Denis’ and my approaches. I tend to be more influenced by what a player is doing at a higher level while Denis places more emphasis on the potential of a player to become a game changer — however, the changes are much slighter than most people may believe.
To answer the question, we both put more emphasis on players that have performed at higher levels because they are closer to the majors; however, guys at the lower levels who have the potential to become a #1 pitcher, such as Mat Latos, or a top flight center fielder, such as Cedric Hunter, we will rank higher than someone as a Josh Geer — as long as there is some correlation between their actual potential and what they are doing on the field. This is especially true if they are significantly younger than their competition as were both Latos and Hunter this year.
Ducksnorts: These lists reflect a moment in time. Do they fluctuate during the season? If so, to what degree?
Savage: Yes and no. If a guy comes out gangbusters over the first half of the year, the natural tendency is to rank him higher. But, the entire season is the true merit of a successful season. If that same player bombs over the second half, what did he really accomplish? There are times when it is clear a prospect has made the strides necessary to move up, regardless of stats. I expect a couple of players missing from the list to be on it next year and some will inevitably fall off. It does, however, take a season of competition to truly regard each prospect on a level field.
Conniff: No, not really. We define Madfriars.com as a “webzine” in that our goal is to attempt to chronicle the Padres minor leagues during the season, which entails providing a write-up of every game in the minors, interviewing nearly everyone involved in the system. Outside of the rankings, which we do individually in November and then our official Madfriars.com ranking in March, we do a player of the month series and a player and pitcher of the year series for each level, and that is about it.
In short, we see ourselves more as reporters/journalists than pundits/gurus.
Ducksnorts: You have Chase Headley ranked #1 in the system (as do most experts). What current big leaguers does he remind you of, in terms of physical attributes, style of play, the type of production you eventually expect from him, etc.?
Savage: He reminds a bit of Mike Lowell. Lowell was a kid who didn’t hit for a whole lot of power in the minors until he really blossomed in his final year in the minors, showing physical maturity at the same time. Headley has taken the same sort of path. We always knew he had some power but his body needed to catch up. That has happened over the last two years. Both have fantastic makeup and play the game the right way. That is a tremendous asset — and one reason why many believe he can make the transition to left field and still maintain a good average.
I expect him to keep his solid patience at the plate and contribute early on. The power may not be there but a full season of Headley will produce 20-plus homers and an annual flirtation with a .300 batting average to go along with a ton of doubles and solid on-base percentage. Eventually finding a home in the number three spot in the batting order would be ideal since he does so many things well.
Conniff: That is tough because Chase Headley right now is very different player than he was at Eugene and Lake Elsinore. As Kevin Goldstein said in an interview with us last week, I’m not sure many people really believed he would hit for the power that he did last year in San Antonio. The type of player that he could become on a MLB level ranges from Bill Mueller to Chipper Jones, but I do think his future is at third base as opposed to left field.
Ducksnorts: I keep thinking Jeff Cirillo, which is sort of between Mueller and Chipper. Moving on, you note that Mat Latos needs to refine his secondary pitches and learn how to become more of a pitcher. What sense do you get about his “coachability” from observing and talking to people within the organization?
Savage: Latos may be a clown off the field, but he has a switch he flips when he gets between the lines. This is a kid that scrapped a nasty splitter to go with a straight change. People have been writing that off, but it shows how much he believes in what he is being told and what he will do to succeed. When he picks up a ball, everything he does is centered around improving. He listens, fiddles with, and even lends his advice to other pitchers. He is a rare specimen.
There should be no doubt about his coachability. He has the aptitude, and I expect him to take a tremendous leap forward this year to what is already a very bright future.
Conniff: I took a second trip to San Antonio instead of Eugene this year, so Denis may be a better person to answer this question than me — but I will say this. In an interview with both Latos and his coach at Broward Country JC I was struck by how much pride he takes in the development of his secondary pitches and his fastball command. Remember, this is a 19-year-old that is 6′6″ 220 lbs and uncorks a mid-90s fastball with great ease, and he enjoys talking about the art of pitching and setting people up more than blowing people away.
His numbers indicate that he needs to improve his command within the strike zone a little better, but there is just so much to like about Latos — his size, command, the potential of his secondary pitches and most of all he is with San Diego.
Ducksnorts: Matt Antonelli was drafted as a third baseman, then shifted to second base; now there is talk that he may get some looks in center field. Where do you envision him eventually playing, and how much offensive upside does he have?
Savage: I actually believe his future is in center, but it won’t be this year. This kid is one of the best athletes I have seen come through the system in some time. He has both the makeup and work ethic to successfully make the switch and be pretty good at it. Plus, there are quite a few middle infielder types that profile well at second base at some of the lower levels. I believe one of them forces Antonelli out there (Rayner Contreras, :cough:).
Antonelli provides a lot of things the Padres don’t have. Some speed at the top of the lineup and a guy who will get on base at a solid clip. The former hockey player (always have to get my plug in for hockey) is a .300 hitter waiting to happen with an on-base percentage that will be Brian Giles like (the good years). Plus, he has pop and will steal some bags. He really is a complete player.
Conniff: I have never believed that the Padres saw him as a center fielder. The only way I could see him going there is if [Tadahito] Iguchi had some incredible year, which I don’t see happening. Also Antonelli needs another year playing second full time and not being distracted by another position. The Padres in spring training the other day pretty much said the same thing, that he was going to be at second for the whole year.
Offensively I’m much more excited about him than I was [Josh] Barfield, and I liked Barfield. First and foremost he’s a guy that is going to get on base. Combine that with a near .500 slugging percentage and 28 stolen bases in 37 attempts last year, and the Padres are trying to get him to run more, I really like his value.
Ducksnorts: We both have Cedric Hunter ranked #4 (shameless plug: Ducksnorts 2008 Baseball Annual). What adjustments does he need to make to fulfill his potential?
Savage: Listening and learning — that will come with maturity. There have been whispers that he does not take coaching well, believing he understands his game and what he needs to do to succeed. There is some evidence that this is true, but it may just be that Hunter is figuring out who he is as a 20-year-old. He will, of course, need to heed the advice of the staff and start applying it in games. Hunter really has a sweet swing and should see a lot of benefit from the 2007 season when breaking balls comprised his diet.
Conniff: First get better teammates. Some of the guys that he had playing with him this year — well, he may as well have had you, Denis and I in the lineup, which was about as much protection as he was getting except for the last month of the season when he put up his best numbers.
Seriously, his main thing that I saw was putting in the swing adjustments that he is able to use so well in batting practice into the games to allow him to drive the ball more. He isn’t someone that is going to hit that many home runs, but I do think he can put the ball into the gaps and he has some speed. He’s always had good strike zone judgment and to me he seems like a natural number two hitter. Defensively, he needs to bring a little better effort into the field on a consistent basis and his arm strength, which improved from last year, could be better.
He should be on a much better team in Lake Elsinore this year, with [Kellen] Kulbacki, [Mitch] Canham and some others joining the team from Eugene combined with a year of full-season ball behind him, he should put up some numbers this year.
We’ll finish up tomorrow, with a look at Kyle Blanks, Yefri Carvajal, and more…
Love the blog? Buy the book!
The Ducksnorts 2009 Baseball Annual provides the most comprehensive analysis of and commentary on the San Diego Padres available anywhere... featuring a foreword by Padres Executive Vice President Paul DePodesta.
March 3, 2008 at 7:38 am
The USA Today has an article about Trevor on the cover of the sports section. Mostly a recap about last year’s heartbreaking weekend and how Trevor handled it.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports.....over_N.htm
March 3, 2008 at 8:22 am
Did anyone else read this article in the UT today?
http://www.signonsandiego.com/.....adres.html
Krasovic sat down and talked with Moores, its pretty much the stuff you’d expect:
“I’m so happy with where we are,” John Moores said yesterday. “It just doesn’t get any better. Everything we said we’d change, we’ve done.”
“The club is financially stable,” he said. “With Petco Park, we’ve made a big difference in downtown San Diego. On the field, even if it gives me a heart attack, every year we are playing really meaningful games in September, and that’s all you can really hope for.”
But here is the line that really got me…
“The goal is to play meaningful games in September,”
Really I thought the goal was to win the World Series? I mean I’m very thankful for the Pads putting together a competitive team for the last 4 seasons but how can you tell your fans that your goal is to only play until September anything after that is icing on the cake.
P.S. This is not a complaint about team payroll or anything like that, its just an annoyance that Moores is not trying to set the teams sites on higher achievements.
March 3, 2008 at 8:23 am
Great interview, Geoff! The minor leagues and evaluation of prospects is a side of the game I know next to nothing about, but I am trying to learn more and this is just a great resource to have. Looking forward to what is to come!
March 3, 2008 at 8:29 am
Steve C., I think you’re confusing the Padres goal with the Yankees goal.
But seriously, playing “meaningful games in September” is not the same as “to only play until September.” To me if the former goal is met, the team has a chance to play beyond September. In other words, if we’re playing meaningful games in September, we have a shot at the playoffs as either a Division winner or a WC berth.
I guess I’m a glass half full guy (most of the time anyway).
March 3, 2008 at 8:33 am
2: I don’t really take any offense in his comments, although I am probably higher on the FO than most people in the blogosphere are.
What’s the diference between saying “we want to play competitive games in September” and “we’re going to win the World Series”? I mean, they’re both just meaningless (perhaps) platitudes coming from the owner of the club.
The playoffs are such a crapshoot (see 2006 Cardinals and 2007 Rockies) that all you can really hope for ARE meaningful games in September (at least in my opinion).
Does it maybe show more optimism, desire, or a “committment to winning” if Moores says, “Next stop: 2008 World Series”? Perhaps. But in the end, they’re just words. Things happen during the course of a baseball season that you can’t control. Who would have predicted that we’d lose 66% of our OF with a week left in the season? How do you manage that? How does promising a World Series mitigate that?
Just to be clear, none of this is directed at you, Steve C. It’s just my opinion with regards to how people react to the words of the owners. In the grand scheme of things, owners really only have negative impacts on their ballclubs (Steinbrenner, perhaps, the exception). They can pony up all the cash they want, but if their GM mis-uses it, then it’s just a waste of money.
I dunno, does anyone think I’m crazy?
March 3, 2008 at 8:36 am
Re: 4 Isn’t every teams goal to win the World Series? Yeah you may not get there but isn’t that what you play for? I’m not saying the season is a complete failure if they don’t make it to the series (like it is for the yankees) but I think this team is talented enough that it should be beyond the goal of just making it into September and still being in the hunt.
I’m not trying to knock on them im really trying to commend the job that SA, KT, and GF have done with this team. The team ahs advanced and I think its goals should as well.
March 3, 2008 at 8:40 am
Re: 5 I agree that an ownere saying “Next stop: 2008 World Series” would be just a little asinine but why not set the bar higher and say “Our goal every year is to win the World Series.” The Goal may not be met but atleast we know that they are hungry for the championship.
March 3, 2008 at 8:54 am
2-4: It’s good that Moores is trying to set realistic expectations, although he should really carry that thought through and say that “If you’re in the playoffs, you have a chance.”
The disconcerting line is “It just doesn’t get any better.” Sure it does. Don’t have league-average or worse starters making up 60% of your rotation. Don’t ignore half the draftable players.
March 3, 2008 at 8:55 am
7: I would argue that they are hungry, regardless. Whether or not they make the explicit statement of “We’re playing to win it all,” I think it’s pretty safe to assume that there are probably 20 to 24 teams this year who are “playing to win it all.”
Unless you’re in a total rebuild mode (à la Oakland, Pittsburgh, and Baltimore) or just have a crappy team (à la San Fran, Texas, and Florida), I think the implicit goal of every team is to win it all. Whether or not the owner verbalizes it seems to be splitting hairs to me.
March 3, 2008 at 9:15 am
9: I can see the reason for suspicion, though. Krasovic didn’t ask him “What are your goals?” and then Moores answered in one of many possible ways that would have meant “Sure.”Krasovic specifically asked if the goal this year is the franchise’s first World Series championship. Moores was specifically asked if the goal was A and his answer was that the goal is B. B’s a laudable goal, but it’s not A, and the question was about A.
The only real difference between those goals is how much risk you’re willing to take. This offseason, were there players available who we could have acquired who would have represented a major leap forward? Maybe not, but the team seems to give more weight to risk than reward these days. Before the 98 season, coming off a 76-86 record, they traded for Kevin Brown. Are we ever going to see the current management take that kind of gamble again? The division has only gotten stronger, which means a gamble has less chance of paying off, but I’m not confident they’d do it regardless of context.
March 3, 2008 at 10:03 am
Last week’s Chris Long interview at Friar Forecast which GY had in Friday’s links was the source for one of BP’s quotes of the week:
http://www.baseballprospectus......cleid=7196
That’s terrific, MB.
March 3, 2008 at 10:03 am
10: I agree. It was a specific question and had Moores just answered, like Steve C. mentioned, “Our goal every year is to win the World Series” then it would have been fine. As it is, playing meaningful game in September is really not that exciting as a goal. For the records, I’d be very happy to have the Padres play those games in September. The Padres’ roster for now is just not very conducive for a run at the WS title (too many if’s).
I’m guessing he was trying to be realistic by mentioning how competitive the division is going to be this season and afraid to have his words taken as a guaranteed for a WS ring by the wider public. Then again, it’s only Spring, he should be unreasonable in his hope for winning the WS. There’ll be plenty time for reality to set in.
March 3, 2008 at 10:08 am
12: Yeah, it opens at least a small can of worms. If you’re not ready to take the plunge this year (because nobody good enough was available, because the farm system wasn’t deep enough to acquire anyone good enough, because you’re still a year away from having a deep enough squad, etc.), fine. But not all of those factors were true every year since 2004.
It’s great to underpay for a player. Sometimes, though, a player can cost you market rate and still be a good addition. I don’t see how the team can see great value in Greg Maddux and his 100-ish ERA+ but not see the value in a 4-5 million investment in a pitcher who would provide similar results.
March 3, 2008 at 10:09 am
Re: 12 exactly!
March 3, 2008 at 10:18 am
Re: 13 Maddux puts butts in seats
March 3, 2008 at 10:28 am
15: That’s a lot of butts. How many extra butts are sitting in Petco for Maddux’s 15 home starts? He’d have to be some kind of Butt Magnet.
I think they see the value in Maddux being a very good bet to throw 200 league-average innings, even at 10 million, regardless of his effect on ticket sales. But if that’s true, then a comparable bet at 5 million would seem to make sense, too.
March 3, 2008 at 10:35 am
Re: 16 I dont know how many butts he puts in seats but I’d be more prone to go to a game if Maddux was on the mound over Wolf or Germano.
Your also correct in that he provides stability and 200+ IP every year.
March 3, 2008 at 10:51 am
17: There are also the fringe benefits that Maddux supposedly brings to the club, such as his mentoring of younger players and especially pitchers.
I don’t know why the FO is so dead-set against signing another starter this season, but it appears that they firmly believe they have the tools necessary in-house. I’m not sure why the extra 3 or 4 million makes a huge difference, but it appears to.
March 3, 2008 at 10:55 am
17: Oh, I agree he’s the 3rd most compelling SP draw, maybe 2nd among older fans (in front of CY). But there were Maddux home games that drew from the low 20s to the low 30s.
March 3, 2008 at 10:57 am
6: No, I don’t think that is the case at all. I don’t think the Pirates, the Royals, or the D-Rays have winning the WS as their goal; nor have they had it as a goal in recent years. And those are just the most obvious teams who are not interested in competing. I would imagine there are more franchises who are quite content to earn money for their owners by being better than the bottom tier clubs I’ve mentioned, but who really don’t care at all if they make the playoffs.
March 3, 2008 at 11:01 am
Butt Magnet! Made me think of Dana Carvey impersonating George Michael on SNL many years ago. “Look at my butt! It’s a perfect circle!” Carvey was great.
March 3, 2008 at 11:02 am
11: Awesome! Congratulations MB! Thanks for pointing this out TW.
March 3, 2008 at 11:32 am
Tom/11: Thanks for the heads up! I don’t always read quotes of the week (although I probably should), so I may have missed that. It is really awesome.
Pat: Thanks, as well!
Geoff, great job with this interview. John and Denis really do a great job over there. Looking forward to part 2.
March 3, 2008 at 11:41 am
Steve C: Can you email me direct? Do you have my email address? Thanks.
March 3, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Did y’all see the video interview on the network with Hoffy?
http://sports.espn.go.com/broa.....p;n8pe6c=2
March 3, 2008 at 12:11 pm
UT PadresBlog with a note on this morning’s “B” game …
http://www.signonsandiego.com/.....index.html
… 3-2 loss to Brewers in 6-innings …
March 3, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Lineups are posted for today’s “A” game …
http://sandiego.padres.mlb.com.....b_milmlb_1
March 3, 2008 at 12:24 pm
27 … Bard strands a pair in the first …
March 3, 2008 at 12:36 pm
BP’s STAT OF THE DAY
Top 5 2008 NL Left Fielders, by PECOTA Projected VORP
Player, Team, EqA, VORP
Adam Dunn, CIN, .306, 35.8
Matt Holliday, COL, .295, 35.2
Carlos Lee, HOU, .288, 32.7
Alfonso Soriano, CHN, .286, 31.0
Pat Burrell, PHI, .303, 28.1
… hmmm … hard to believe Pat Burrell is on this list??? And now with Soriano hurt, LF is pretty thin league-wide …
March 3, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Great interview Geoff. I hope Denis is right and Antonelli ends up in center. There are no good free agent center field options next year (and the team apparently won’t pay for them even if there were), and second base has been an easy position for teams to fill with respectable, cheap replacements in free agency. If he can play centerfield, it makes sense to push him to the most difficult defensive position he can handle.
March 3, 2008 at 12:37 pm
28 … CY gives up a run in the 1st … on 1 H + 1 BB + E by KK & 2 SBs …
March 3, 2008 at 12:44 pm
KG @ BP says (in this article http://www.baseballprospectus......cleid=7199, which I think is subscriber-only) “At this point, Headley is the favorite to win the left field” … which seems premature to me, but his primary point is how well Chase is doing in the early going, and how high KG rates his skills now (”an on-base/slugging machine who should sit in the middle of the Padres’ order for years to come”).
March 3, 2008 at 12:45 pm
29: I think it’s reasonable to expect Burrell to be a Top 5 VORP LF. He doesn’t hit for average, but he does an excellent job of getting on base and has plus power. And VORP/BP loves guys who can get on base.
March 3, 2008 at 12:50 pm
32 … OT, and not meaning to start more rants about the Padres commitment to slot (but I s’pose that’s what I’m doing) … here’s a KG comment that caught my eye re: Rick Porcello …
I got a lot of flak for ranking him No. 11 in this year’s Top 100 Prospects despite having not thrown a single pitch, and I’m already wondering if that ranking was a little low.
March 3, 2008 at 1:04 pm
31 - RBIs by CY and DaVanon get Padres up 3-2 3 … Zarate pitched a scoreless 3rd for Padres …
March 3, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Yeah I saw that note on Porcello via BP….makes you wonder….if they had taken Porcello instead of Schmidt, is this the #1 farm system in the game?
March 3, 2008 at 1:38 pm
36: No, but it’s probably Top 10 instead of mid-teens. Just too much separation between the Top 5 orgs and us to make up for it with one player. That’s not East Coast Bias against the Padres farm, either, regardless of what Moores thinks. Geez. Five years ago those East Coast writers were raving about the Padre system.
They could have gone Main instead of Schmidt, Burgess in the supplemental, and that might have pushed them into the Top 10 too. Burgess would have meant gambling that Kulbacki or Cumberland would have lasted until later in the 1st supplemental.
March 3, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Headley’s still tearing it up. Another double today (this one right-handed) and a solid single in three at bats.
March 3, 2008 at 1:44 pm
35 … I had that score wrong … it’s been 2-1 Padres since the top of 2nd … now @ top of 6th …
March 3, 2008 at 2:18 pm
OT … I know it’s Giants being Giants … but after seeing what Lowry did for the Giants today, I’m less worried about Wolf and Estes
http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.....b_sfnmlb_1
March 3, 2008 at 2:47 pm
39 … McAnulty with a 3-run HR … and Luis Rodriguez with 2 RsBI … Padres now up 7-1 in 8th …
March 3, 2008 at 2:50 pm
41 … Macias with an OF assist (”Fielder at 2nd base”, which sounds as iffy as when Fick CS’d Crabbe in the intrasquad game last week
) … anyone see or hear details of this play?
March 3, 2008 at 3:05 pm
42: baserunning mistake by Fielder
March 3, 2008 at 3:07 pm
38: apparently, Headley’s one out was a hard hit ball at someone
March 3, 2008 at 3:08 pm
LM: Here at the game, Fielder was doubled off second on a fly ball.
March 3, 2008 at 3:41 pm
45 … thanks! So mostly a mistake by Fielder … but sounds like also some heads-up by Macias …
All-in-all, today was a very offensive day
12-4 Padres in top of 9th, according to latest mlb.com online box score …
March 3, 2008 at 4:46 pm
a gaslampball’er found this news …
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/ne.....;type=lgns
Padres agree to terms with 24 players
March 3, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Not too many comments about the interview but good job Geoff.
There were some earlier comments about the Moores story by Krasovic in the U-T but no one commented on the part that really bugged me. In the article, Moores said “ballpark construction delays relating to Henderson’s litigation cost the Padres about $100 million.” What exactly does that mean? Does that mean that the Padres and Moores lost out on $100m of potential revenue? Or that it actually cost him an extra $100m? Or since the stadium was mostly taxpayer funded, does that mean that we ended up paying an extra $100m. This is my main complaint about Moores — he took millions of dollars from the city of San Diego yet right now the Padres have one of the lowest payrolls in baseball. And they’ve gone cheap in the draft, passing up the chance to get franchise players to save a little bit of money. I don’t mind the team passing on big name free agents as they are seldom worth the money but they just can’t continue to have poor drafts — it’s impossible to compete that way (or nearly impossible, they’ve done well the past 4 seasons).
March 3, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Adam Bass with two more scoreles innings today…
March 3, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Looking at the Padres lineup for their B game, the starting 2B is Edgar Gonzalez. I’d never heard of the guy so I looked up his stats:
http://minors.baseball-referen.....i?pid=5587
Good minor league numbers overall — check out his 2006 stint in Albuquerque. I’d much rather see him win a job then Oscar Robles or Jeff Davanon as they’ve both spent time in the majors, Gonzalez is turning 30 this season and has zero games in the majors and only 195 in Triple-A.
March 3, 2008 at 5:06 pm
OT … news from the NL Western front …
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/ne.....;type=lgns
Diamondbacks’ Owings skips start with sore shoulder
March 3, 2008 at 5:16 pm
50 … thanks for the info/link on Edgar … but I’m not following how/why you think it’s a negative if Robles/Davanon have MLB experience and Gonzalez does not? I’m OK with MLB experience not being much of a factor … but if anything, I think it has to be seen as a positive for both Robles and Davanon … though I know how “old school” that sounds …
March 3, 2008 at 5:17 pm
50 - I think the big hangup on Edgar is he’s a below average SS. I’ve never seen him play, but in his 6 years in the minors he only has 21 games at SS. That says something…
March 3, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Gosh I thought the Diamondbacks were shoe ins to win the division because none of their top 4 pitchers could ever get hurt……while the Padres would be lucky to get 150IP from Maddux.
To explain JM 100M argument:
-Ballpark construction costs increased about 20% while the lawsuits took place….this should account for about 40% of the 100M
-60M in lost revenue, which is 30M per year….sounds about right
March 3, 2008 at 5:43 pm
53 … great point … and none of those 21 games @ SS were last season …
So, where are we at with the backup SS role?
Robles started the “A” game today (wonder who played SS in the “B” game?) … and Crabbe finished up … hmmm, Robles only had 24 minor league games at SS (but he did play 54 games at SS for LAD in 2005) … can Crabbe only 6 … hmmm … that is all shaky …
March 3, 2008 at 5:59 pm
50, 53, 55: I’d rather have a backup SS who is below-average defensively but can swing it than a Rafael Belliard-type. Start him when Young is pitching, at home, at night. If Greene goes down for a long time it’ll be hard to survive with either type starting, but if Greene is healthy you’re not pulling him for defense.
If Crabbe can catch the balls hit near him playing short, and if his minor league hitting record is a product of real skill, he could be an almost ideal utility player. Our bench will be short enough, wrapping all the normal utility functions into one player would be a big advantage.
March 3, 2008 at 6:32 pm
56 … after looking at Crabbe’s numbers in the minors (http://minors.baseball-reference.com/players.cgi?pid=3222), I’m with you on this one, TW. It still bugs me that Fick was able to CS him … but I like his BB/K ratio … but note that his OPS jump from ‘06 to ‘07 is simply “park effects” (ie. lgOPS in ‘06 was .701 whereas lgOPS in ‘07 was .794 … so he basically league average those seasons … after being well below average in ‘05) … bummer he didn’t play more SS coming up … but I’ll bet if he had, he’d not been available in the Rule 5 draft …
March 3, 2008 at 8:14 pm
I was just saying I’d like to see a guy with no experience get a chance. I know that neither Davanon or Robles have much experience in the majors, but at least they’ve made it. I’m sure there are plenty of players in the minors that can hit if given the chance (although defensive ability is another thing) but for some reason GM’s prefer to sign retread. Jack Cust is a perfect example. At least the Padres didn’t sign a retread hitter this off-season.
March 3, 2008 at 8:50 pm
58 … now I’m not sure what you’re saying Jack Cust is an example of? Check out his past … http://thebaseballcube.com/pla.....Cust.shtml … before you make up your mind about what he is a perfect example of … I’m thinking he’s the perfect example of why GM’s prefer to sign retreads … because sometimes they explode for a 912 OPS …
March 3, 2008 at 10:40 pm
i thought will inman would crack the top 20… is there an injury issue???
March 4, 2008 at 5:45 am
60: Agree. I’d put Inman third among our pitching prospects, ahead of everyone but Latos and LeBlanc. His stuff may be short, but unlike Geer and Ramos he still gets strikeouts with it, and he wasn’t legally able to buy a beer until last month.
March 4, 2008 at 7:42 am
56: So you’d rather have Derek Jeter than Rafael Belliard as your backup shortstop, huh?
60: Inman is pretty obviously among the top 20 by any objective measure, but some people like fastballs more than they like guys who can pitch. I think Inman’s ability to command his fastball makes it a plus pitch, despite the fact that he usually throws it only in the 87-91 range.
March 4, 2008 at 8:11 am
61: It’s amazing how long Belliard stuck around with his sub-50 OPS+. 17 seasons! His high OPS+ as a regular was 61!
Completely agree on Inman, which I wrote in a post this morning that got lost in the DS filter. He should be our #3 pitching prospect behind Latos and LeBlanc. I understand the MadFriars will only rate guys they’ve seen, but one bad game in person shouldn’t outweigh his body of work. He didn’t struggle as badly as some other pitchers on that list who were older and working at lower levels.
I don’t think the MF crew loves fastballs so much; Geer and Ramos are both on the list and neither one of them cracks 90 with regularity. I’m pretty sure that if other teams call about our prospects, they’re asking for Inman before a lot of names on that list.
March 4, 2008 at 12:31 pm
[...] fans in the house, I’ve posted a Q&A with the folks at MadFriars.com over at Ducksnorts (Part 1, Part 2). Actually, even if you’re not a Padres fan, there’s some good stuff here in [...]
March 5, 2008 at 10:37 am
Seriously behind on my responses. First off, I’m glad to hear that folks enjoyed the interview.
#5: Totally agree. “Moores doesn’t want to win” is a tired refrain, IMO.
#11: Belated congrats to MB on the Prospectus mention. That’s awesome!
#16: Butt Magnet is my new favorite nickname.