Padres Farm Report (14 May 08)

Triple-AIowa 5, Portland 2

Craig Stansberry (SS): 1-for-4
Chase Headley: 1-for-4, HR
Will Venable (CF): 0-for-3, HBP
Chip Ambres (RF): 1-for-4, 2B
Brian Myrow (PH): 0-for-1
Josh Banks: 6 IP, 4 H, 3 R, 1 HR, 1 BB, 3 SO
Dirk Hayhurst: 1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 0 BB, 2 SO
Jared Wells: 1 IP, 2 H, 2 R, 0 HR, 1 BB, 2 SO

Hayhurst continues to get people out. He’d better stop it, or he’ll find himself in San Diego before long. That 11 K/9 and 6.6 K/BB will eventually get someone’s attention.

Double-ASan Antonio 5, Corpus Christi 0

Drew Macias: 2-for-5
Chad Huffman: 2-for-4
Kyle Blanks: 1-for-4, HR
Jose Lobaton: 1-for-4
Craig Cooper: 2-for-2, 2B (didn’t start)
Matt Buschmann: 5 IP, 4 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 1 BB, 8 SO
Neil Jamison: 1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 1 BB, 1 SO

Third straight shutout for the Missions… I listened to a good chunk of this game on radio. Apparently right-hander Manny Ayala has rejoined the club after missing time due to an undisclosed injury… The announcers also were raving about Macias’ defense in center field.

More coverage at the San Antonio Express-News.

High-ALake Elsinore 5, Stockton 3

Cedric Hunter: 3-for-5, 2B
Eric Sogard: 0-for-3, BB
Mitch Canham: 2-for-4
Kellen Kulbacki: 1-for-3, BB
Javis Diaz: 1-for-3, BB
Drew Miller: 6 IP, 10 H, 3 R, 2 HR, 0 BB, 2 SO

Low-AWest Michigan 11, Fort Wayne 3

Luis Durango (CF): 0-for-4, E
Andrew Cumberland (DH): 0-for-4
Justin Baum: 1-for-3, HBP, E
Felix Carrasco: 0-for-3, BB
Yefri Carvajal: 0-for-4
Mat Latos: 4 IP, 4 H, 1 R, 0 HR, 1 BB, 3 SO (6 GO)
Geoff Vandel: 2.1 IP, 6 H, 6 R, 1 HR, 0 BB, 0 SO

Cumberland at DH? Um, okay…

Tagged as: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

15 Responses »

  1. In Buster Olney’s ESPN blog he provides a link to how Rick Porcello is doing at 19 in the Florida State League (which would be the equivalent of pitching in the Cal League, only in a much more pitcher friendly environment).

    This is a missed opportunity in the draft that is going to come back to haunt the Padres. Twenty six other teams passed on him because of his contract demands, he evenutually signed for a little north of $7 million and is on the 40 man roster, but this is the type of gamble that small to medium market teams like the Padres need to take.

    After San Diego just flushed $6 million dollars down the toilet with Edmunds and an equally bad decision to offer Michael Barrett arbitration on the mistaken assumption that Tampa was going to sign him – which costs the team $3 million, how is taking a flyer on someone who may have been the best high school pitcher since Josh Becket a chance you don’t take? Heck, it’s cheaper.

    Taking a young RHP out of high school is a big risk. Injuries, maturity, etc….but if you are a team that is not going to participate in signing FA’s like Barry Zito, Andruw Jones and so on – a move I wholeheartedly endorse – you have to spend money and take gambles in the draft. But if one of your top criterias in looking at a first round draft pick is signablity you’re never going to land the potential superstar.

    Again if Porcello makes the majors its not a question that the Tigers have great scouts – as are the recent stories about the Diamondbacks – more of a recognition that the front office is willing to spend money in the draft. There are not a whole lot of people who follow amateur baseball that did not believe Stephen Drew, Justin Upton and Max Scherzer were going to be quality MLB players – other teams just weren’t willing to pay the price.

    The Diamondbacks decided that if they were not going to be, and couldn’t afford to be players in the FA market, they were going to be in the draft when much smaller amounts of money goes much further. This is not an apples-to-apples comparison – there is a huge difference between spending what it would take to get Porcello and laying down a seven year $126 million deal for Zito.

    I admit, initially I could see the Padres reasoning in not taking him – but in light of recent developments this was a big mistake, one that in all probability the team will make again and again and again.

    Just think how nice it would have been to have both Mat Latos and Rick Porcello in the starting rotation for six MLB years.

    Sorry for the long rant…just annoyed.

  2. On Dirk we should have an interview coming up with him on in the next few days…a really interesting guy.

  3. #2@John Conniff: Excellent point John. I actually prefer not to think about how nice it would be to have Porcello and Latos in the rotation because it would depress me too much. When you think about the money they’ll end up wasting this season ($6 million for Edmonds; $3 million for Barrett; $1 million for Prior) on guys that aren’t helping the team, it’s hard not to be annoyed. This might just be foolish optimism on my part, but with so much money that could be coming off of the books next season (Giles, Maddux, Wolf, Iguchi, Barrett, Edmonds = app. $35 million), and their ability to finally start filling some of the holes on the major league team with players from their own farm system, I can see Moores opening the wallet for a top amateur player, whether it’s in the draft, Latin America or the Far East.

  4. #4@JMAR: Moores/SA have made it clear that they will not pay over slot for the players that they draft. According to them its to stay within good standing with MLB and not about the money…

    I would love to see him spend more money in scouting in both Asia and the Caribian but we will see if having a recuced payroll will do that.

  5. #4@JMAR: I know I’m picking nits, but it’s what I do. :-)

    I agree with John as well, but I don’t see Barrett or Prior as being a waste of money. $3 million is basically a league average salary anymore, and you have to have a backup catcher. $1 million for Prior was a great gamble. Edmonds was terribly disappointing as an FO move, but the other two I don’t see as bad at all. Sure they aren’t working out, but that’s hindsight. Edmonds was something most people here saw coming all winter long.

  6. At Lake Elsinore, Cedric’s OBP is nearly .400 … and it sure seems like Sogard has stop’d hitting doubles …

  7. I think one of the better points that I read was by Tom Waits the other day when he noted that paying over the slot in the draft is what a team with San Diego’s financial constraints should do as a matter of policy because signing established stars is really out of their budget. To not draft someone like Latos isn’t simply a question of skimping, its just not good policy (my apologies Tom if I didn’t get your quotes exactly correct).

    I liked the signing of Prior and would do it again because its a reasonable gamble. I disagree with Barrett, $3 million is far too much to pay for a backup catcher – especially when you have people within the organization that can do the job. If Carlin plays well I fully expect the team to try to dump Barrett if they can. The signing of Edmunds, that should fully be on Towers and his staff.

    While I like the new Dominican complex and the increase in international scouting its also important to realize that all the MLB teams are pretty much doing this now and essentially the teams that pay over the slot in the draft are more likely to be more agressive internationally where its just a bidding war.

    Thus, its not unreasonable to assume that if a team is unwilling to pay big bucks domestically for top high school talent, it probably isn’t going to pay big bucks for a 16 year old Dominican.

  8. #8@John Conniff: That’s it, perfectly. The difference between what the Mets and the Padres can/will pay a free agent major leaguer is 75-100 million dollars. At the draft level, the difference between slot and what a premium talent requires is anywhere between 50K and 4 million dollars. And for that the team gets control of the player for at least 6 years, normally 8, and often 10. It’s absolutely counterfactual to contend that the playing field isn’t level when it comes to the draft, or that big market teams can influence draftable players so much that smaller-revenue teams can’t compete. Sure, the players have options if they don’t want to sign. But the team holds the biggest hammer of all, the chance to play baseball and get a check with 7 numbers before the decimal point.

    Prior was a good gamble, but that’s what he was, a gamble.

    I don’t mind Barrett because catchers are volatile; if he hadn’t been hurt, he’d be the starter right now and Bard would be backing him up (assuming Bard had struggled). One way to look at it is the Padres were paying 5.2 million for the catching position. That’s reasonable.

  9. #8@John Conniff: John … what’s your view of why the Padres have made the decision to stick to “slot”? It seems they think it’s best for their business (ie. the Padres) and/or perhaps for MLB in general. Just playing the “Porcello” card seems to be spining the conversation away from the Padres larger perspective. I would also like the Padres to change their policy on this … but first I need to know their reasons. Is Detroit getting any consequences for not sticking to slot? Is MLB getting any consequences for Detroit not sticking to slot? Would the consequences be more severe/obvious if more teams didn’t stick to slot … or there weren’t any such concept as “slot”?

  10. #10@LynchMob: BA has written a couple of stories about this. If a team wants to pay over slot, they have to tell the commissioner’s office, which will try to talk them out of it. But there’s very little “punishment” of offenders. Arizona had gone over slot when MLB helped them with their debt. The Yankees went hugely over slot and received the 2008 All-Star Game. The commissioner’s office can fine teams that exceed slot, but it’s not required.

    Here’s a piece from Jim Callis on how the slot system actually works.

  11. #10@LynchMob: To the best of my knowledge there hasn’t been any sanctions by MLB against teams like Detroit, Arizona or Boston that go above the slot.

    I like the job that both Alderson and Fuson have done since coming on board – and Towers too for that matter. I believe that they see the draft as a type of crapshoot and have been burned too many times before with putting too many eggs in high profile picks that haven’t lived up to their billing – Mark Phillips and Sean Burroughs or because of injuries – Jake Gautreau, Tim Stauffer, Cesar Carrillo and too an extent Matt Bush.

    By attempting to acquire more picks in the first three rounds gives them more players – thus more chances to succeed if you believe all of the picks are roughly equal. Selecting more college players, who are closer to realizing their potential also leads to more certainity.

    I don’t have a problem with any of those philosophies but it is not a mutually exclusive concept from what myself and others are advocating.

    I don’t see any problem stating that in the first two rounds the Padres should try to take the best player available. Period. The costs, as Tom pointed out above, are not prohibitive and in the grand scheme of things its good business.

  12. #12@John Conniff: John … what’s your view of why the Padres have made the decision to stick to “slot”?

  13. #13@LynchMob: I think its what I wrote above, they see it as the most cost effective way to build a team. I agree with the concept in general, but just think they should take at least one or two flyers every draft.

  14. #14@John Conniff: Thanks. I guess I think some of basis for their decision to stick to slot is a belief that it’s better for MLB overall … the decision to have slots was a “team decision” and they are sticking with it. I’d guess they see “one or two flyers” as going half-ass with the team decision. And I certainly realize that calling it a “team decision” makes it sound like they may not have voted that way … and I think we’re both sure that they did (ie. I think Moores likes something about the concept of “slot”, and I’d guess SA does also).

    Question for you (and I realize this is buried and you’ll not likely find it) … are you advocating MLB change their policy so that there’s no “slot” for the first 2 rounds, but then there is after that? Or every team can “go over slot” 2 times per draft?

    Eh, it seems the point of “slot” is specifically for those 1 or 2 times when teams are tempted to go “over” …

    Another question … what’s the rationale for not allowing trades of draft picks? It seems like if you allow that then you can more easily enforce slot … ie. if a team wants to get a better player, it has to trade up for him.