Triple-A — Tucson 5, Portland 2
Craig Stansberry (SS): 1-for-3, BB, E
Chase Headley: 1-for-4
Brian Myrow: 0-for-4
Michael Barrett: 1-for-2
Chip Ambres (CF): 1-for-4, HR
Matt Antonelli: 0-for-3, E
Nick Hundley: 0-for-2 (didn’t start)
Josh Banks: 6 IP, 4 H, 1 R, 0 HR, 2 BB, 8 SO
Clay Hensley: 1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 0 BB, 1 SO
Jared Wells: 1 IP, 3 H, 3 R, 0 HR, 2 BB, 0 SO
Good to see Barrett and Hensley back in action… The Beavers led, 2-1, after seven but fell apart at the end.
Double-A — Frisco 4, San Antonio 1
Drew Macias: 0-for-4
Chad Huffman (DH): 2-for-4, HR
Kyle Blanks: 0-for-4
Seth Johnston (3B): 0-for-4, E (11)
Craig Cooper: 1-for-3, 2B
Colt Morton: 1-for-3
Steve Garrison: 5.2 IP, 6 H, 4 R, 2 HR, 2 BB, 5 SO
Neil Jamison: 1 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 0 BB, 3 SO (17 pitches, 15 strikes)
High-A — Lake Elsinore 4, Inland Empire 1
Javis Diaz (DH): 1-for-4, BB, SB
Cedric Hunter: 2-for-5, HR
Eric Sogard: 0-for-5
Mitch Canham: 2-for-4, 2B
Kellen Kulbacki: 1-for-3, 2B
Rayner Contreras: 2-for-4, 2B
Nathan Culp: 6 IP, 4 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 1 BB, 7 SO, HBP
Justin Hampson: 1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 0 BB, 2 SO
Hunter goes yard for the second straight night — wind blowing 14 mph from left to right field, which is where the homer went… Sogard in a bit of a tailspin: he’s 8-for-41 in his last 10 games, with no extra-base hits… Strong outing from Culp… Hampson makes his 2008 debut.
Low-A — Fort Wayne 3, Great Lakes 2
Luis Durango (CF): 2-for-5
Andrew Cumberland (SS): 1-for-4, BB
Justin Baum: 1-for-5, 2B
Yefri Carvajal: 2-for-5
Shane Buschini (DH): 2-for-4, 2 2B
Wynn Pelzer: 6 IP, 4 H, 1 R, 0 HR, 0 BB, 3 SO (10 GO)
Pelzer continues to impress. He’s becoming one of my favorites down at Fort Wayne.
Yahoo has a story up with Towers saying he is ready for wholesale changes:
Here’s another one, more quotes from KT:
Re: Towers and wholesale changes:
Would Towers being fired/resigning qualify as wholesale changes?
I don’t think they can do anything to the team to improve the situation to prevent Towers from having to watch ‘this’ for another four months. There is little to trade that will return much value and there’s not enough bursting at the AAA-seams to improve the play.
If the team is to improve, it will have to be largely with the pieces we’ve put together thus far, save for some tinkering with LF (e.g., Headley) and C (Barett back from the DL) and the back-end of the rotation (e.g., Hensley). Greene and Kouz will have to improve and the bullpen will have to return to 2005-07 form. Otherwise, the FO will have gotten the 90 win prediction correct, but it will be for our opponents.
I don’t think that losing Towers solves the problem, but there always has to be a fall guy (see Magadan, Dave 2006; Rettemund, Merv 2007).
Personally, I’m looking forward to selling off the vets. Might as well get what we can, and set ourselves up for the future.
I’m actually an intern for the Inland Empire 66ers. Hampson looked good today, and I have a feeling that him and Hensley will help the ML pitching staff pretty soon.
Also, Hunter’s home runs today and yesterday were rather impressive. Just turned on what looked like fastballs and easily hit them over the tall right field fence.
Kulbacki from what I have seen recently over this series and from his numbers just looks completely lost at the plate. His double today was the first ball that I have seen him hit hard.
Canham has been on fire, getting on base a ton and his double today came off Esteban Loaiza and just barely missed leaving the park.
#4@Masticore317: Selling off is a good idea IF you can get some value in return. There is no sense in dropping guys like KG, OG, CY, etc if we are not getting something in return.
My guess is that there will be tinkering…PMac/Huber done and gone, some of the bully blown out…but wholesale changes will have to wait another month or so to see if one or two of the pieces can get hot. If Kouz hits 5 bombs in 2 weeks, he may be out and Headley back to 3b…If KG gets hot he might fetch us some useful pieces…but for now, we would be asking a whole lot for some tomato cans and that is rarely successful.
#2@Pads Fans: You know what is most telling in this article…or actually, page? The #1 highlight of the night is a 6-4-3, routine ground ball, turned for a DP. Nothing flashy. Nothing spectacular. Not even showing a run scored. No, a routine, batting practice, easy, ground ball double play. Sad.
And Towers was fired up last night, wasn’t he?
Did anyone happen to see Edmonds over the shoulder catch in Houston last night ?
#6 Coronado Mike; Sure you want something good in return, but there may be some salary dumping that will take place too. IMO, the pitchers might bring a good return, but someone like Giles might be traded simply to cut payroll in a lost season. Who knows ! I didnt think anyone would grab Edmonds either, but the Cubs picked him up. Then again, it cost them next to nothing.
1988 Padres started 15-30, fired Larry Bowa and ended up going 83-79.
#10@JP: Are you advocating the firing of BB?
Speaking of Padre trade possibilities…….
#12@parlo: So OG went the route of blocking clubs that he doesn’t want to play for, rather than those that might want him. Should make a trade easier.
I would definitely move sooner rather than later.
#11@Coronado Mike: NO !
What the heck are we going to do (this season) about centerfield ?
#1@Zagz: Good. He should be disgusted with what he’s seeing on the field.
#3@Sean Callahan: Yes, although KT isn’t the problem.
#4@Masticore317: You may be disappointed in what the Padres are able to get in return for some of these guys. Maddux is arguably our most marketable commodity, and the last time he was traded, it was for Cesar Izturis.
#5@Mike: Thanks for the details. I’ve seen Hunter a handful of times this year, and he’s made nice contact but not driven the ball. Good to hear first-hand accounts of the homers. And I like what I’ve seen of Canham at the plate, though I’m skeptical of his ability to remain a catcher. Good news on the Hampson front as well.
#13 Tom Waits; Plus, sometimes No Trade Clauses are outdated. A previous cellar dweller might be viewed in a whole new light if the teams prospects have improved. Or maybe there was a particular manager or player that was disliked and is no longer with the team. Maybe he disliked playing RF in a certain stadium, but the team now has a new home. This season, I think anything is possible. Towers used the phrase “wholesale changes” last night.
#15@JP: Gerut, unless a CF comes back in a trade.
#17@parlo: Usually the player gets to submit a list at the start of the year, but whichever way you go, there’s a risk. You might leave a team that you hate off the list because they have an all-star outfield and then find yourself in that uniform because one of those all-stars gets hurt. But by putting Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Washington on his list, he basically gave away almost half his slots.
#12@parlo: I hate when they call Chase a LF’er…he is so a 3rd baseman…
Also, the list of teams Giles has a no-trade to (Baltimore, Boston, Detroit and Tampa Bay, plus Florida, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh and Washington) is interesting.
And here is one more Padres story I found this morning. Who says we dont get coverage by the national media ?
#19 Coronado Mike; Lots of previous cellar dwellers in there. Boston seems like a strange choice. Maybe he doesnt want to hit at Fenway, or learn to play RF in Fenway. It could be that he thinks he would be a platoon player in Boston.
#20@parlo: From that article…
Somehow, the Padres’ statistical analysis folks projected that this club would win 90 games. Maybe they meant over a two-year period.
You can win with power, and no speed.
You can win with speed, and little power.
But to field a team with neither?
It boggles the mind.
#22@Coronado Mike: Well, the only 2 positions that had new players were CF and LF. The same Padres hit for power last year; Giles is even hitting for more. It’s catastrophic failure of players who HAVE hit in the past. It’s not like the Padres were expecting a bunch of punch-and-judies to turn into sluggers. They were expecting hitters to be what they had been. They didn’t have pie-in-the-sky projections for most of those regulars. The place they deluded themselves was CF, and possibly LF as well.
May I claim credit for Hunter’s power surge? As soon as I questioned his power development, he pops these 2 HR’s. Nice!
More to the topic of discussion, sure, go ahead and trade the vets, but they are not going to set us up for the future. We simply do not have much of value at this point. Wolf, Maddux, Estes? They aren’t going to bring anything worthwhile; same for Giles, Gerut, Hairston and Iguchi.
I really don’t understand the trade CY sentiment. Sure he is likely to bring back something worthwhile, but he’s the sort of young, affordable and under team control player you want to keep to build around. I guess some people have some scepticism about his durability, but this would almost certainly be reflected in the return he brings.
We could be seeing some salary dumping coming up, but I don’t see it helping us set ourselves up for the future unfortunately. I think we’re going to have to depend on the drafts and international development to pay dividends at some point or become resigned to poor performing clubs again. Sorry to sound so pessimistic, but I’m just not feeling it this morning.
I think many here are underestimating what we might get in trade returns. No, none of our guys are going to net us a major-league ready AAA phenom. Those guys never get traded these days anyway. But look at what we got last year for Linebrink – three pitchers, one of whom may be in the big league rotation next year and a reliever who was with the Padres last year. And Garrison may turn out to be the best in that group. So can’t a Maddux / Greene or Tadahito / Bell or Meredith combo net us a couple of prospects ready to break in with the club next year? If Towers has proven anything, it’s that he has an uncanny ability to fleece opposing GM’s.
I won’t be the least bit surprised if he ends up with a candidate for the rotation in 2009 as well as a couple of good, young position prospects. In fact, Milwaukee is looking for some rotation and bullpen help – why not go after LaPorta or Alcides Escobar? LaPorta is probably a pipe dream, but I would have said the same thing about Inman for Linebrink before it happened.
Any chance Kouz is included in the trade deals?
Iguchi – Indians
Maddux – Cubs/Red Sox
Wolf – Brewers
Kouz – Indians?
Giles – Seattle? Kansas City?
Had a weird thought last night about trading Kouz, moving Headley back to 3B and (this is where the pipe dream comes in) spending money on Adam Dunn in LF.
None of those players seems likely to be in such high demand that we can name our price, but they shouldn’t just return 4A trash, either.