Padres Farm Report (29 May 08)

Before we get started, I’ve got a new article up at Hardball Times about a few stories I’ve been tracking this season. I’ve also been interviewed over at Friar Nation. Yes, my revised win projection for the Padres is 73. Seems kinda bleak, but they’d actually need to break even the rest of the way to achieve it. When you look at it that way, I’m being perhaps too optimistic…

Triple-ASacramento 3, Portland 2

Josh GeerPeter Ciofrone (RF): 1-for-4, 2B
Chase Headley: 1-for-4
Brian Myrow: 0-for-4
Chip Ambres (CF): 0-for-3, BB
Craig Stansberry (SS): 0-for-2, S
Matt Antonelli: 0-for-2, BB
Vince Sinisi (PH): 0-for-1
Josh Geer: 7 IP, 7 H, 3 R, 1 HR, 2 BB, 8 SO (9 GO)
Joe Thatcher: 1 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 0 BB, 0 SO
Paul Abraham: 1 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 0 BB, 0 SO (3 GO)

Antonelli’s batting average is down to .178… Sinisi, out all year with a fractured right wrist sustained during spring training, came off the disabled list and made his season debut… Solid effort from Geer. The homer was to the rehabbing Eric Chavez (Mt. Carmel HS).

Double-ASan Antonio 7, Springfield 5

Chad HuffmanDrew Macias: 2-for-4, BB, SB, E
Chad Huffman: 3-for-4, 2B, HR, BB
Kyle Blanks: 0-for-4, HBP
Craig Cooper: 0-for-2, HBP
Seth Johnston: 1-for-5, 2B
Colt Morton: 0-for-3, HBP
Will Inman: 4 IP, 4 H, 5 R, 1 HR, 2 BB, 4 SO, HBP (90 pitches, 58 strikes)
Jonathan Ellis: 1 IP, 2 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 1 BB, 0 SO (3 GO)
Neil Jamison: 2 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 0 BB, 4 SO (2 GO)

Huffman is en fuego… Rough start for Inman… Dominant outing for Jamison — six batters, four strikeouts, two ground outs.

Pat Turner at the San Antonio Express-News pens a nice article on Cooper.

High-ALake Elsinore 6, Rancho Cucamonga 2

Corey KluberJavis Diaz: 1-for-4, S, SB
Cedric Hunter: 1-for-3, BB, SF
Eric Sogard: 1-for-5
Mitch Canham: 2-for-4, BB
Rayner Contreras: 1-for-3, HBP, E
Kellen Kulbacki: 2-for-4
Corey Kluber: 6.2 IP, 3 H, 1 R, 0 HR, 1 BB, 6 SO

Third consecutive strong start from Kluber (18.1 IP, 14 H, 5 BB, 17 SO, 2.45 ERA over that stretch).

Low-ADayton 5, Fort Wayne 4

Yefri CarvajalLuis Durango: 2-for-3, 2 BB
Justin Baum: 1-for-5, 2B, E (15)
Shane Buschini: 0-for-2, BB, E
Yefri Carvajal: 1-for-4, HR
Jeremy McBryde: 4.2 IP, 7 H, 2 R, 0 HR, 0 BB, 4 SO
Geoff Vandel: 1.1 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 HR, 0 BB, 1 SO

More coverage at OurSports Central.

Draft Watch: Tanner Scheppers

So, yeah, next week I’ll take a look at some guys who might be on the Padres draft list. For now, I’m still indulging the fantasy of how I would run the show.

Tanner Scheppers, RHP, Fresno St.

pre-draft rankings:

The only reason Scheppers might slip to #23 is a stress fracture in his right shoulder. If not for that, he’s a top 10 pick. With the Padres’ recent history of first-round pitching flameouts (Tim Stauffer, Cesar Carrillo, Nick Schmidt), they probably won’t be willing to gamble on Scheppers, but if he’s still there at #42 or #46, who knows. When healthy, he works with a 92-96 mph fastball that touched 99 mph in a relief appearance, and a power breaking ball.

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

32 Responses »

  1. Have you considered linking to prospects’ First Inning page or something similar? That would make it easier to get a look at their season stats when reading these. You could even use their linker page:

  2. hey I was surprised that you think Stansberry will actually still be in the organization by September..;)

    Nice interview, those are great guys at Friar Nation.

  3. Greeat Interview GY! Have you ever thought about doing a monthly or even weekly DS pod cast?

  4. FYI – According to this mornings Oregonian, everyone’s favorite Non-Prospect Dirk Hayhurst is getting the start for the Beavers on the hill tonight against the River Cats.

  5. #5@Rain Delay: Yikes, that seems odd … no chance he goes more than 5, right? In fact, perhaps not even more than 3-4? I wonder why …

  6. Geoff (and everyone), two questions:
    1. What in the world is causing Antonelli to have such a piss poor batting average when he was outstanding last year?
    2. When Headley gets the call in a few weeks to join the big league club, do you think Huffman gets the call to AAA?

  7. #6@LynchMob: Well they don’t have that many ‘true’ starters. But yeah I bet Dirk gets 4 maybe 5 innings of work. They carry 12 pitchers on the roster, which is exactly half of the active roster (AAA you can only have 24 active players).

    And just at a glance it looks as though they only have 4 starters, so someone has to be that fifth guy. So they maybe rotating through the pen for the 5th starter.

  8. #7@Loren: I think, from at least what I’ve seen is that he’s almost too patient at the plate, and the then finds himself in a 0-2 hole and he has to try and battle back from it, which leads to protecting the plate and swinging at stuff he would swing at early in the at-bat.

    That’s at least my take from what I’ve seen of him. Which is a lot this season.

  9. #9@Rain Delay: “Wouldn’t Swing at”…not enough coffee in my system yet. lol

  10. #4@Steve C: Yeah, I’ve done a couple of podcasts in the past and they were a bit labor intensive for my taste. I toy with the idea every now and then, but I’m not sure there’s enough of a value add.

    #5@Rain Delay: Good for Dirk. Here’s hoping he makes the most of his opportunity.

    #7@Loren: Having no inside information whatsoever, I have to believe that Huffman would be a great candidate for in-season promotion.

  11. #9 Rain Delay
    It almost sounds like he’s the perfect money ball player taken to the most logical conclusion – a player that tries to walk at all costs :-p. He needs to be kicked in the butt a few times or, perhaps, shock therapy to swing at nice fastballs he sees over the plate.

    Since you’ve seen him alot, where did this insanely excessive plate discipline come from? I know he’s been very patient and very good at knowing the strike zones but still he couldn’t have been THIS bad at LE or SA.

  12. #12@Loren: It’s 1/3 of the season. He hit a lot of pitches last year, this is probably temporary. Right now he has an insanely low BABIP of 205. That’s about 100 points lower than what’s generally considered normal.

  13. #13@Tom Waits: That’s not to dismiss Rain Delay’s observation. Sometimes a low BABIP will be caused by taking weak, defensive swings. But a player’s slump will rarely be cured by someone going R. Lee Ermey on him.

  14. #14@Tom Waits: Oh I disagree!!! Everyone needs The Gunny to kick their behind now and then. :-) R. Lee Ermey rocks!

  15. #15@Pat: I’ll bet you’re the kind of guy that would…..wait, I can’t write that quote here during the family hour.

    BA has a new draft tracker up. Of the guys that are currently ranked between 15-30 (which doesn’t really mean much in terms of who will be there), the most Padre-type players seem to be:

    Josh Fields, RHP, Georgia (reliever)
    Jason Castro, C, Stanford
    Andrew Cashner , RHP, TCU (reliever)
    Ryan Perry, RHP, Arizona (reliever)
    Ike Davis, 1b/OF, Arizona State
    Jemile Weeks, 2b, Miami
    Reese Havens, SS, South Carolina

    As mentioned previously, MLB’s Jonathan Mayo says we’ve paid quite a bit of attention to Zach Collier, currently at 20 on BA’s Draft Tracker.

    There are several college hitters and pitchers who seem likely to be targets with our 1st round supplementals, including Conor Gillaspie (3b, Wichita State) and Dan Schlereth (lhp, Arizona).

    This post is in no way an endorsement of drafting these people.

  16. #16@Tom Waits: I admittedly know next to nothing about the upcoming draft, so who do you think we should draft (that would feasibly be around in round 23)? It seems like you’re not wild about who the Padres would pick, but who do you think would reasonably be the best possible choice with the 23rd pick?

  17. #17@Phantom: It’s not so much a question of any one pick, but the balance of them. For example, maybe Havens is a stretch at 23, but if you get him, you could have a SS in AA next year. Then you take some risks with your later picks, but HS kids take money to sign, often more than slot.

    But as to what premium talents could be available when we pick:

    1. I really like Collier’s upside at 23.

    2. Gerrit Cole has PHENOMENAL stuff, but most scouts think he’s an a-hole and he’s demanding big-time money. There are some questions about his mechanics, too, but he’s a Latos-quality arm.

    3. Casey Kelly, SS / RHP, is a great athlete. His rawness at the plate is a legitimate concern.

    Right now there’s no Porcello-type of player who seems likely to fall to 23, so being conservative there isn’t fatal. With only 2 supplemental first rounders this year, I’d hope to take a chance with at least one of them.

  18. #17@Phantom:

    For me I think all of GY’s targeted kids would be fantastic if they fall to us. I have been scouring the internet also and have developed a huge man crush on Anthony Hewitt. I also like Issac Galloway in the 1st or sup. if he falls that far. If Tanner Sheppers were to fall (No way do I think he does) he is the type of college arm I would love even with the stress fracture.

    With that said I fully expect the Padres to take a kid that can hit but may not have a real position (Gillespie, Davis) or a pitcher that throws strikes and has control but no + pitches.

    I will be extremely dissapointed if we take a reliever.

    Weeks to me is intriuging because his bat is projectable and he may still have some untapped upside. With his athleticism I wonder if he could also be a CF’r going forward.

  19. #19@KRS1: The latest report on Scheppers is that it’s not a stress fracture, but that an MRI evaluated by Dr. Andrews (yes, the guy who does so many arm surgeries) revealed wear and tear in the shoulder. What worries me there is that you may pay for a college starter and end up with a college reliever anyway.

    On Galloway, I find myself agreeing with Jim Callis: If there are questions about the bat before the draft, it’s usually better to pass. I don’t see either of them at 23, but they’d be great buys at 42. Bulk Galloway up a little bit, give him some kind of loading mechanism, and see what happens.

    Weeks as a CF is very interesting.

  20. 19 & 20
    Lets say hypothetically that we do get Weeks, is there any chance that could suggest a move of Antonelli to the outfield instead?

  21. #20@Tom Waits:

    I hadn’t heard that on Sheppers… Sounds like it could be ugly and you can count me out if that is the case.

    You’re probably right about Galloway in the 1st but I do like his tools a lot and think he could be a steal at 42.

    I’d rather Antonelli focus on hitting than having to learn yet another position.

  22. #16@Tom Waits: Do the Padres have any sort of history or expressed interest in drafting college relievers? Or are these guys linked to them because they like college players and dislike risk?

    I personally do not understand the point of drafting college relievers. Haven’t teams learned by now that relievers are just failed starters? There’s no upside at all, and there appears to be some risk, because Street is probably the only success story of the college relievers thus far.

  23. #16@Tom Waits: I would be pleased with Castro or Weeks.

    #18@Tom Waits: Agreed about balancing the picks. If Tyler Ladendorf (JC shortstop) is available at #42, I’d love to see us grab him on the heels of a more polished guy like Weeks.

    #19@KRS1: Hewitt is rising like crazy; I don’t see him slipping to #23. Mayo has Ethan Martin going #24, after we take Schlereth. If Martin is available, I hope we don’t pass on him in favor of Schlereth.

  24. #23@Ben B.:

    I can’t recall us drafting a college reliever, but this year the college starters aren’t deep.

    In college, closers aren’t so often failed starters as they are in pro ball. Teams don’t need as many innings from their SP, and college closers are more frequently used like the fireman relievers of the 60s-mid 80s.

    There may not be enough information on college relievers to say that they’ve generally failed as draft picks. Teams tend to rush them more than college starters. Cordero was pretty good for a while, and with Street, that’s 2 out of a not-very-big group of recent college relievers. That’s without searching too deep, I expect there are more successes.

  25. #21@Loren: If they move Antonelli, it will be because they’re worried about his D and because Sogard (maybe Cionfrone at the way outside) is pushing them. Not because of a kid they just drafted.

    More likely that they’d let Weeks play 2b in the Northwest League, then switch him to CF in the winter.

  26. #24@Geoff Young: Agree on Martin. He has the athletic profile to play RF or to be a top-shelf 3b. Schlereth….it’s like TS Garp buying a house after a plane crashes into it because it’s pre-disastered.

  27. OT … check out Kevin Goldstein’s look back at Arizona’s 2007 draft …

    Not What They Were Hoping For: In last year’s draft, the Diamondbacks spent a little over a million dollars on a pair of West Coast college right-handers who were high on polish and low on pure stuff. Supplemental first-round pick Wes Roemer and second-round selection Barry Enright both won a ton of college games with average velocity, decent breaking balls and laser-like precision, and that was enough for Arizona to begin both pitchers in the High-A California League. So far, both are still filling up the strike zone, but both are getting hit awfully hard as well. Roemer has an impressive 50 strikeouts against just 17 walks in 58 innings, but he also has a 5.12 ERA thanks to 76 hits allowed, including 10 home runs; Enright has a similar line of 47 whiffs and just 13 walks in 55 1/3 innings but, like Roemer, he’s been torched for 77 hits, leading to a 5.37 ERA. Once seen as a pair of pitching prospects who lacked high ceilings but could move quickly through the system, the brakes are now firmly engaged on both.

    … hmmm, sounds like the Padres aren’t the only team with a “high on polish and low on pure stuff” strategy … I wonder why? (note: I’m asking that tonge-in-cheek because I think it’s a necessary / valuable part of many team’s draft strategy … because it often results in value to the organization)

  28. From the same Kevin Goldstein article, this about a pair of Padre prospects …

    Not Great, But Big Leaguers: While the Padres pride themselves on pitching (and with a big league club average just over three runs a game, how could they not?), there’s more coming, and two arms at San Diego’s Double-A San Antonio affiliate caught the eye of one pro scout. Left-hander Steve Garrison and righty Will Inman, both acquired in last summer’s Scott Linebrink trade, are both pitching well for the Missions, and one scout who recently evaluated the pair thought that both will be successful in the majors, although on a somewhat limited level. “Inman is just so unusual,” said the scout. “He’s a fly-ball pitcher with a funky arm angle and a funky breaking ball, and it’s all just kind of weird. I don’t like him as a starter–just too many balls up and flat–but he’d be great for their bullpen in that park.” As for Garrision, the scout gave him a slightly higher grade when it came to upside. “Like Inman, he’s not overpowering, but he’s big-league worthy,” the scout continued. “I could see him starting or relieving, really. The fastball is average, but the other stuff is pretty good, and he’s got plenty of feel, command, athleticism and aggressiveness.” A concise conclusion: “They’re not phenomenal, but they’re good.”

    … fyi.

  29. #28@LynchMob: The difference, of course, is that Arizona also drafts (and signs) high-upside players, including Jarrod Parker in 2007. Parker was in high school last year. This year in the MWL he’s struck out 30 in 36 innings, most of them a year or two older than him, with only 9 walks.

    The polished / low-risk strategy is nearly everything to the Padres. It’s only one aspect of the strategy employed by more successful teams.

  30. #30@Tom Waits: Does Cedric Hunter count as a high-upside player? Or Drew Cumberland? Perhaps that still qualifies as “nearly everything” … I certainly understand the spirit of your comment … but I also feel more tolerant of what the Padres have done recently than you seem to …

    How many high-upside players are there in each draft? There would seem to be “few”, by definition … so a team either takes one of them with their 1st round pick, or they don’t … and I’ll agree with you that Carillo nor Schmidt nor Antonelli seem like they were picked for their upside … I’m just saying that each of those pics, being pretty deep into the 1st round, seem reasonable given the state of the Padre farm system … heck, they seem reasonable no matter what … those players were all “consensus 1st round picks” …

    What’s your sense for how many “high-upside players” taken after the first 15 picks in the 1st round actually deliver on that upside? I’ve not studied it … do you figure it’s less than 5%? I think the %s for any given drafted player getting to MLB is pretty low … and to subset out those tag’d as “high-upside” seems like, again by definition, will be much lower … but perhaps I’m missing something about what a high-upside player is …

  31. What a tough region for USD this is.