Those Who Snooze Don’t Always Lose
Wed, May 21, 2008
by Geoff Young
We were walking west along J Street, just past Fire Station 4, when the crowd erupted. Cardinals fans seem to travel with their team, so we assumed that the visiting team had extended its seemingly insurmountable 2-0 lead.
I was in a lousy mood before we even got to the ballpark — I forget why, but it seemed important at the time. The game wasn’t helping any.
In the bottom of the first, after Jody Gerut drew an eight-pitch walk to lead off the inning, Tadahito Iguchi rapped into an easy 6-4-3 double play and I just smiled. It wasn’t the smile of a happy man, mind you, more like the thing Jeff Kent does right before he gets tossed.
Next inning, Adrian Gonzalez got the Padres started with a booming drive to center that Ryan Ludwick misplayed into a double. Kevin Kouzmanoff followed with a sharp single to left, advancing Gonzalez to third.
Interesting. Runners at the corners, nobody out. How will the Padres fail to score here?
Easy. Khalil Greene grounded the first pitch he saw to third baseman Troy Glaus, who fired to Adam Kennedy at second for the force. Kennedy noticed Gonzalez trying to score and, rather than trying to complete the double play, threw home. Yadier Molina whipped the ball back to Glaus, but Gonzalez scrambled back to the bag, just ahead of the tag.
Here’s everything you need to know about the Padres offense this year: The crowd went nuts. Yep, Gonzalez retreated safely to the base he’d already occupied and people were getting ready for a parade. It’s amazing how much fun you can have when you just lower your standards, or better yet, abandon them altogether.
Meanwhile, back in reality, Scott Hairston stepped to the plate. The Padres still had runners at first and third, but now there was one out and we were, for whatever reason, giddy with delight.
Hairston worked the count full. With Greene at first, I asked my wife, Do you send him? She said no, and I agreed. For their careers, Hairston strikes out in 22.5% of his plate appearances, while Molina throws out 49.5% of runners who try to steal against him. Greene isn’t slow, but neither is he a burner. Knowing what we know about Hairston and Molina (and despite the fact that weak-hitting Luke Carlin waits on deck), it’s pretty much a given that you don’t send him in that situation unless your specific goal is to avoid scoring runs.
You know what happens next: Greene breaks with the pitch, Hairston looks at strike three, and Molina guns down the runner at second, inning over. I inform my wife we’ll be leaving as soon as Greg Maddux comes out of the game.
Grass grew, paint dried, and the fifth inning rolled around. With one out in the home half, Greene singled to left. Hairston whacked the next pitch, a hanging slider from St. Louis starter Joel Pineiro, down the left field line for a double that pushed Greene to third and no further. Carlin then fanned on three pitches and Tony Clark, batting for Maddux, lifted a lazy fly ball to center for the final out.
Yep, that was enough.
We made our way out of the ballpark, past the trendy sports bars and pizza joints, past the fire station — but you know this part already — and back to our car. We didn’t listen to the game on the way home. I had no mind to subject myself to more of the Padres than was absolutely necessary. Come to think of it, even that had become too much.
We spent much of the trip home coming up with catchy slogans for the team: “Our Team, Our Town… Let’s Move” and “You Snooze, We Lose” — that sort of thing. Because really, at this point in the season, you have two choices: hit stuff or laugh. Well, I prefer to laugh.
I later learned of Kouzmanoff’s heroics in the sixth and that his three-run jack ended up being enough to move the Padres ahead and keep them there until the end. After I was sure everything was okay, we fired up TiVo and watched the rest of the game. Actually, we watched the bottom of the sixth, the top of the eighth, and the top of the ninth, but you get the idea.
Without wishing to take anything away from Kouz, who absolutely crushed his home run, we all owe Pineiro a big thank you. After walking Gerut and Brian Giles, he fanned Gonzalez for the second out. The script for the ‘08 Padres calls for an inning-ending double play right there, but I’ll be darned if Pineiro didn’t just put the ball right past Gonzalez.
Nothing good ever came of a strikeout, right? Isn’t that what they say?
Yeah, well they need to watch this game again. Gonzalez’s inability to make contact allowed Kouzmanoff to bat with ducks on the proverbial pond. Kouz then tattooed a 1-0 hanging slider to Tatooine. (I don’t even know what that means, but it sounds kinda funny.)
We skipped forward to watch Heath Bell and Trevor Hoffman put the finishing touches on a Padres victory. And I thought how nice it is that the rest of the nation has gone back to ignoring Hoffman now that he’s not blowing saves anymore.
Or something like that…
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.
May 21, 2008 at 7:44 am
This morning was the first time I did not check the Padres score before my moring coffee…
Thank you kouz for making me feel bad and happy at the same time. I love that guy and, as a fan, will be sad if he gets traded.
May 21, 2008 at 7:47 am
Nothing better to charge my Padre fan batteries than going to a game, seeing Kouz blast a missile to deep center and watching Hoffy go one, two, three in the 9th. My Padres glass has been returned to the half full position.
May 21, 2008 at 7:47 am
Pretty sweet last night. Playing poker with a guy who couldn’t understand sample size a few weeks ago and kept telling me Trevor was done. Funny, he didn’t say a word about it last night.
May 21, 2008 at 8:08 am
Man there were some frustrating innings last night. Predictably, as soon as they didn’t have RISP, both Khalil and Hairy got knocks. We could have really used their contributions in the second, so that we didn’t have to play from behind for half the damn game.
On the other hand, Trevor has looked really sharp dating back to the save in Philly. Maybe it was just a legitimately slow start.
May 21, 2008 at 8:17 am
There is a forestation on J street?
May 21, 2008 at 8:19 am
Fire station! Comedy is hard.
May 21, 2008 at 8:36 am
#6@PM: That’s what she said!
May 21, 2008 at 8:40 am
My dad and I made it to the game last night. It was his first ever at Petco so it was pretty cool to see a win like that.
That ball that Kouz hit was crushed. That dude is seriously strong! I still think he is a prototypical Petco Power hitter I just wish he was more consistent. His line drives stay out of that nasty Petco marine layer and he is plenty strong enough to go the other way also.
I also have to say that from our seats Trevor looked ON last night. I have definitely been critical of Trevor (and I still wonder if having multiple days or weeks between save opportunities is helping him too much) but he was seriously efficient last night. I think he threw something like 8 or 9 pitches to get 3 outs and only 1 pitch was a ball. That’s pretty insane and even Pujols looked overmatched.
May 21, 2008 at 9:25 am
The Union Tribune has been aggressive in evaluating the Padres. But the writers still have manager Bud Black on a honeymoon. Isn’t he a source of the problems. Maybe now we know why so few former pitchers become big-league managers.
Players I would ship out first are Paul MacAnulty, Scott Hairston and Tony Clark. Hairston cannot be
moved until another outfielder capable of playing center field is picked up. Clark is an asset on a contender, so he does little for the Padres. MacAnulty is this year’s Terrmel Sledge and he might find a home in Japan, too.
It is amazing that there is no backup for Khalil Greene, and no one with big-league talent to contend with Jody Gerut for the center field job. You’ve got to hang this on the sleeping front office. There have been more than a few days when Greene looked like he needed some time in the shade of the dugout. He is my favorite Padres player, so this is not a knock. Hey, he has his batting average up to .228, up about 20 points from when he seemed to be heading toward the Mendoza line.
ballpark frank
Las Vegas, NV
May 21, 2008 at 10:09 am
#9@Frank Barning: Black has made some mistakes, but it’s the same thing as evaluating the 2008 team versus 2007. He managed the team to 89 wins last year.
In many ways the manager is stuck. He’s not going to know that Thatcher 2008 isn’t the same as Thatcher 2007 without letting him go out there a few times.
May 21, 2008 at 10:23 am
MLBTradeRumors.com is reporting that Aaron Heilman might be shopped by the Mets for some bullpen help…anyone have any interest in him as a starter on the Padres?
According to that report, Heilman will be arbitration-eligible in 2009 and 2010 and will reach free agency after that.
May 21, 2008 at 10:25 am
#11@Coronado Mike: If they want a setup man in return, I don’t see the fit. I’d like to have him.
May 21, 2008 at 10:41 am
#12@Tom Waits: Is the human Cla(w) an option?
May 21, 2008 at 10:56 am
Interesting article on BP yesterday by Joe Sheehan on the Padres. It’s a pay article but he basically says it’s time for the Padres to give up and play for either 2009 or maybe 2010. He talks about how the Padres have put themselves in this situation because of their remarkably poor drafts in the early part of the decade. He thinks the Padres should trade Kouzmanoff and play Headley at 3B for a blocked outfield prospect and brings up Matt LaPorta from the Brewers. That might be workable as the Brewers have a hole at 3B and LaPorta is completely blocked and has to be traded if the Brewers want to get anything out of him. The other trade candidates he mentions are Chris Young (stats trending downwards), Heath Bell (lots of relievers dominate for 170 innings and then slowly fade away) and Khalil Greene (calls him a harder to spell Kevin Elster).
May 21, 2008 at 11:00 am
#13@Coronado Mike: I’d be inclined to hold onto Clay. He’s in his third year and he still seems to be reasonably effective.
Actually, and I know this is going to be controversial, but I think Cla has a better chance at being a future closer than Heat. Heat’s velocity is down this year and he hasn’t been as dominant as he has been in year’s past. Cla has been fairly consistent (he got rocked last year when he got his pitches up and still gets pasted when this happens), and he wouldn’t be a “blow-it-by-you closer”. He still gets guys out at a ridiculous pace and can K people when necessary.
May 21, 2008 at 11:03 am
#15@Phantom: I am not sure that Bell’s early going woes is not a bit of a hangover from his workload. I don’t trust Cla as a closer, but is still a valuable piece, but if we could get a guy that has the potential to be a solid #3 like Heilman for him (I don’t know that we can, I am just speculating) I would not hesitate.
May 21, 2008 at 11:04 am
#14@Schlom: I don’t see any way, shape, or form that the Brewers trade LaPorta for Kouzmanoff. If we were obscenely lucky we might get Gwynn Jr and Bush for Kouzmanoff and Wolf or Maddux.
The Brewers could go Harvey Wallbangers on everyone and have Hart in CF, flanked by Braun and Laporta. They’d want ground ball pitchers, but that’s potentially 100-110 HR from the outfield alone.
May 21, 2008 at 11:06 am
#16@Coronado Mike: It’s worth thinking about. One concern would be whether Heilman could be stretched out again.
May 21, 2008 at 11:07 am
#16@Coronado Mike: I do think part of it is a hangover, but I’m curious to see how his arm will eventually recover from last year’s workload.
This is something I’ve thought a little bit about, and I think Cla is less prone to giving up the big inning than Bell. He’s a master at eliminating inherited runners, and as long as he has a strong defensive IF, he should be fine.
May 21, 2008 at 11:07 am
#14@Schlom:
DUDE!!!
If we could land LaPorta I would effectively freak the F out! I doubt that there is any chance at all we could pry him away but he is pretty well blocked until Cameron is out of the outfield. It would be worth a shot. LaPorta is the type of player I would be willing to give up a lot for if I were KT and it would probably take a lot. I also think we match up fairly well with the brewers as well.
Maybe something like… Kouz + Leblanc + Drew Miller might come close but even still I imagine the Brewers would almost certainly target Latos.
May 21, 2008 at 11:10 am
#17@Tom Waits:
True, and now that I think about I remember reading something when Braun was moved to left that there were people in the Brewers organization that belived once he learned the outfield more they thought he had the speed and athleticism to play Center. I personally don’t buy it but I do remember reading that somewhere.
May 21, 2008 at 11:12 am
If your going to move Headley to 3B and trade Kouz then damnit go find a proper hard hitting LF like an Adam Dunn. For right now I have no problem keeping Kouz (god I love his power he just needs to be a bit more consistent) and Headley on the same team. We would just need better defenders at CF/RF (which a Venerable and maybe a Huffman could cover).
Question; any interest in Chone Figgins who’s a free agent this offseason?
May 21, 2008 at 11:16 am
#21@KRS1: Yeah, much easier to see him in RF than center.
#22@Loren: I don’t believe anyone truly thinks Venable and Huffman would be plus defenders in center and right. LaPorta has huge, Dunn-like power. I just don’t see the Brewers moving him for a marginal 3b. \
May 21, 2008 at 11:16 am
#22@Loren:
I would much rather have Matt LaPorta than Adam Dunn!
I have zero interest in Chone Figgins as a free agent.
May 21, 2008 at 11:33 am
23 & 24
Did some research on LaPorta and I kinda feel like that kid in the store that see’s the big shiny expensive toy and goes nuts. Damn that guy would be perfect in Petco, just a question of is it plausible that the brewers will trade him? For Latos i’m kinda unsure, but what else would we have that they’d want?
May 21, 2008 at 11:36 am
#14@Schlom: You have to believe that LaPorta only could be discussed if Headley is involved in the deal…
May 21, 2008 at 11:41 am
I think the only player that the Brewers would move LaPorta for would be CY or possibly Bell and I dont see the Padres working out a deal that would include either.
May 21, 2008 at 11:49 am
#26@Coronado Mike: I think that Kouzmanoff has more trade value then Headley since he’s proven himself in the majors and his minor league numbers are far superior. The only thing in Chase’s favor is that he’s almost 3 years younger (granted, that’s a huge advantage).
LaPorta has no place at all to play in Milwaukee. Hart can’t play CF (they tried that last season and it didn’t work out) and Braun and LaPorta both can only play LF. So one of LaPorta, Braun or Fielder has to be traded — obviously LaPorta is the one to go. Add in the fact that the Brewers have a huge hole at 3B, the Padres and Brewers are logical trading partners. Now if they’d rather have Headley then Kouzmanoff, I’d do that as well. Sheehan thought that Kouzmanoff was a poor fit for Petco as he’s a right-handed gap hitter (he also hates his defense but I don’t think he’s that bad).
LaPorta might be good, but then again, there are tons of players that have torn up Double A and not become stars. Remember he’s an advanced college hitter, his stats should be awesome. As it stands right now, he has an almost zero chance of becoming a starter in the majors, why would a team give up a ton to get him?
May 21, 2008 at 11:53 am
#28@Schlom: The same reason that people give up a ton to get strong minor leaguers…potential.
LaPorta is highly regarded and I am willing to bet the price will be much higher than we are willing to pay…
May 21, 2008 at 11:58 am
#28@Schlom:
1. Kouzmanoff’s minor league numbers aren’t superior. Kouz never had a year (a whole year) as good as Chase’s 2007. He was never considered a top prospect, while Chase was ranked on every single Top Whatever list this last season. Headley’s also considered a superior defender.
2. Lots of people think Hart could play CF, and even if he can’t, that doesn’t strip LaPorta of his value. If the Brewers were interested in trading LaPorta, there are a lot of AL teams that could use a DH. The Yankees might even look at him for first base next year. They’re not going to sell low.
May 21, 2008 at 12:09 pm
#29@Coronado Mike: Well, I wouldn’t trade Headley straight up for him. Why would anyone? Headley was awesome in Double A last season at the same age as LaPorta this season and he plays 3B instead of LF. Same thing with Kouzmanoff, although he was in Single A at 23 although again, he plays 3B which is much more valuable then LF.
Kouzmanoff might be a better player then LaPorta straight up and is certainly more valuable because of his position. The only reason I’d make that trade is because Headley is seriously miscast as a LF, is a better fielder then Kouz and is probably a better fit in the ballclub. Plus he’s younger and the Padres next window of success is probably a few seasons down the road.
If the Brewers are in a win now mode, which they might be, Kouz (or Headley) is a better fit for them this season and the next.
May 21, 2008 at 12:17 pm
#30@Tom Waits: Kouz’s number weren’t as good?
http://minors.baseball-referen.....i?pid=7906
Check out his 2006 season again — and those were in much weaker league for offense then the Texas League last season (706 and 716 league OPS vs. 748 for Chase).
As far as people think that Hart can play CF, the fact is that the most important people, the Brewers, think that he can’t. If they did, he would have played CF last season instead of a converted infielder (Bill Hall).
Let’s not great crazy on LaPorta. Sure he’s a good prospect but he’s also a poor defensive player, not really that young (he’s 4 months older then Antonelli) and also playing in a hitters league. The Brewers aren’t going to sell low for him if they can avoid it, but why would any team offer a ton for him when they no the Brewers can’t use him? I think we both agree that Headley is a better player then him, so why would the Padres trade them straight up for each other?
May 21, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Headley and Venable homer. Beavers up 7-3 late. Beavers have been playing better ball.
May 21, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Ideally the Padres would trade either Kouz or Headley. Headley is fine as a LF for this season as the Padres have terrible players out there now but if he has an 800 OPS (which is probably realistic for Petco Park) that puts him in the top quarter of 3B in the NL (only Chipper, Ramirez, Wright, Atkins and Glaus are above 800 this season) but near the bottom at LF (only Pierre, Hairston and Byrnes are below 800 so far). It would be fine for the time being but you would think that Towers should be able to find an average LF for next season.
May 21, 2008 at 12:57 pm
#32@Schlom:
If the Brewers would take Kouz I would go nuts but realistically it will take Kouz plus probably 2 more of our top 5 prospects to get LaPorta.
May 21, 2008 at 1:10 pm
If everyone’s that interested in getting LaPorta then what about trading Kouz to a team that desperately needs an upgrade at 3b (Indians perhaps) and then using some of those prospects (maybe in conjunction with a trade of Iguchi/Wolf/etc) to acquire LaPorta?
May 21, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Here #36@Loren:
If we have any intetion of aquiring LaPorta (who despite what Schlom may tell you is regarded by most scouts as a top teir power bat and will likely be a top 10-15 prospect before the year is done) you have to be willing to give the Brewers top talent and need back. I think Kouz may still have some upside to other teams but if they agree to take him I would think they would also want our top pitching prospect in Latos and maybe another arm like leblanc. LaPorta has superstar potential and it usually takes top talent in return to aquire that type of prospect. The Brewers would not be willing to flip LaPorta for Wolf or iguchi or anything like that it would take top young talent for sure. You have to question if we have enough of top young talent to even get the Brewers to entertain the idea.
May 21, 2008 at 1:42 pm
#22@Loren: From 2005 to 2007, Adam Dunn hit .260/.391/.569 at home and .236/.368/.487.
I don’t see why he is coveted. I don’t think watching him in Petco would be fun.
May 21, 2008 at 1:42 pm
RE: #37 & KRS1
I didn’t make this as clear as it should’ve been but I meant taking the prospects we get for trading an Iguchi/Wolf/Clark/etc and using THOSE prospects in conjunction with some of our own to get LaPorta,. I agree I don’t think its plausible but its a nice dream.
May 21, 2008 at 1:49 pm
The Brewers drafted LaPorta last year, so it’s a little weird to call him a blocked prospect. Maybe he can’t play defense, and maybe he’s older than you’d like a prospect to be, but those concerns didn’t matter to the Brewers in 2007, and he’s hitting really well in AA in his second pro season. You think the Brewers are sold on Corey Hart and Mike Cameron as long-term solutions? You don’t give up on prospects like LaPorta early unless you’re getting a sure thing, and Kouz isn’t one.
May 21, 2008 at 1:54 pm
#30 Tom Waits; I dont want to trade Headley. We have been hearing about him for years. But I think his we are overstating his value. He has a serious strikeout problem that isnt going away. I have heard comparisons to David Wright that just seem severely rosy to me. He is 24 years old already, I think he needs to be called up. Unless it is a trade too good to be true, I think we should play him and see how it goes. It is time!
May 21, 2008 at 2:01 pm
#35@KRS1: Are you serious? Do you think that Matt LaPorta would take more to acquire then Johan Santana or Miguel Cabrera? I didn’t realize that the asking price for a defensively challenged left fielder was that high.
May 21, 2008 at 2:06 pm
#42@Schlom:
2 padres top 5 porsopects + Kouz does not equal Burke Badenhop, Eulogio De La Cruz, Dallas Trahern, Andrew Miller, Mike Rabelo and Cameron Maybin.
May 21, 2008 at 2:07 pm
#42 Schlom, The Santana and Cabrera trades had salary implications. They really werent straight trades.
May 21, 2008 at 2:14 pm
#41@parlo: I’m with you parlo. Let’s get the 24 year old Headley up here now and get on with it. The Padres brass overvalues all of their prospects so as to gloss over their poor drafting and development.
May 21, 2008 at 2:18 pm
#42@Schlom:
Are you serious?
Do you think we could have aquired either Cabrerra or Santana for Kouz + Latos and another arm?
I don’t.
Keep in mind it cost a 2 top 10 prospects to get Cabrerra and very good prospects to get Santana and both aquisitions meant the team trading for them had to sign them to $100+ million contracts. Totally different situations.
LaPorta wasn’t drafted 7th overall because he was horrible Schlom.
Also, you keep defending Kouz’s defense when he is regarded as a poor defender but hammer LaPorta on his. Have you ever even seen LaPorta play? Could you even pick him out of a lineup? You speak as though you are a scout that has him and his ability all figured out.
I like Kouz but the bottom line is that he is old, regarded as a poor defender (I don’t exactly agree but he won’t be mistaken for Brooks Robinson anytime soon) and he is extremely inconsistant. He does still have upside and potential but not nearly that of LaPorta. The Brewers spent the 7th pick on him and won’t just let all that potential go for scraps. Especially with the looming contractual issues that may be coming with Prince Fielder.
May 21, 2008 at 2:18 pm
#33@JP: Thanks for the pointer, JP …
The Beavers box score (http://tinyurl.com/6ld9ta) has several interesting things in it today … as the Beavers are up 16-7 thru 8 innings …
- Chase with a HR and a 2B and a single
- Venable with a HR and 3 singles
- Barrett is 3-for-4 with a 2B
- Clay Hensley with a clean inning (remember, the score is 16-7, so not many other pitchers have clean innings)
On the flip side …
- Antonelli is 0-for-3 (but has drawn 2 BBs) and has made an error
- Hayhurst ding’d for 2 runs in 1 IP
May 21, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Man, I brought up LaPorta yesterday and figured everyone would tell me I was an idiot for even thinking about him - no one said a peep! I guess it takes Schlom bringing up something to get everyone all riled up - in fact, I’m going to say that Schlom stole my idea.
I would love to get LaPorta, but he is probably a pipe dream. No way the FO would give up a bunch of our prospects for him unless they were some guys that are blocked in our organization like Blanks or one of the AAA pitchers (they can’t ALL be on the pitching staff next year).
The other guy I mentioned yesterday was Alcides Escobar, one of the Brewers top prospects, sounded like a slick-fielding SS who is young but developing his bat very nicely. I would love to get someone like that back in a Greene trade, although I’m not sure Escobar could come up and play next year so that may be out as well.
May 21, 2008 at 2:31 pm
I can’t believe how overrated LaPorta is by everyone. LaPorta can only play 1B or LF. Right now Prince Fielder and Ryan Braun play those spots for the Brewers so he’s not going to play either of those. Considering he played 1B in college, he’s not going to be able to play RF. Conceivably you could move Braun to RF but that would mean benching or trading Corey Hart. Since Hart is better defensively, faster and a pretty good offense player it’s doubtful that LaPorta is going to replace him. Therefore his only value to the Brewers is if they have an injury or as a trade chip. Certainly he’d be an improvement at DH or 1B for the Mariners, Yankees, Tigers and probably a few other teams, but what are they going to give up for them? If the Yankees aren’t going to trade their young pitchers for Johan, they aren’t going to trade them for Matt LaPorta (plus they can just sign Teixeira for next year). I think that LaPorta is also somewhat overrated as a prospect since he was a high draft pick — 7th overall — although most people thought that was an overreach at the time. One dimensional players have a very small margin for error — if LaPorta doesn’t have 875 OPS or so he’s not going to be very good.
May 21, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Glad to see Headley and Venable killing it today. I just can’t figure Antonelli out - a guy with plate discipline like that has to get it going sooner or later, right? And no more Burroughs comments. . .
I would love to see LaPorta in a Padres uniform and I agree with Schlom that people on here tend to underestimate what we can bring back in a trade, but trying to compare a trade package for Santana who has to immediately be signed to a $100M+ deal to a trade package for a polished AA prospect is asinine - there is no way to compare the two. Plus, LaPorta was seen as a reach because he played 1st in college and Fielder was clearly the 1B of the future for Milwaukee.
May 21, 2008 at 2:41 pm
#46@KRS1: Cabrera and Santana are at least twice the player that LaPorta is, maybe more. I would give up the entire top 10 Padres prospects for either of those guys — players that have proved themselves at the major league level are worth more then the promise of a prospect (obviously).
I’m not saying that LaPorta is a bad player, just that he’s blocked by better players in Milwaukee therefore he’s an obvious trade candidate. Also, as good as his season is this year so far, it’s no better then Kouzmanoff’s season in Double A. Considering that a good hitting 3B is worth a lot more then a LF, I don’t see how he’s not nearly as valuable. Plus add in the fact that he’s already had success in the majors (LaPorta would have to have a season like Adrian’s last season to be more valuable as a LF, how likely is that?) I don’t see how he’s that valuable. The main reason he was a higher regarded prospect is that he was drafted 7th overall instead of in the 6th round like Kouz.
#48@BigWorm: In fairness this wasn’t even my idea, it was Joe Sheehan’s.
May 21, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Then in that case, I’m suing Sheehan. He obviously reads the ducksnorts comments.
May 21, 2008 at 2:51 pm
#46@KRS1: First of all, I think you are correct, that we couldn’t trade Kouz straight up for LaPorta. Having said that, I agree with most of Schlom’s points.
First of all, as the Brewer team is currently composed, Kouz would be more valuable to them than LaPorta. They don’t have a good third baseman; they do have a good first baseman and left fielder. Kouz is better than Bill Hall, but LaPorta isn’t better than Fielder or Braun. They could probably trade LaPorta for someone better than Kouz, and I would imagine what they really want is rotation help.
Secondly, Kouz is a better defensive player than LaPorta. He can play an almost league average third base, while LaPorta is stuck at first or in left, and by all accounts isn’t very good at those.
Third, Kouz is a good player and an asset that can be a key part of a contending team. He had a great minor league track record and last year he put up a 109 OPS+, despite a start much worse than this year’s. He’s not old: he turns 27 this year, so he should still be expected to maintain about that level of production through his years under team control.
Now obviously this would be a much better case if Kouz weren’t struggling again to open the season, and even if he weren’t he probably wouldn’t have trade value equivalent to LaPorta. But the point more generally is that Kouz shouldn’t be dumped when his value is low right now, and that he can help the team.
May 21, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Re #50
Antonelli, from everything I read, seems to just be too patient at the plate. He draws walks like crazy but that also means he can get himself in a hole and not be able to dig out. He can spray the ball well, but it appears that he’s just unable to get anything done. Truth be told I’m more worried about all his errors, granted he was a 3B for a long while and is in his second year as a 2B but that’s got to be disconcerting.
As for Headley and Venerable, is there a SINGLE GOOD REASON (besides the money and arbitration issue) that both these guys shouldn’t be up? Hairston’s turning into a disaster, PMac doesn’t belong here and Huber can’t get a good shot at the lineup
May 21, 2008 at 2:55 pm
The only reason I’d trade Kouzmanoff is because he’s not really a great fit for the team and ballpark. He’d certainly hit a lot better if he was in Milwaukee for example. Since Headley appears to be a better fit for the team (better defensively and a switch hitter) it makes more sense to hold on to him and trade Kouz. However, you could trade Headley instead but I certainly wouldn’t trade him straight up for LaPorta. I’m not even sure I’d trade Kouz straight up for him — they might be comparable bats in the same park. However, you can only play one 3B at a time so one of them should go.
I think we are also underrating Kouz. Granted he’s not doing that well at the moment but he also started off terribly last year (even worse as we all remember). Plus I don’t think his fielding is that bad — in Win Shares he’s right in the middle of the pack:
http://tinyurl.com/62wx3d
May 21, 2008 at 2:58 pm
#52@BigWorm: I wasn’t around yesterday, when did you bring it up? The reason I ask is that the Sheehan column came up later in the day, certainly after noon as I didn’t see it until last night. He certainly talks about the Padres a lot plus didn’t he attend the last Q&A with the Padres FO in Petco? It wouldnt’ shock me if he reads this blog? What else is he going to do during the day as a baseball writer?
May 21, 2008 at 2:59 pm
#51@Schlom:
The Cabrerra and Santana trades are different because of the money. You cannot compare the 2.
Quit comparing Kouz’s AA year to everyone else’s. Just stop. He was always a year or 2 old for his level.
This is LaPorta’s first year of pro ball and he is starting off at AA and raking. That should speak for itself. When LaPorta was drafted he was to be the LF of the Brewers future. They were banking on Braun at 3rd.
I don’t disagree that LaPorta is blocked at the moment but keep in mind it hasn’t even been a full year since he was drafted and Mike Cameron is only signed for 2 years I believe. That doesn’t exactly mean they will not be a place for him in a year or 2. If he keeps hitting he will force their hand.
The main reason he was drafted 7th and kouz was a 6th rounder is because he’s better prospect. That is not to slight Kouz but it’s the truth. The point I am trying to make is that if you want laPorta you will have to overwhelm the Brewers. Just because at this moment in time he is blocked that doesn’t mean his future with them is non existant. Top prospects tend to find their way into lineups. Baseball is funny like that.
May 21, 2008 at 3:15 pm
#57@KRS1: Of course that is all true. A couple of points however:
Kouzmanoff was only one year older at each level then LaPorta (at the same age he was in the Carolina League and then moved up from there).
LaPorta is always going to be blocked in Milwaukee because he’s not as good as the team’s current options. His only shot at a full-time trade is through injuries or a trade. He’s certainly not going to play with them in the next two seasons as long as Cameron is there — and if Hart can’t play CF now what would make you think he’ll play CF in 2010? Also, why would they hold on to 2 LF’ers at the same time having a hole at another position? That doesn’t make any sense.
I don’t care about where they are drafted, all that matters is how they produce at the major league level. Just because he was drafted 7th and Kouz in the 6th round doesn’t make him a better player — all that really means is that he performed better with an aluminum bat in college (which has zero to do with what they are going to do in the majors).
What do you mean overwhelm the Brewers? Would you trade Headley for him straight up or do you think that’s not enough?
May 21, 2008 at 3:15 pm
#57@KRS1: Picking nits, as usual, but Laporta is only 1 year younger than Kouz was when they both played their first year of AA.
Now carry on arguing with Schlom.
BTW, I find these prospect discussions fascinating because I know so little about minor league ball.
May 21, 2008 at 3:18 pm
#32@Schlom: As I clearly said, a whole season. Kouz had only 344 at-bats in 2006, and that was as a 24 year old.
The Brewers may not think Hart in CF is optimal, but they’re not going to give away LaPorta because their outfield is crowded. If they thought that way, they wouldn’t have drafted him. And the Southern League is the exact opposite of a hitter’s league, which makes me wonder if you’re really paying that much attention. He’s crushing the ball in a league that crushes hitters. The Brewers have a lot of options. Hart in CF. Braun back to 3b.
Who has said that we should trade Headley for him? Headley is far, far more valuable than Kouzmanoff. We’re not going to get LaPorta for Kouzmanoff. I doubt we’d get him for Headley.
May 21, 2008 at 3:18 pm
#45@JP: He is only one year younger than David Wright. Wright has over 2000 ML ABs. This is a very poor hitting Padre team. If he is what they say he is, then he needs to be here now. It is time to fish, or cut bait.
May 21, 2008 at 3:19 pm
#36@Loren: Because we’re not going to get much for Kouzmanoff. A lot of teams will still see him as a marginal 3b who only hits LHP.
May 21, 2008 at 3:21 pm
#39@Loren: Dang, sorry I missed that before I responded in 62.
May 21, 2008 at 3:21 pm
#59@Pat: I find myself staying out of trade discussions, because they all seem so hypothetical.
May 21, 2008 at 3:24 pm
#54@Loren: Can you be too patient? Truthfully, I can’t believe pitchers aren’t attacking him more. How the heck do you draw so many walks when you’re hitting below the mendoza line??
May 21, 2008 at 3:25 pm
#49@Schlom: Prospects are not evaluated based on where they fit in the organization. They’re evaluated based on how friggin’ good they are. The Brewers have absolutely no incentive, zero, nada, to trade him. Other teams covet Corey Hart.
There is no way, shape, or method that Kevin Kouzmanoff is traded for Matt LaPorta that doesn’t involve kidnapping Doug Melvin’s family members.
May 21, 2008 at 3:26 pm
#55@Schlom: When a team has to make 3 or 4 explanations as to why one player is better than he appears, that player does not have a lot of trade value.
May 21, 2008 at 3:27 pm
The main thing you have to remember is that most prospects don’t pan out — any player that has hit at the major league level is worth far more then a prospect. If you hang on to your prospects too long and they don’t pan out you end up like the Angels — with a bunch of highly regarded prospects that you didn’t trade even though they were blocked that are all stagnating in Triple A (Wood, Aybar, Sean Rodriguez, Morales, etc.)
That being said, it might be better to trade Headley but I think he’s a better fit for the ballpark then Kouz.
May 21, 2008 at 3:32 pm
#58@Schlom:
I would much rather keep Headley and try to add things to a Kouz based package to try and get LaPorta. I would really hate to get rid of Headley after bringing him all the way through our system and I also think he is better suited at 3rd.
May 21, 2008 at 3:36 pm
#66@Tom Waits: Jumping into the fire a bit.. Tom, I have to disagree with you. If LaPorta is blocked, then the Brewers absolutely have an incentive to trade him. His value to the team is close to zero until either (1) he contributes at the big league level or (2) he is traded for player(s) that contribute at the big league level. Any value (attendance, publicity) by having him in Triple AAA are negligible, save his value as insurance for the big league club. His value is in his effect (direct or indirect) on the big league club - not “how frigging good he is”. In my opinion, Schlom’s got you on this one.
May 21, 2008 at 3:40 pm
#70@Marsh: So by that logic The Padres have to trade blanks next year if he continues to rake in AAA? and he would have no value to the club?
May 21, 2008 at 3:40 pm
#66@Tom Waits: The problem is that no matter what, regardless of LaPorta’s or Kouz’s true value is, LaPorta will always appear to be more valuable because he gets to play 81 games in Miller Field. That’s without even comparing a 3B to a LF.
Actually, the Southern League isn’t really a pitcher’s league (750 league OPS this season) vs. 735 in the Eastern League. The Texas League is at 765 this season but was 748 last season.
I don’t see why you think that Brewers have no incentive to trade LaPorta. Again, where does he play? Do you put him in LF in 2010 and try to compete with the worst OF defense in baseball with LaPorta/Hart/Braun? Not to mention they will still have a hole at 3B. They also have a prospect on the same team as LaPorta that’s a year younger and is out-hitting him (Matt Gamel, a 3B who makes Braun look like a good fielder). Where does he play? Obviously someone is getting traded. Either Hart, LaPorta or Gamel. Do you chance trading the best defender on the odd hope that one of your LF’ers can handle CF? Isn’t that sort of what the Padres did and we know how that worked out.
May 21, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Also you have to remember that i’m sure that if the Brewers put LaPorta on the market the padres would not be the only team to bid for his services.
May 21, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Also you have to remember that i’m sure that if the Brewers put LaPorta on the market the padres would not be the only team to bid for his services.
May 21, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Schlom, I think the point you’re missing on LaPorta is that he has 6 years under team control. Cabrera and Santana are better players (probably), but in terms of value, it’s probably a lot closer than you’d think. As others have indicated, the money had a lot to do with those moves. Even if LaPorta turns out to be average, you get a ton of value from him because of how cheap he’ll be.
May 21, 2008 at 3:44 pm
#70@Marsh:
LaPorta is blocked in AA. He still has a ways to go to the majors.
The Brewers also have a potential contract issue coming up with Fielder so he may not be around in a year or 2. TW also pointed out that Braun could always move back to 3rd. There are a lot of cards that may still fall for the Brewers so getting rid of LaPorta is probably not on the top of their list of priorities.
May 21, 2008 at 3:45 pm
#49@Schlom: Wait wait wait. You can’t say that “what matters is what the Brewers think” and then claim that LaPorta isn’t worth much because other teams believe they have Milwaukee over a barrel. What determines LaPorta’s trade value is ENTIRELY dependent on what the Brewers think. They’re in no rush to move him. What if Hart or Braun gets hurt? What if they decide that Braun’s defense at 3rd is worth getting a 1000 OPS bat in LF?
#58@Schlom: You may not care about where they were drafted, or how Kouz is generally perceived, but those things are critical in determining the trade value of a player. LaPorta was a top 10 pick last year who destroyed the Sally League (his first extensive exposure with wood bats), moved to AA, and is treating it like t-ball.
May 21, 2008 at 3:45 pm
#69@KRS1: I agree but there is absolutely no guarantee that Headley is going to better then Kouz.
#71@Steve C: Yes. If Blanks isn’t going to beat out Adrian (who is signed through 2011) why would you hang on to someone instead of trading him when his value is the highest? The Angels have gotten absolutely zero out of Brandon Wod (who was a top five prospect a few seasons ago). Not only didn’t they trade him when his value was sky-high they’ve also jerked him around and let him stagnate in Triple A since they thought they had better alternatives on hand. Isn’t that a waste of a prospect?
May 21, 2008 at 3:48 pm
#78@Schlom: Right but if no one is going to give the Padres fair value for Blanks then they should they just give him away because he is blocked by Adrian? Last time I checked the Rangers regret doing that…
May 21, 2008 at 3:50 pm
#70@Marsh:
1. LaPorta isn’t blocked, no more than Headley is.
2. If the Brewers put him on the market, 10-20 teams are going to be interested.
Sean Burroughs’ trade value was exponentially higher in 2001, before he played a major league game, when he was “blocked” by Phil Nevin, than it was 1 year later, when he’d actually played in the majors. Prospect valuations are incredibly volatile. 2 years ago Chase Headley was a C prospect who’d put up mediocre numbers in the Cal League. Jump ahead 1 year and he’s a top 20 player. Jump ahead to April 30, 2008 and his value has taken a hit.
Saying that a player’s value is based only on what his parent team’s major league roster looks like is like saying that my $1000 can only buy a 19″ cathode-ray TV because I already have a plasma.
May 21, 2008 at 3:53 pm
#75@MB: I don’t understand that argument. The Padres could pay McAnulty about $3m for the next 6 years instead of getting a real LF that makes $75m (or whatever). Sure there’s value in saving $70m but the idea isn’t to save money, it’s to win. I can fully understand not wanting to pay a ton of money to someone who is 32 but not so someone younger (do you realize that Miguel Cabrera is only 20 months older then LaPorta — reportedly at least). What’s the point of having good players if you aren’t going to keep them? I remember earlier when I talked about if the Padres had a chance to trade for Hanley Ramirez they should have done it (this is if they actually drafted Porcello) but a lot of you said that they couldn’t afford to sign him. What kind of philosophy is that? “We want good players but not players that are too good because they make too much money.” You can’t compete that way.
May 21, 2008 at 3:55 pm
#81@Schlom: Talk to the owner and FO about that issue….
May 21, 2008 at 3:59 pm
#78@Schlom:
There is also no guarantee that the Padres won’t get it together and finish in 1st place either. What is your point? I personally like Headley more and I think he has a brighter offensive and defensive future with Padres at Petco.
Brandon Wood was always a masher but he still strikes out way way too much. You can argue that they Angels mismanaged him some and I think that is valid but with the prospects and players they had in front of him and the flaws in his game I don’t think it’s out of the question to have kept him down.
May 21, 2008 at 3:59 pm
#72@Schlom: You can’t compare OPS in the league to determine how hard that league is on hitters. OPS depends on the quality of the position players and the pitchers they oppose. The Southern League has always been a pitcher’s league.
It’s not that the Brewers may not have an incentive to trade LaPorta. What they don’t have is an incentive to trade a top 25 (baseball-wide) prospect for what most scouts view as a seriously flawed 3b.
May 21, 2008 at 4:03 pm
#81@Schlom: Well, let’s say LaPorta is as good as Cabrera and they both age the same … so they are equal on the field. Now over the next 6 years you pay, I don’t know, maybe 35 mill. for LaPorta and over 100m for Cabrera. Now you’ve got all that money to spend on other players or whatever. That’s all I’m talking about. LaPorta may just be more valuable “property” right now, just for that reason. Of course, there’s a chance he isn’t as good of Cabrera, or even as good as Kouz and so on.
You’d have to go through all the calculations … point is, to me at least, it isn’t a very clear issue and there is always quite a bit to consider …
May 21, 2008 at 4:04 pm
#80@Tom Waits: I don’t say how you can say LaPorta isn’t blocked anymore then Headley, considering that LaPorta can only play LF and they are superior players ahead of him. His only hope to play soon is if there are injuries and even down the road he needs a trade to free up playing time (there is no way Braun is moving back to 3B and in Gamel the Brewers might have a younger superior player).
What is the goal of every baseball team? Isn’t it to win? If you have a shot at the playoffs this year or next, shouldn’t you do everything in your power to do it? The Brewers would improve their major league team this year and next year by trading LaPorta for a 3B. Standing pat (or hoping for the best) doesn’t usually work out — sure it’s working for the Cardinals but the Padres are the more likely result for that philosophy.
I never said that I though that Kouz for LaPorta was a fair trade — if they wanted Randy Wolf I’d throw him in there too. But I don’t think it would take Kouz, Latos and another prospect to get him.
May 21, 2008 at 4:09 pm
#78@Schlom: That’s exactly it, though. LaPorta for Kouzmanoff is a waste of LaPorta’s trade value. If the Brewers feel they can’t make use of LaPorta at the major league level, then they should trade him this year or next. But they’re going to get way more than Kouzmanoff.
May 21, 2008 at 4:10 pm
#80@Tom Waits: “Saying that a player’s value is based only on what his parent team’s major league roster looks like is like saying that my $1000 can only buy a 19″ cathode-ray TV because I already have a plasma.”
Heh? Did I say that?
I’ll grant you that my estimation of value may have seemed lacking in that I did not explicitly mention the the future value of a prospect, however that was what I had intended to convey as part of my direct value estimation.
Regardless, let’s get this right. Like most all things, this is a basic NPV analysis and we need to look at the cash flows the player can expect to bring to the major league ball club. As I see it, there are three sources of potential cash flows worth discussing:
(1) impact on major league club in current year either through (a) performing at the big league level or (b) providing insurance/back-up for players on the current club. Obviously, A>B by a wide margin.
(2) impact on major league club in future years (note: these need to be discounted back to present value)
(3) trade value that can produce either (1) or (2) with other player(s)
I’m not an expert on LaPorta, but I think that there is general agreement on this board (though apparently not in your last post) that LaPorta is blocked. He plays LF and 1B and both those positions have young, bankable Brewers occupying them (note: Headley is obviously less blocked due to the lack of a young, bankable player ahead of him on the big league club).
Thus, regarding cash flows, LaPorta creates no value per 1(a), but certainly he has some value as 1(b). I would argue that this is very minimal value, particularly since it would likely take a catastrophic injury for him to contribute by means of 1(a) for any sustained period of time.
Further, since the people blocking LaPorta are young, he has limited value as per cash flow stream #2. In contrast, Antonelli, for example, has significant value to the Padres in that Tad Iguchi is not thought to be a long term solution at 2nd base.
Therefore, the only real value that LaPorta has in this analysis is his minimal worth as part of cash stream #1b and then his indirect value in cash stream #3 as trade bait - particularly since he can be traded to a team that can use him for cash streams #1a or #2 in return for a player that can contribute #1a or #2 for the Brewers. Clearly, LaPorta’s value relating to cash stream #3 is much higher than in #1b, so therefore the Brewers organization has the incentive to trade him.
Hence, I agree with Schlom - the Brewers should want to trade LaPorta.
May 21, 2008 at 4:13 pm
#85@MB: What are the chances that he’s as good as Cabrera? 0.1%? 1%? No way it’s any higher then 25%. Put Cabrera in Double A 20 months ago and what does he hit? 400/500/750? Combine that with playing 3B (not well of course but probably average for Double A) and he’d be far and away the best prospect in baseball (Baseball America had LaPorta 23rd).
My point is that I don’t understand why you’d want someone that is worse because he’s cheaper. That doesn’t make any sense to me. I think too many people over-value prospects — most analysts thought the Yankees shouldn’t have traded for Santana because they would be better off holding on to their young pitchers. That was absolutely ridiculous. Only a buffoon like Brian Cashman wouldn’t trade potential for the best starter in baseball (one reason why he’s rightly going to be fired shortly). I understand that the Padres or Brewers aren’t the Yankees (no one is) but just being cheap doesn’t make someone more valuable then production.
May 21, 2008 at 4:14 pm
#84@Tom Waits: Okay, I agree with this point. I was lead to believe that you thought differently when you said:
“Prospects are not evaluated based on where they fit in the organization. They’re evaluated based on how friggin’ good they are. The Brewers have absolutely no incentive, zero, nada, to trade him”
Glad to see that we’re more on the same page than I had thought.
May 21, 2008 at 4:17 pm
#89@Schlom:
Here is a Shocker…
I wouldn’t have traded Chaimberlin + Hughes + Tabata + whatever ungodly amount of money it took to sign him for Santana either.
May 21, 2008 at 4:19 pm
I’ve got to say, this is a fascinating debate.
I’m inclined to think that LaPorta’s trade value falls somewhere between what’s being suggested here by Schlom and Tom. I think they both bring up good points, but are maybe a little too unwilling to concede this.
For my part, I know nothing about LaPorta, or the Brewers, so I will continue to stand back and be amused.
Oh, and there’s no way I would have made the trade for Santana if I was the Yankees. Hughes showed good stuff in ‘07. Santana might not be worth the terms of the contract (years, not money).
May 21, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Again, I think LaPorta might be a good player (why else would I trade for him) but the main thing is that he is limited to LF (and isn’t particularly good out there). He needs to mash to be a valuable player. Just because he has a 1000 OPS in Double A doesn’t make him a can’t miss prospect — I’m sure a lot of the LF’ers in the majors have done that. Heck, Adam Dunn was better at age 21 (not to mention more athletic as he had a football scholarship to Texas out of high school) and he’s a terrible fielder now and I’m not even sure I’d want him on the Padres. I don’t have the time or the patience to go through the minor league careers of every LF starter but I’ll be they all have a similar year to LaPorta’s sometime in the high minors.
Put him in Petco and maybe he hits 280 with 25 HR’s. I think we’d agree that’s a good year and that’s about the same as Kouz did last season (taking in the position adjustment).
May 21, 2008 at 4:24 pm
#86@Schlom: Because the Brewers have many other options.
1. Hart in CF, which, unless you have a spy in the Brewers’ front office, has to be considered a possibility.
2. Braun back to 3b.
3. Braun to CF, which at least some people (not me, necessarily) think is possible.
4. Trading Fielder.
5. Waiting to see how LaPorta does in AAA, and whether he fits their needs better than Hart or Fielder.
LaPorta’s hopes to play soon have no bearing on this discussion. His trade value has no relationship to his hopes.
The Brewers might very well improve their major league team this year and next by trading for a 3b. But what would improve it more, trading LaPorta for Kouzmanoff or using him to get the most talent possible, and then making a lesser deal to get a 3b who is Kouzmnoff’s equal? LaPorta is way too valuable to spend on Kouzmanoff.
May 21, 2008 at 4:24 pm
#89@Schlom: I think they are higher than that … Cabrera is a terrible defender. But, yeah, my guess is he won’t be quite as good as Cabrera. A bit below at least, probably.
Anyway, why would I want a player that I know is worse than another guy? Easy … because he costs less, and that saved money can go toward other players, or the draft, or something else.
If money was no object, obviously I’d want the best players. But money’s important, especially for the Padres it seems.
May 21, 2008 at 4:27 pm
#93@Schlom: You also have to consider the fact the he was a high draft pick and all the scouts seem to love him — (right? … I honestly don’t follow prospects a ton). That’s probably a better proxy for his future value than a few years of unadjusted minors/college numbers.
May 21, 2008 at 4:29 pm
#94@Tom Waits: those are good points.
May 21, 2008 at 4:35 pm
#91@KRS1: A lot of people though that but I never understood that. The Yankees huge advantage over nearly every other team is that they can afford to have an astronomical payroll (I have no idea how high it could be but I’ll bet they aren’t at their limit). By using this advantage properly, they can in effect, make the rest of baseball their “farm system.” If Hughes turns out to be great, they can just sign him when he becomes a free agent in five years or trade for him when he becomes too expensive for the Twins to hold on to him. Why bother to develop your own young players (although you can do that too because you can afford to give the highest signing bonuses) when you can let other teams do it for you? It’s a can’t miss strategy as long as you only sign young players (don’t waste money on players over 30 especially players like Giambi). Fortunately for the rest of baseball, Brian Cashman isn’t smart enough to do this. Unfortunately he’s about to get fired and they might get someone who understands to use the Yankees advantage.
May 21, 2008 at 4:38 pm
#90@Marsh: It was inaccurate writing on my part. What I should have said is they have no incentive to do anything but maximize his trade value. Why get a marginal 3b now when they might get Phil Hughes (just one example) for him in the offseason, when the Yankees could be looking for a 1b?
LaPorta may be limited to LF and 1b. But there’s no rule that says the Brewers can’t be creative in who moves where.
#92@Phantom: There’s never going to be a good match when Team A has a prospect whose value is huge and Team B is looking to move a player whose value is low. The team with the prospect, if they’re interested in trading at all, will be interested in trading him for the greatest possible return.
If the Brewers are really working through this systematically, as Schlom and Marsh suggest, there’s no way they settle for Kevin Kouzmanoff and his 684 OPS. That’s the kind of player you trade your own tarnished property for….a Dave Bush, maybe. That doesn’t mean that Bush is cursed to forever be less valuable than LaPorta, or that Kouzmanoff might not actually have a better major league career than LaPorta, it simply reflects the current value of those players.
May 21, 2008 at 4:41 pm
#98@Schlom: The flaw in this reasoning is that the best players will always freach FA. If the recent trend of locking-up young talent has told us ANYTHING, it’s that this is no longer the prevailing trend.
Sure, every once in a while you’ll have someone like A-Rod or Prince Fielder reach FA. But for every one of those guys, you’ll have Jake Peavy, Miguel Cabrera, Hanley Ramirez, Troy Tulowitzki, David Wright, etc. who will sign extensions with their current team.
Baseball players fear, more than anything else, getting hurt. They have no idea when a random tweak or errant baseball will end their career. And so they will gladly give up the possibility of larger for future pay days for guaranteed money into the future.
Were the Yankees counting on us continuing to “develop” Jake for them? If they were, then they clearly miscalculated how seriously the team would try to keep him.
May 21, 2008 at 4:44 pm
#96@MB: Sure but just because you are drafted high doesn’t me you turn out well:
http://www.baseball-reference......ype=junreg
There are certainly some good picks on there but also some duds. One Hall of Famer, a few other All-Stars but also some that never appeared in the majors or only briefly.
#94@Tom Waits: I don’t see many of those happening. Rarely does a player move off a position to an easier position and then move back. Chipper might be the only one and he might be the worst fielder in major league history of his career (and he’s still a lot better then Braun even now). If the Brewers were comfortable playing Hart in CF they would have done it last season instead of playing Bill Hall there and waiting two more seasons and then playing him there seems unlikely. I guess if Berkman has played CF then the Brewers can play Braun there. I could see them trading Fielder as well as he might not age well — but he’s already hit 50 HR’s in the majors and is only 7 months older then LaPorta.
The Brewers optimal performance team doesn’t include LaPorta but then again, teams have reasons (salary) for playing lesser players.
May 21, 2008 at 4:45 pm
#99@Tom Waits: I agree, but I think you’re over-stating both extremes. Kouz isn’t nearly as average at 3B as you intimate (park effects and what-not) and I don’t think LaPorta’s value is as sky-high as you predict.
But yes, generally, what you say is true. I think the problem in this situation is that you and Schlom are completely over and under-valuing Kouzmanoff and LaPorta.
May 21, 2008 at 4:46 pm
#96@MB: Yes. A prospect’s value is almost never based entirely on numbers, league comparisons, any of that. Again, let’s go back to Burroughs. After his 2001 minor league season, when he was still considered a Top 25 prospect even though he was apparently blocked at the major league level by Phil Nevin, his trade value was huge. That’s in spite of the fact that he really hadn’t progressed as a hitter in the minors. He had the name and the reputation, the bloodlines, he was a consistent presence on top prospect lists. Now clearly, in retrospect the Padre organization should have traded him, because he ended up not doing much for us. But the value of LaPorta dominating AA less than a year after being drafted, and the fact that he was a high 1st rounder (and had been considered a top 10 player before the 2006 season, when he got hurt), is critical to his current trade value. It doesn’t matter one bit that Kouz had a great 2006 between AA and AAA. If LaPorta right now is worth a theoretical $100, Kouzmanoff is maybe worth $60. You’re not going to convince the Brewers to take a 40% discount on what they could purchase with LaPorta by trying to convince them that LaPorta and Kouz should both really be worth only $80.
May 21, 2008 at 4:51 pm
#100@Phantom: The top players wouldn’t sign away their free agent years if they knew they’d get double from the Yankees. Some would of course but the top players wouldn’t.
I don’t understand why the Padres don’t do something like this. Tell the top high school pitchers (or college but it would probably be harder to do) to ask for huge signing bonuses. San Diego is by far the best place for a pitcher to end up in so it would also be in the players best interest to place themselves “off-limits” to most teams. It’s a win-win situation. The Padres would end up with the best pitching talent and the players would end up in the environment which is optimal to their success. Of course, that would cost some money so we know that John Moores probably won’t do it but it is pretty logical.
May 21, 2008 at 4:57 pm
#104@Schlom: But top players HAVE signed away their FA years. That’s EXACTLY what Miguel Cabrera did. Granted, he got paid. But he might have been able to get more on the open market. The same can be said for Hanley Ramirez.
Both players and teams are avoiding FA as a reliable method for building teams because it’s too risky.
May 21, 2008 at 4:58 pm
#102@Phantom:
Kouz currently has an 80 OPS+, which is adjusted for the park. If I’m the Brewers, I may think that his second half last year was for real, but I’m not going to pay for it when he’s struggling so bad now. Most scouts think he’s a poor defender; as I intimated earlier, if you have to get into esoteric measures to explain to a potential trade partner why your player is better than they think, you’re not going to win.
LaPorta’s trade value right now is higher (although I might say equal to facilitate discussion) than Headley’s was at the end of last year. If anyone had suggested trading Headley for someone who produced like Kouz did last year (Eckstein, Belliard, Edward Encarnacion, Cuddyer, Werth), what would Padre fan reactions have been? That we were seriously underselling him.
May 21, 2008 at 4:58 pm
#103@Tom Waits: That’s very true. In fact, every team probably over-values their own prospects so in the Brewers eyes LaPorta is worth more like $120. I think you are underrating Kouz a bit — 3B that hit 275/329/475 (after being one of the worst players in baseball the first month) in Petco Park have some value.
Certainly the Brewers would be better off this season with Kouzmanoff rather then LaPorta - probably the next season as well. They’d also be better off if they could trade him for a pitcher or another better 3B. Or if they trade Braun, Fielder or Hart for something they need. To fit LaPorta into the team they are going to have to trade something. Personally I wouldn’t play for the following season, much less two years down the road.
May 21, 2008 at 5:02 pm
#98@Schlom: The 1996 Yankees had Bernie Williams, Derek Jeter, Andy Petitte, Mariano Rivera, Ramiro Mendoza, and Gerald Williams. Paul Oneil was obtained in a trade, as was Tino Martinez for farm products. Jorge Posada arrived the following year.
I realize it is fashionable to claim that the Yankees buy their championships, but how often do teams put together that amount of talent from their farm system for a championship run ???
May 21, 2008 at 5:05 pm
#99@Tom Waits: Aha, see now this is the fun stuff - the negotiations.
There is a zone of possible agreement between the value of LaPorta to another organization (value B) and the value of LaPorta to the Brewers Organization (value A).
-
ZOPA: Value A ——————————————-Value B
-
Obviously, value B is greater than value A, and a trade will result in value claming by each team above value A and below value B.
-
Trade: Value A —————Trade Value ————Value B
-
Brewers Value Claim = Trade Value - Value A
Padres (e.g.) Claim = Value B - Trade Value
-
Just as you can say that that the Brewers would be fools to settle for anything other than value B (LaPorta’s value to another organization), others could say that any another organization would be fools to give the Brewers anything other than Value A+1 unit of value (slightly more than value A). (note: value A in this instance represents only the direct value of LaPorta (see cash streams 1&2 in my other post).
This is one of the places where we see the skill of good general managers at work. That is, being a general manager (in this regard) is about (1) properly estimating values A & B and (2) claiming more value in the trade than the other team.
Thus, General Managers can make mistakes in either point 1 or point 2. If, hypothetically, both general managers in a trade get point 1 correct (the trick is undestanding the value to the other organization), then you would assume that they would split the value that could be realized in a trade. Of course, that’s not always the case, but usually the value win/loss occurs because of incorrect valuations of A & B.
In my opinion, KT has always done a nice job of getting the lion share of the value claim during trades. E.G. the Linebrink deal last year….(Thatcher was way more valuable to the Padres than Linebrink was to the Brewers and that’s not even taking into consideration the discounted future value of Inman)…
May 21, 2008 at 5:06 pm
#102@Phantom: More on Kouzmanoff’s relative ability at 3b.
Last year, Kouz earned 15 Win Shares. It’s not my favorite tool, but it’s handy because it combines offense and defense. That put him in the middle of full-time 3b. This year he’s earned 3, which is coincidentally enough the same amount that Bill Hall of Milwaukee has. There’s no way that the Brewers trade their best prospect for a player who has, so far in 2008, been just as unproductive as the player he’s going to replace. Now obviously Kouz has the potential to be more than he is now, but teams don’t pay full price for unrealized potential. Not unless they’re in a fire sale mode, like the Marlins when they traded Beckett.
May 21, 2008 at 5:09 pm
#106@Tom Waits: I guess my main problem is that I don’t get why LaPorta’s trade value is higher then Headley’s. If Headley had a better season in Double A, was younger at the time and plays a much more difficult position, shouldn’t he be worth more. The only point in LaPorta’s favor is that he was drafted 7th overall vs. 66th for Headley.
May 21, 2008 at 5:16 pm
#108@parlo: That’s kind of my point. Since it’s nearly impossible to get that much young talent together at the same time (unless you are the Rays and finish last place every season) you are better off getting established players (free agents) instead of relying on your own.
#110@Tom Waits: By that logic you wouldn’t trade for Robinson Cano because he has 0 Win Shares so far this season. Nevermind that he’s been in the top 5 the past two seasons (and is younger then everyone else ahead of him).
May 21, 2008 at 5:17 pm
#107@Schlom: Sure, Kouz has value. He’s given away some of his second-half surge last year by posting a 684 OPS this year, and his defensive reputation among scouts hasn’t changed. But his value isn’t LaPorta Now. It might be LaPorta in September 2008, if the big guy struggles later this year.
#109@Marsh: One of the keys to Towers’ trading success, though, is identifying players who are undervalued by their parent organization. He’s grabbed assets who are seen - by the parent - as flawed or superfluous, often players who have struggled in major league duty. The Brewers just drafted LaPorta a year ago. They weren’t even sure he could play LF then. Do they see him as superfluous when they knew his flaws 11 months ago and still paid him 2 million? There’s no wiggle room for Towers in that situation.
May 21, 2008 at 5:21 pm
#113@Tom Waits: You’re exactly right about Tower’s skill.
May 21, 2008 at 5:26 pm
#112@Schlom: No, by that logic the Yankees wouldn’t trade Cano because nobody wants to pay what he’s actually worth. Kouzmanoff is not Robinson Cano.
Kouz just doesn’t represent the kind of upgrade you seem to think he does. Last year, Hall earned 12 WS despite playing completely out of position. This year he’s tied with Kouzmanoff. Why would Milwaukee sacrifice their best trading chip when Hall has proven he can earn 18-21 WS a season?
#111@Schlom: Because trade value is not determined by math.
Scouting reports play a huge role. LaPorta was rated as having 70 power, which is about as high as you’ll ever see. And Power is the tool that matters most.
Current buzz plays a huge role, and LaPorta has that among scouts. It’s like when the Royals traded Beltran for Mark Teahen, when Teahen was having a very good season. The buzz around him built up and Allan Baird bit.
The other key is that LaPorta was playing in college this time last year. Headley didn’t have his breakout season until after he spent an entire year in High A. LaPorta skipped High A entirely.
May 21, 2008 at 5:27 pm
#64@parlo: Oh yeah. I totally agree. It’s fun sometimes, but basically pointless. Still, I learn a lot about these minor league guys when they are being discussed within a hypothetical trade discussion.
May 21, 2008 at 5:29 pm
#113@Tom Waits: You have to forget about the 2 million. That’s a sunk cost and shouldn’t be used when evaluating future value.
Tower’s doesn’t necessarily need wiggle room. It seems that there is a ZOPA for LaPorta, in that his value to the Padres is likely higher than his value to the Brewers. Thus, KT should be able to trade a player representing value somewhere between the two values represented by LaPorta to each organization. Similarly, the traded player likely is valued more by the Brewers than the Padres. The net of the value claiming for both players could be zero (actually, should be zero if everybody was rationale and capable of properly players), but we know that it is unlikely that that will be the case.
note: I actually know very little about LaPorta, so I cannot actually make the statement that his value is greater for the Padres (given that they have Headley) than for the Brewers. I guess I’m stating it “as obvious” above for the sake of argument.
May 21, 2008 at 5:37 pm
#117@Marsh: Why would I forget about it when one of Schlom’s key assertions is that Milwaukee has backed themselves into a corner with all those, er, corner players? They knew exactly what they were getting 11 months ago when they drafted LaPorta. They knew he was going to be limited to LF or 1b. They knew that Braun had struggled so badly with the glove at 3b he hadn’t even broken camp with the major league club, and that many evaluators thought he would have to move off the position. They knew Prince Fielder had hit 28 HR in 2006 (at age 22) and another 19 by the time LaPorta was drafted.
Knowing all that, they still chose to draft him. They didn’t paint themselves into a corner. If they move LaPorta, it will be completely on their terms.
I would agree that there “should” be a player who is worth enough to the Brewers to get LaPorta. There’s no way that player is Kevin Kouzmanoff, not when Hall has hit so well in the past (and matched him this year). Kouzmanoff might be part of a deal, but it’s going to take something else the Brewers really want.
May 21, 2008 at 5:37 pm
I could totally see a Khalil to Boston trade. What would they have that we could use?
May 21, 2008 at 5:45 pm
#119@Masticore317: Justin Masterson. But they might want us to take Lugo back, or they might decide to use Lowrie instead.
I wish they needed an OF and that OG hadn’t put them on his list, because then we might get a young pitcher and Lowrie for Khalil and OG.
May 21, 2008 at 5:45 pm
#119@Masticore317: not much the Padres don’t match up well trade wise with Boston, they have kind of tapped out thier minor league system (position player wise).
May 21, 2008 at 5:50 pm
#118@Tom Waits: The signing bonus is sunk cost. Unless that sunk cost provides you some leverage in future negotiations (e.g. you’re a VC Firm and you previously financed a start-up therefore in a down round of financing you should be able to negotiate favorable terms), then you have to ignore it. Otherwise you’re mistakenly placing future value on costs incurred in the past. The fact is that bonus is a cost that has already been incurred. Nothing they do in the future can change that. LaPorta’s value is solely based on the cash streams he can create in the future. Again, ignoring sunk costs is fundamental to NPV analysis. Many, many bad decisions have been made by organizations (particularly governments, I imagine) forgetting that.
As for that being part of Schlom’s argument (I’m not going to search through the comments to figure out if/when he said that), I can’t support him there.
ps - the only way you could conceivably treat the signing bonus as a useful costs is if you thought of it as a capitalized asset that you depreciated every year over the players useful life. In that case, you could add back the depreciation cost as a non-cash charge when calculating your free cash flow. As I understand it, though, players are not thought of as “assets” in the financial sense. Rather, they are treated like operating expenses (this is like the difference between Delta owning a plane (capital asset that can be depreciated) or leasing it (operating expense).
May 21, 2008 at 5:55 pm
#118@Tom Waits: Sorry Tom, re-reading your post, I’m not sure that you were actually talking about “forgetting the signing bonus” which is what I had stated.
It could be argued that LaPorta was signed for $2mil because - like you always suggest the Padres should have known with Porcello - he represented (1) strong insurance value (1b from above) and (2) strong trade value.
Now that things have played out they way that they have, you would have to assume that the brewers would be reluctant to move Braun back to 3b in order to suit up LaPorta. Maybe I’m wrong about that, I dunno.
May 21, 2008 at 5:59 pm
#122@Marsh: I apparently wasn’t clear. The 2 million is sunk, but it clearly indicates what the Brewers thought of LaPorta when they drafted him. They didn’t pick him 7th and pay him that 2 million dollars if they thought his future position would lead to him being traded, 1 year later, for a player like Kouzmanoff. The tangible proof of what the Brewers thought of him, rather than the cash involved, is what matters. If they didn’t think they could use him themselves, or trade him for more than Kouzmanoff, why wouldn’t they have drafted Matt Dominguez, Jayson Heyward, Kevin Ahrens, or any of the pitchers who were available?
I don’t doubt that LaPorta’s future trade value was considered. But they didn’t sign him so they could turn him into Kevin Kouzmanoff. LaPorta’s the kind of prospect you turn into an impact player, not a gap-filler, especially when Hall fills the gap already.
May 21, 2008 at 6:03 pm
#122@Marsh: I’m not blaming the Brewers for drafting a player that isn’t as good as what they had at the major league level as LaPorta still obviously has value. He needs to be traded to fully maximize that value — probably the sooner the better.
May 21, 2008 at 6:04 pm
#123@Marsh: Oh, I don’t think putting Braun back at 3b (or Hart in CF) would be their ideal outcome. But it’s better for them than selling low on LaPorta.
I wrote 122 before I saw 123, else I might not have.
May 21, 2008 at 6:07 pm
#124@Tom Waits:
But they didn’t sign him so they could turn him into Kevin Kouzmanoff
That’s a great line. A clincher, if you will…..
May 21, 2008 at 6:10 pm
#127@Marsh: Um, your line should have been in quotes.
“But they didn’t sign him so they could turn him into Kevin Kouzmanoff”
May 21, 2008 at 6:10 pm
I wish I could continue this discussion but I have to leave to go to the game tonight.
I guess my main point is that I’m not sure that LaPorta will be an impact player as he is already as far right on the defensive spectrum as he can go — and I think the failure rate of drafted 1B or LF is so low. He better be an impact bad otherwise he’s going to be a bust.
Maybe with more time we can figure out what the average 3B does in Petco vs. the average LF and then we can better figure out who is the better player. Superficially, whoever plays in Milwaukee is always going to look better then someone in San Diego due to the park factors (another reason why it would be good to trade with San Diego as pretty much no matter what you are going to end up with the better hitter).
May 21, 2008 at 6:26 pm
in game thread is up….