San Diego Padres Draft Recap

by Dex on Jun 9, 2008 8:39 AM PDT Comment 21 comments

I don't pay enough attention to college (much less high school) baseball to really form opinions regarding the draft. Even if I did, I don't pay any kind of significant attention to other teams enough to figure how well the Padres do in comparison to others. Therefore, my technique when I need to speak intelligently about the draft picks is to read a few sources and then semi-blindly go along with 70% of what everybody else says, admit to not knowing about 15% of it, actually know 5% of what I'm talking about and then form a completely outlandish opinion on the final 10% of opinions I use in conversation.

Incidentally, I'm positive that this is how sports commentators manage to comment on so many different topics and still say sane, though the ratios obviously differ. For example, Skip Bayless probably goes with percentages of 10, 2, 2 and 86, respectively. Somebody like Bob Costas probably goes with 50, 0, 40 and 10.

Now that I've let you in on my secret, let's look at what everybody else is talking about so that we can pretend to know what we're talking about later in the comments section.

Paul DePodesta provides notes on all the guys drafted in various here, here, and here.
Ducksnorts recap - Geoff does me one better and notes that he comments and analyzes information from reliable sources, which makes him sound much more standup than me, because I basically admit to being a fraud.
Friar Forecast recap - I know that my opening paragraphs might seem like shots at others doing recaps, but also keep in mind that there really are people who pay a lot more attention to baseball at those levels, and for now, I trust Padman to be one of those people.
Scout.com doesn't list the Padres as a "winner". In this world, there are winners and losers. There is no "try".

My analysis: The Padres were a little surprising in the fact that they fixated on hitting rather than pitching, what with pitching apparently being their wheelhouse for evaluating talent. I'm not concerned so much with loading up at certain positions and I also thinking fielding talent (defense) at the high school and college levels is poorly evaluated. One thing I think is very interesting is the number of Taurus birth signs that were drafted. That bodes well for our chi.

Draft Grade: B--

0 recs | Comment 21 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

well

this is mainly talent we might see five years down the road, playing for say the rangers or the cubs, correct?
anyone in this draft class that may show up sooner?

-- I've misplaced my pants.

by garth on Jun 9, 2008 9:19 AM PDT reply actions

Drafts make me so sleepy

It’s hard to care about lesser players on the major league roster and I have a difficult time caring about freshly drafted players that are 3-5 years away.

by jbox on Jun 9, 2008 9:52 AM PDT reply actions

I wish

Chase Headley wasn’t 3 to 5 years away.

by Winfield's Ghost on Jun 9, 2008 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

please...

you know we can’t bring him up now that we’re on fire! It be too much pressure for him to step up and contribute on a (temporarily) winning team. What if we start to lose again? He’ll just blame himself and fall into a shame spiral.

by pjbno4 on Jun 9, 2008 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

excellent point

And it’s a good thing he wasn’t brought up before the Mets series. He would’ve assumed that he was responsible for the success and gone crazy with ego. Best to let him wait it out till we lose again.

by Dex on Jun 9, 2008 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions

So we want this Headley

Not this Headley

I'll wait to the day's end when the moon is high
And then I'll rise with the tide with a lust for life...

by Axion on Jun 9, 2008 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

If Headley ever stumbles upon this site

he’s going to think we hate him.

by Winfield's Ghost on Jun 9, 2008 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions

"think"?

Why do you think elan disappeared?

by Phantom on Jun 9, 2008 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions

I can't believe you love Khalil

but hate Headley.

PHANTOM HATES HEADLEY!!!

by Winfield's Ghost on Jun 9, 2008 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions

lol

I’m a huge Chase fan. I was surprised he hasn’t been called up yet.

Here’s a hypothetical question: If we’re in this in mid-July, who should the Padres target in a potential trade?

by Phantom on Jun 9, 2008 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions

Hmmm

(Trying not to laugh at “if we’re in this in mid-July”)

I don’t know enough about who might be available. And I’d think it would depend too on what the injury situation (CY, Bard, etc) looks like in terms of what type of player they’d looking for. My assumption would be another reliable arm for the bullpen and (stop me if you’ve heard this before) a bat. Teams like Seattle, KC and Cincy might be looking to deal at that pt, so their rosters would worth looking at.

by Winfield's Ghost on Jun 9, 2008 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions

It seems somewhat ridiculous

to ponder right now, but it’s a very real possibility. At this point, I truly believe that LA will be our biggest competition as AZ is fading fast. Their defense is just too bad for them to keep winning ballgames.

by Phantom on Jun 9, 2008 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions

Crazy hypothetical non-real world fun time

I still don’t see enough of our top prospects developing to make them expendable. It’s pretty much at the point where any that develop into major league players in the next 1-2 years will be needed on the major league roster. The possible exception could be Kyle Blanks who is doing well enough this year to be decent trade bait. The question then becomes what could we use him to upgrade? LF could become Headley and I don’t want to waste too much talent on a one year rental a la Adam Dunn (although I doubt we have the ammunition anyway, and the Reds will probably be contenders, but some in a similar situation). CF looks okay now with Gerut having an OBP in the .350s. RF is solid. 1B is solid. 3B is good enough and you don’t want to send Kouz the wrong message. SS is a mess offensively, but I don’t you can fix that with a trade. 2B is not a mess, but again there probably won’t be anyone available that would be considered an upgrade. If the CY, Peavy and Estes come back as scheduled, the rotation is okay. So that leaves catching and relievers. To trade any of our top prospects that reliever better be a proven late innings guy have a good 2008 season. With our current catcher production (defense and offense) we could basically take a shot at any veteran catching option and have a chance at upgrading the position, but I think you’re probably better off with the Barrett/Carlin situation. Bard is pretty useless if his bat is dead (and it looked pretty dead).

So to conclude. We could probably trade for a stud reliever, but I wouldn’t want to sell out like the Brewers did for Linebrink last year. Maybe something like the Braves did for Dotel, with us sending Germano for a injury prone guy with good track record on a non-contender. Not sure who that guy is yet. LF is an option but I’d rather try Headley than sell out the farm for a rental.

I watched all 23 innings and all I got was this lousy signature.

by Wonko on Jun 9, 2008 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions

I kinda had

the same opinion, which is why I posed the question. The biggest place to upgrade offensively would be SS, but there’s not really a strong hitting SS freely available. Plus, you’d likely lose your stellar defense at the cost of improved offense.

I could see them securing the rotation and adding a reliever. But probably not much in the way of position players.

by Phantom on Jun 9, 2008 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions