Heath Bell still a Padre. Season still over.
by Dex on Aug 1, 2011 9:31 AM PDT
Email
PrintHeath Bell made it through the trade deadline untouched, but we now say goodbye to Mike Adams and Ryan Ludwick. Ryan Ludwick was a gentle soul. Not one to ever complain or do anything too loudly. Oftentimes, he would meekly attend to his business without much to-do. More than once, I forgot that he was on the team though he did hit for power decently enough and he played left field better than Chase Headley or Kyle Blanks or anybody else the Padres have thrown into left field that had to pretend to be a left fielder in their illustrious history of doing amazing things with left fielders.
For that, and for the year he spent in Padre Blue/Sand/Sky/Brown/Orange/Yellow/Green/Camo/Grays, Ryan Ludwick will always be a Padre as he drifts off into the sunset of even worse obscurity than he was faced with in San Diego.
Seriously though, that last part. How would you like to be Ryan Ludwick and go from St Louis, though hot as hell and a stadium filled with El Camono driving "good" baseball fans, to San Diego where the weather's nice, but the fans are mostly indifferent, to Pittsburgh, baseball hell. That sucks.
Heath Bell, the most valuable resource to move, remains unmoved. I know some people are bummed about that, but I'm thinking that it might imply good things about our future payroll and opportunities.
For Mike Adams, we get prospects to grow and nurture in the city known in all of baseball as the Cradle of Closers. For Ryan Ludwick, we get something even more prospective than prospects in the form of a prospective prospect (or cash).
What does all of this mean? Season is cashed, folks! Come for the Trevor Hoffman ceremony. Stay for the future. 2010 was Almost the Best Season Evar. 2011 is the season of the Lame Duck Payroll. 2012? THE FUTURE.
145 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Watch this: the PTBNL will be...
Ludwick, after the Pirates tire of his dismal play! Status quo wins.
Bummer to see Adams go, but the prospects we got back look very good. We shall see.
The Padres are good, but make no mistake: we've gotta beef up the linwup.
If I had a nickel from every SBN blog that has banned me, Arrowhead Pride would owe me 5¢.
"I'm so psyched, I'm gonna smoke a doobie and poop on my hot dog." --Dex
by StrangeBroP25 on Aug 1, 2011 9:35 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
I don't mind "giving up season"
If that means we can see our young guys get more playing time.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
We didn't give up the season
The team just sucked from root one this year
Understanding is a three edged sword; your side, their side and the truth.
Bolttalk Podcast - the Best Chargers show on the Web!
by TheAxManCometh on Aug 1, 2011 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions
"Heath Bell, the most valuable resource"
No, Adams was
http://twitter.com/matthewverygood
http://lobsterstuffedwithtacos.tumblr.com
by matthewverygood on Aug 1, 2011 10:14 AM PDT reply actions
I wish they had traded Bell for those two prospects
because he’s worth less. They tried, Rangers didn’t go for it, so they gave them Adams instead.
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 1, 2011 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
As a Cardinal fan
I was hoping the Cards would trade for Mike Adams….never really wanted or cared for a Heath Bell rental/trade. Bell seems like a guy that is just around the corner from not being that good anymore
Don't hate the game, hate the nerds!
by thenerdhater on Aug 1, 2011 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Well, up into this year
Bell was one of the best relievers in the game. A K/9 of 11+ will do that. This year he seems to have lost the feel for his curve and the strikeouts have dropped accordingly. If/when he finds it again, he’ll go back to blowing away hitters and being one of the best.
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 1, 2011 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions
No question what he WAS
Just saying if I’m talking about now or in the future, I’d bet on Adams.
Don't hate the game, hate the nerds!
by thenerdhater on Aug 1, 2011 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
There's nothing wrong with Heath's curve.
The strikeouts were nice, but the 9th inning drama wasn’t. He worked in the
offseason to increase his groundball rate, at the expense of strikeouts, and
succeeded. His GB rate is way up this year, but he was willing to make the
tradeoff on strikeouts to get it. BTW “up into this year”? He has 30 saves, on
a pace for 45. His save conversion rate is 90%, about what Trevor did every
year.
by wegotballsley on Aug 1, 2011 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Did you see a quote somewhere that he said that?
Because if he did, he’s failing. His groundball rate is the lowest it’s ever been in his entire career.
Heat has his greatest success when he gets his strikeouts. Every year with the Padres except this one, he’s had at least a 8 K/9. This year, it’s down to 6.85. He’s also still walking more than 3 batters per 9. That’s acceptable when you’re striking out a ton of guys, but he’s not anymore.
Up to this year, he’s been good based on his high skill level. Now, he’s still preventing runs, but not in a way that makes him any better at it than anyone else. It’s happening because of luck, defense, and ballpark.
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 1, 2011 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions
The main culprit of his added drama
Besides the lack of Ks is the increased Line Drive rate. The GB and FB rates aren’t off that much to be that much of a concern (although both are slightly going in the wrong direction).
It’s almost like you can take the guys that were whiffing and say that they are now just crushing the ball on him. (it doesn’t REALLY work that way, but that’s how everything balances out)
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
I don't see GMs having as much confidence as GLB Comments...
Adams has never been a closer. Heath has been an elite closer for a couple of years now. Adams is only a year younger than Bell. It’s not like we’re talking about some young 24 year old stud who’s going to be around the game another 10 years. It’s only been with the Padres that Adams has even looked as good as he has.
I really like Mike Adams and all, but, if we’re talking about moving somebody for the same two prospects, I move Adams all day long and hang onto my star in Heath Bell.
My thinking...
One of the following will happen:
1. Padres are able to spend more in 2012 and Heath Bell gives us a nice San Diego discount
2. Heath Bell gives us a REALLY nice San Diego discount
3. Heath Bell gets offered arbitration, turns it down, we get picks
My best case scenario was this:
We trade Heath Bell to the Rangers for Robbie Erlin and Joe Wieland….keep Mike Adams and Heath Bell re-signs with us in the off-season with a REALLY nice San Diego discount.
That would have been perfect.
by Drama on Aug 1, 2011 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I can't believe I'm saying this.
But I AGREE with Drama. A billionty percent.
~Chicks dig unhittable sliders. The slider will get you. Oh, yes, it will get you.~
It's not a question of one guy being way younger
it’s that Adams still had a year of control left. That, combined with the substantial decrease in Bell’s ability this year, meant Mike had more value. It’s not just commenters saying this, organizations know these things. It’s why we got better offers for Mike than for Heath.
The whole “proven closer” thing doesn’t mean as much as it used to, because more and more teams are realizing that there isn’t something special about the 9th inning. An effective reliever can get three outs no matter which inning we’re talking about. It doesn’t matter where they pitch Mike—he’ll still be the same outstanding reliever whether he comes out in the 8th or 9th inning.
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 1, 2011 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions
I disagree.
I think there is a great psychological difference in closing version “any” inning. Look at Heath’s numbers. He was a solid 8th inning guy, but not amazing. You throw him in the closers role and his numbers got better, and he converts at a high rate. There are several very decent relievers who never were able to close that well (look at the musical chairs they have on other clubs).
Heater is 30 for 32 this year. I don’t think that is a “Substantially worse” than his 42 for 48 in 2009.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
Saves aren't a good measure of effectiveness.
Instead, look at his falling strikeout and groundball rates.
Bell was exceptional in 2007 as an 8th inning guy, had a down year in 2008, bounced a bit higher in 2009, in 2010 matched his 2007 awesomeness, and then has since fallen way down in 2011. The fact that he still has a relatively low ERA is a testament to his defense, ballpark, and amazingly good luck on fly balls.
Relievers are volatile lot, due to small sample sizes and the high leverage situations they’re asked to come in for. One year a guy will be great, the next year so so, the next year back to awesome, and so on and so forth. Consistency is almost impossible. It’s simply the nature of the beast.
I like Heath a lot—I think he’s fun to watch and a good clubhouse guy. But he wasn’t worth the same amount as Adams, as is demonstrated by the fact that Mike is gone and he’s still here. If Jed had gotten an offer worth more than the comp picks we might get in the offseason, Heath would have been gone as well.
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 1, 2011 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I have no problem with trading him
I am not saying that Saves are a good measure of general “good pitching” but they are a great way to see what the result is of what a closers job is to do:
End the game with the lead.
I could give 2 squirts of piss as to whats Heath’s K or GB/FB Ratio is as long as he is saving games.
Are those numbers a good indicator of how good he is as a pitcher in general or how effective he will be? Probably.
But he is 30 or 32 with lower stats. Lucky? Maybe, but he is doing his job. End the game with a lead.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
That's fine logic
If you are trying to measure what he’s done. But, if you want to get an idea of how he’ll do in the future then those K and GB/FB ratios matter.
I think we all can agree that the only want to get saves is to get outs and get them without giving up runs (or, another way of looking at it, a series of walks and hits). Since the only ways a pitcher can control how quickly he can get outs and prevent hits is with Ks, GB/FB rate and HR rate, then those are the factors that are going to determine his effectiveness. Unless you just surround him with a full defense of gold glovers. And then, how much more effective would he be than the next guy?
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
I think we should strive for a defense of gold glovers.
I also think that saving is more than K, GB/FB, and HR… those are all necessary, but mental game plays a significant part.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
If you did that
Then a guy like Heath Bell is essentially worthless. All you’ll need is a below average pitcher with exceptional mental makeup and you’re golden. Pay him peanuts until you find the next guy.
Saving IS more than K, GB/FB and HR. No one is saying it isn’t. But, without those characteristics all the mental makeup isn’t going to matter when guys are hitting you left and right. Unless those balls just magically end up landing in peoples’ gloves.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
That is horrible logic.
Are you saying it worthless to have gold glove players if you have good pitchers? Its not like its either or you look for value at a price.
Having GG players + Heath Bell > Having GG Players + League average pitcher.
You should always strive to put together a good defense. Our current team is an example of that.
No one says “Pitching wins championships” People always say “Pitching and defense wins championships”.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
You're right
Let’s just get a team of All Stars.
Why didn’t we think of that before?
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
Hmmm....
I don’t think if you look at the list of GG’er or even if you were to look at GG level defense guys, you are going to see all All-Stars.
But saying that good defense makes Heath Bell useless is batshit crazy.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
I was saying
That if his K rates and GB/FB and HR rates go to s___, then he’s not going to get any better results than any other crappy pitcher with excellent mental makeup. And without that great defense, he’ll be terrible. But, with it he’d be good. That’s just baseball.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
All I am saying...
Is that his decreased K rate doesn’t seem to be effecting his converted saves. That probably has more to do with his increased GB ratio.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
And all I am saying
Is that his decreased K rate doesn’t seem to be effecting his converted saves…. yet.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
He will eventually get worse
I do not think Heath Bell will be saving games into his 40’s.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
But, they couldn't move Bell for those prospects
The Rangers wouldn’t accept that deal. They want the more valuable commodity (Adams) if they were going to give up those guys.
Instead they’ll have to accept either the comp picks or re-signing Bell. Both of which would be considered by most to be less valuable than trading Bell for the two prospects in this deal.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
This is true.
Except from what I hear the I think the draft picks are a wash as far as the prospects are concerned.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
Not true
We are likely to get a supplemental first round pick and either a late first round pick or a second round pick. Since Erlin is a top 50 prospect and Wielend is a top 100 prospect, the likelhood of those draft picks having better value than that is extremely unlikely. The will have value, but not that much value.
There are numbers to back this up. I’ll find this in a sec.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
Here's a link to a BTB score article that uses Victor Wang "famous" prospect values numbers
I think it’s pretty safe to say that Erlin and Wieland are both two of the top 50 pitching prospects in baseball. Erlin easily so since he’s a consensus top 50 player and Wieland most likely in that tier.
Using the numbers that puts the value of each a $15.9M. So the Padres picked $31.8M in value.
The value of a late first round pick is $5.2M
The value of a supplemental pick is $2.6M
The Padres got $24M in additional value of those two prospects vs. best case scenario in comp picks.
Having said that and given what I perceive the market for Bell would have been, I’m thinking that Jed and his team may value comp picks a little higher than Wang’s research. However, I don’t think that’s enough to overcome the $24M gap.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
By the way
Using WAR calculations for Mike Adams value to Padres, you could figure he had about $3M worth of value remaining this year and, if he had an awesome 2012 (like his 2011), about $9M next year.
So, Padres got a lot of value in this trade for their 8th inning guy.
Why did the Rangers pay that much, you ask? Well the numbers used for figuring out a player’s value in dollars is the average for all teams. A playoff team, especially one with World Series potential, is going to get more value for their player than a team that’s going to finish in last place. Therefore, it’s also in a contender’s best interest to “overpay” a little for a player at the deadline.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
While I agree with your general point
I caution against using WAR when discussing the value of relief pitching. WAR’s based on several assumptions, namely that all plate appearances are equivalent to one another, that are clearly violated when discussing late-inning relievers who operate nearly exclusively in high leverage situations.
While WAR is accurate in determining the value, in a vacuum, or a given player, it greatly undervalues pitchers who contribute positively in high-leverage situations. A cursory glance at WPA for the top-end relievers can verify this pretty easily.
Basically, all that does is make Adams worth more to those who have the ability to use him in high leverage situations most often (offset by pushing off value from the reliever(s) who were in that role previously).
In other words, Adams is worth even more than the ~$12 million you estimated through 2012, assuming he’s placed in the most important situations for the Rangers, before we even consider the revenue from postseason games, etc. I don’t think the Rangers overpaid.
That's exactly what I was I was trying to say at the end.
Thanks for reiterating.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
WAR is not a good indicator of value for relievers
especially ones used almost exclusively in high-leverage situations. Most teams would rather add a 3 war reliever than a 3 war starter.
by iheartyourfart on Aug 1, 2011 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, I don't know any other places where you can get $ value for a player.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
That may be true.
But without getting too fancy. Isn’t the 1st round a minimum Top 32 player, and isn’t the supplimental normally like a top 75?
If they draft on average, thats what they should get. If they draft a little smarter, they could get more like Top 25 Top 50.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
No. That logic is bad. Extremely bad.
A 1st round pick is a minimum Top 32 player? That basically implies that no 1st round pick is ever a bust.
A top 5 or top 10 has a good (perhaps very good) chance of being a top 32 prospect, but a pick at the end of the first round has a small chance of ever reaching that status.
On average, those players are just not reaching the heights of being the type of prospects. Sure, if you do above average or exceptional in those spots you can get a top 32 or top 75 player, but you can’t count on that. It’s not that exact of a science.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
Bad, maybe. Extremely bad?
But you just stated that your own logic is bad too.
We are taking about the value of two Top 50 AA prospects.
Are you saying that no Top 50 AA prospect has ever been a bust? It may be a marginally better chance that they are not a bust, but not that much more. In the end, those two are 20 & 21 year old prospects. Jed can flip both of those draft picks into 22-23 year old proven college players that would probably have the same chances of succeeding as 2 Top 50 AA picks.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
Yes.
What studies have you done? This is based on facts and analysis. You’re just pulling ideas out of nowhere.
It’s not my logic I’m using. I’m using the common logic for evaluating these deals. That logic takes into account busts and the like.
I don’t get why you are assuming it wouldn’t.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
To say that more calmy
1. I did not state that “my” logic was bad and I am not sure I understand why you think that.
2. Yes. Top 50 AA pitching prospects bust a lot. The average value taking into account those busts is what is used in the logic. Yes, it’s an average. It’s not the best case, it’s not the worst case, maybe it’s not even the typical case. But, it’s an average. The average for top hitting prospects are even higher. A top 26-50 hitting prospect is on average worth $23.4M.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
Well...
1) You didn’t I am stating that your own post inferred that its bad.
2) Yeah, I imagine they do. I have studied statistics a lot recently while helping with a masters thesis. If there is one thing baseball statistics are limited by, its the facts.
Did this study take into account the GM’s putting players into the wrong level? Rushed prospects? Make-up? The fact that evaluators of “Top 50” may have inherent bias?
If a GM doesn’t think that he can evaluate players to the point that he can get close to the value of the place in which he selects his picks, then he shouldn’t be GM’ing. There are all sorts of factors. I didn’t say that the draft picks are exactly worth the 2 evaluated players. But its a wash, or pretty close to equal… if all things are equal.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
It doesn't appear to be a wash though.
All things being equal.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
Whatever.
All I am saying is that there are a lot of variables. I understand that conventional wisdom is that the prospects are better than draft picks.
I am saying we are talking about probability that guys who are 2-3 years from Majors are going to pan out there.
When I say “All things being equal” I mean that if a #1 overall pick is an exactly equal about better than a #2 overall pick and on down accordingly.
Having two high draft picks, if you have any confidence in your ability to draft. Can be as good or better that two top 50 prospects. That it is a wash.
I like draft picks. I think there is more possibility with them.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
what makes your argument valid
is what is the probability that the draft picks you pick (mid-low first round, due to being protected, and a supplemental pick) is at being say a Top 10 player at AA, or the probability they are an perennial all star at the majors.
"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"
a few points
-The chance of a top 50 AA prospect getting and succeeding in the major is the same no matter how you acquire them
-There is a probability of two draft picks making it to the top 50 AA prospect level.
-When you trade for two top 50 AA prospects, you acquire them, so there is almost a 100% chance you get a top 50 AA prospect.
Its almost always a better to trade for two prospects already in the top 50, then to acquire the draft picks.
-There is also the opportunity cost of drafting and signing the draft picks. Both in hard value and in resources.
"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"
by Ron Mexico on Aug 1, 2011 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Great clarification.
Thanks.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
No
The difference isn’t just marginal between a Top 50, developed prospect, and a late-first/supplemental draft pick. This has been repeatedly demonstrated in studies.
And even if they were equivalent, the fact that one player is closer to the majors than the other means that by the time the younger of the two players reaches the big leagues, the older player has already generated revenue for the franchise that has been (hopefully) reinvested.
There is something to be said about getting older, established prospects that you are completely ignoring, let alone the difference in quality between an established prospect and a draft pick.
You can draft college players
Who are older than these two 20 & 21 year old kids.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
And while those college players are still in the minors
The prospects you could have traded for would already be in the majors, establishing revenue.
That was his point, regardless of how he worded it.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
I'm tired of arguing this though
The idea that
Two players that COULD be top 50 pitching prospects (draft picks)
are somehow equal to
Two players players that ARE top 50 pitching prospects (traded for)
Is just too inane to keep arguing.
The latter is worth more. It’s been proven again and again. I don’t need to keep proving it.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
To be honest
All that I am say is that there is a possibility that a drafted player can be more a AA top 50 prospect is just that.
A drafted player, could be a AA top 10 prospect, and that, while some dude put monetary value on it that can weigh the prudence of every move. Some first round draft picks are Matt Bush, and some are Justin Verlander. I like the idea of getting something awesome.
Which is why I like draft picks.
My comment was from seeing someplace that prospects are so unpredictable that draft picks verses prospects are essentially the same. Which came from someone who had said that our drafting is normally terrible.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
Justin Verlander and Matt Bush
Were in the protected pick range. They doesn’t apply to this discussion.
Even if our drafting were the best there are was. It’s still not a wash. The two players that are highly ranked prospects are just more likely to be better players than the comp picks. Bottom line. That logic in and of itself makes it not a wash.
I think, on careful examination of what you’ve said, is that you mean to say it COULD be a wash. Again, we agree. However, if, gun to your head, you have to evaluate it at this moment in time, then it CURRENTLY is not a wash. There is just no way to logically make it such.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
I'll go with that.
I don’t always accurately convey what I mean.
The bottom line is that what we get from Bell could end up being as good as what we got for Adams even without trading Bell assuming we were to get the two draft picks.
Though your other comments are leading me to believe that Bell is washed up, and we should do whatever we can to trade him.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
Personally, I don't think he's washed up.
But it’s undeniable he’s not as good as he has been in the past. Hopefully he bounces back, which he absolutely could. But at the same time, I don’t think it makes sense for a team with our resources to extend him, even on a discount.
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 1, 2011 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions
I have an optimistic theory on Bell
That this year has worn on him and affected his rate stats. That without the pressure of getting traded and relocating his family he could improve. Just a thought.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
...
Not in baseball terms. The point was that if you have a choice between two exact same players, but one is closer to the big leagues, you select the person closer to the big leagues.
That, and that your statement that the picks were equivalent to the prospects we got in return being entirely incorrect.
Its less prudent.
But not necessarily incorrect.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
It IS incorrect to assess that the prospects are equal to the draft picks at this moment
In the future that may not be true. But, we don’t living in the future. We live right now. And the trade happened right now (well, very close to right now). And right now it is incorrect to value those two things equivalently.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
I am not valuing them equally
I even said its not prudent to take two draft picks. Prudent means responsible.
So let me restate leaving nothing previously stated to be taken into consideration.
*
Yea, the value of the prospects is *probably
Yea, the value of the prospects is probably better, and it would be irresponsible for Jed to go accept draft picks instead of prospects. However, I like draft picks because there is a great deal of mystery about them, and there is a chance we draft a guy who is a badass top 10 guy. Like we get a college guy who is 22, almost major league ready! Which is why I like the draft. Its like christmas… where as getting prospects is like taking someone elses toy you already know you like.
****
Better?
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
Sort of.
The way that most look at this situation, they still look at it as present value. Since the prospects and picks have no real current value to the major league team, what people look at is probable value.
You can take those probabilities and turn that into the average value you can see in return. By doing that you have now given yourself a current value. Using the current value of the prospects vs. the picks, the prospects have higher value.
Yes, that value comes from their probability of being of greater value to a future major league team. So using those commonly used methods for looking at current value, it is incorrect to say anything other than the prospects providing more value than the picks.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
More picks makes draft day more exciting.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
As a GM
Draft day excitement takes a backseat to building a better team.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
Draft day excitement makes better teams
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
umm what about the first round picks from the previous year?
and the year before that?
and the year before that?
I believe our current management takes the draft...
A bit more serious than our previous managements have.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
He's talking about all draft picks
Not just our draft picks.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
what I meant was the top 100 prospects
are drafted over a 4 to 5 year span.
just because your the top prospect of your draft class does not mean you are the top prospect overall.
Erlin and Wieland both are fantastic prospects
and Erlin, in particular, is tailor made for Petco. I’m convinced he’s going to be a star for you guys.
Go Rice Owls!
Would be a Matt Harrison fan, but I only like superstars
Pittsburgh
If they keep it up, it’d be cool if Ludwick was part of the first winning Pittsburgh team
Don't hate the game, hate the nerds!
They have dropped to 4 back. Its possible...
But they have to pick it up.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
I don’t believe that the Pirates have any money to give.
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? ◔ヮ◔
Uncommon Sportsman :: Absurdity in play
Whatever money they do get/save
should go towards signing draft picks. Every cent.
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 1, 2011 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions
Moorad said
that the $3 mil from Ludwick this season would go toward draft picks
but I thought the Padres were already spending everything needed for draft picks
is the $3 mil going to allow them to sign extra extra draft picks?
On the other hand, you have different fingers.
It will give them better negociation confidence to go over slot
Where they need to.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
They made four extremely agressive selections.
I would assume that they did not expect to sign all four. Perhaps those expectations have changed.
If they can make the playoffs this year
They’ll increase revenue enough to cover that cost.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
Something like that
Sales also lead to concessions and parking and jersey sales and t-shirts that say NL Central Division winners, etc.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
I was going to make a comic with the Pirates GM saying “but we’ve got money, too!” followed by a pic of Jed laughing, but it’s going to take more time than I have right now, so just pretend I did and we all liked it.
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? ◔ヮ◔
Uncommon Sportsman :: Absurdity in play
so, now
they have to offer Bell arbitration for around 11 million, which he might just take, eliminating any prospects next year, but I suppose if he stays good and leaves after that, they might still get two prospects for him in 2013, I guess. If they haven’t traded him yet.
They could extend him before that.
If they do so with a club option or two, they should be fine.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
That's what I'm hoping they do.
Avoid free agency altogether and just get him locked up for the discount he’s stated he’ll give them.
Let's pray
Mat Latos is the real deal...Go Lakers, Pads, and Bolts
by mrbarneydangles on Aug 1, 2011 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
if he accepts arbitration
there is still a good chance we get something for him at the deadline next season, or at least have a solid closer on a winning team if we are not sellers. Despite some buggy peripherals i don’t see heat falling off the cliff and an elite closer at $11 million still has some value, though probably moreso on another team.
by iheartyourfart on Aug 1, 2011 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Just read on twitter that he WILL accept arbitration. No picks.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
Still could get picks.
If he’s signed before the deadline.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
I don't get it. If he accepts arb it's like normal arb, how do we get picks?
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
Free agency opens after World Series
The deadline to accept arbitration is in December.
If he signs anytime in between, then the Padres get the comp picks.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
Is there a mandatory waiting period?
Or immediately after arbitration is offered, could he turn around and say “I accept!” without looking for a long term deal?
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 2, 2011 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
The team needs to tender him a contract offer first
Which I believe has to occur by December 1. But, he can accept as soon as they tender him.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
Ok.
So you mean the team doesn’t have to offer until December 1, and if he takes a deal elsewhere before that, they get the comp picks.
I had been understanding you to mean the team would offer, but he could take another deal elsewhere before deciding whether or not to accept. And that didn’t make sense to me.
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 2, 2011 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions
This is what I love about Dex:
his undying optimism.
I’m just adding to the chorus of being sad to see Adams go, but it’s also fun from a fan’s perspective to still have Heath in the bullpen. We need people with personality! (especially since right now we’re short on talent)
Good point. I was wondering if Dex's rent went up or something.
He should be telling us: “the Padres have only 62 losses – there’s still a chance for
a hundred wins!” Okay, maybe not that optimistic. Maybe “53 games left, 43-10
gives us 90 wins!” or “50-13 will get 87 wins – that might be enough!”
The thing is, a lot of us will settle for “Eight games with the Giants and ten with the
D’backs – let’s make ’em sweat.”
I’d even settle for “Nine more with the Dodgers – let’s pound them into last place for good!”
by wegotballsley on Aug 1, 2011 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions
The way I see it, any season where we finish ahead of the Dodgers can't be all that bad.
So let’s sweep those losers!
I would hesitate to think that he'd get through waivers.
For example, if I’m the Angels I’m claiming him. If the Angels are team trying to acquire him, then if I’m the Rangers I’m claiming him. Assuming both teams have cash.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
I assume they'll at least put him through waivers to see what happens.
He may make it to the Angels, who might be willing to cough up something useful for him.
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 1, 2011 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions
both teams can't claim him
lowest team in the standings has higher priority, right? Meaning Texas (currently) could not put a claim in on Bell to block the Angels, if the Angels wanted to put a claim in on him.
Correct.
But the Rangers could claim him to prevent him from clearing waivers and being traded.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
Shedding $$ when payroll already lowest?
The median salary on the Padres is $450k, the lowest in MLB. Ludwick, in major league terms, is cheap. His $6.75 million makes him the 36th highest paid OUTFIELDER. He is #130 in pay among major league players. Ludwick was a bargain. He wouldn’t even be in the top 10 paid on the Yankees.
What would be wrong with actually keeping Ludwick and putting a major league product out on the field for the fans – even in a losing season? This organization is cheap, cheap, cheap. I’d have more faith if we had been buyers last season when we were actually in a competitive race. We were still trying to dump Bell despite the playoff race. Yeah we acquired Ludwick at the trade deadline, but that was hardly the biggest splash among the contenders. We needed an ace starting pitcher. Maybe we could of traded Karsten Whitson for a Cliff Lee rental, but we were too cheap to pay him. We just miss the playoff and now its back to cleaning house. Just frustrating.
P.S. If any of you think this money saved is going toward signing prospects, please contact me. I have a timeshare for sale that might interest you.
ludwick earning the league minimum would be a liability
we already know he doesn’t work. why continue to pay him $6mil+ to take up a roster spot and keep guys from blanks, tekotte, cunningham, darnell, etc. from getting playing time and turning into productive padres?
by iheartyourfart on Aug 1, 2011 6:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Ludwick has double the RBI's of anyone else on team--no one hits in Petco
Headley now the team leader with 37, and Maybin now team leader in HR with 6 —he’s our power guy.
So what?
How important is it to keep your “RBI Guy” on a last place team? Ludwick was leaving after this season anyway. Why on Earth would it be more important to score runs in 2011 than it would be to get a prospect for the future? Regardless of the money involve or how well the guy is hitting.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
My point is...
Why the Padres are waiting for the youth to arrive, why not let some average priced free agents like Ludwick occupy the position for a couple seasons. Even when the Braves sucked from 07-09, they still went out and signed Derek Lowe, Javier Vazquez, Adam LaRoche and other veterans to play while they were waiting on all these young pitchers to arrive. That’s what other teams do. What is the payroll now, 35 mil? What prospect did the Padres get for Ludwick? I think I missed that. This deal was about cash.
Gotta play the young kids
Ludwick was taking up space. If we judged our prospects based on minor league numbers we would have the offense of the Red Sox, and Rizzo would be Ted Williams.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
I can't believe someone has a problem with the Ludwick trade.
by Drama on Aug 2, 2011 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
rec'd hard
i’ve always been a ludwick advocate but there is a point where a guy just isn’t working and its not worth it to hang on to him
by iheartyourfart on Aug 2, 2011 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Just to clear one thing up
Jed said on the radio yesterday that they are definitely taking a player for Ludwick. They just aren’t sure which one and will be scouting the Pirates the rest of the year to determine that.
by Zach (maestro876) on Aug 2, 2011 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions
lolBIs
1971 called, they want their stats back
by iheartyourfart on Aug 1, 2011 9:06 PM PDT up reply actions
RBIs are a useless statistic.
They’re entirely dependent on having runners on when the player comes up to the plate. Ludwick’s only the RBI leader because of his spot in the order.
by Darklighter on Aug 2, 2011 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
It's sad that this still needs said.
www.FriarsOnCardboard.blogspot.com
"jbox does not drink coffee, as it makes him clean house big time." ~Kev
by TheThinGwynn on Aug 2, 2011 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
but the lotto would go bankrupt
and vegas wouldn’t be as fun
by iheartyourfart on Aug 2, 2011 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions
lotto
-tax on the mathematically challenged.
"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"
Also apparently Wins, Saves, and fielding percentage.
I don’t know what to say to that.
Wonko could do that himself.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
And MLB has absolutely zero interest in changing that formula.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
I'd like to target Ramon Hernandez and Jerry Hairston in the off season.
Catching and utility infielder are two areas I’d like to improve this team. There isn’t going to be a lot of help in the free agent class of 2012. But Ramon and Jerry are two names that immediately stand out. Hundleys a nice guy, but it’s getting pretty clear he’s not going to be a number 1 catcher. I like him as a good backup, but that’s it. Ramon is 35 so he’s getting up there, but he’s coming off a good offensive year and he’s still solid behind the plate. If Bell isn’t retained there’s going to be some cash to spend. Maybe we can front load a deal with the available cash and convince him to sign a 2 year deal.
Jerry is just a good guy to have on a team. Bench strength will be really important considering how much time O-Dog spends on the DL.
"Never have a motto, that's what I always say" - Me
http://marcel-oehler.marcellosendos.ch/comics/ch/1986/05/19860506.gif
"I Hate SF" - The Chosen One.
i like both guys too, but
i fear they will both be overpays next season.
at catcher ramon castro and matt treanor look like they could be cheap free agents and each brings something nice to the table (namely power and OBP respectively). I’d love to pick up a strong clubhouse guy like pudge rodriguez next year but his BABIP and k% look like he is just about done. Heck, even ryan doumit could be intriguing as an addition if the padres think he can actually catch.
remember hairston out-priced us last season, which lead to the bartlett deal. as much as we like to pick on bartlett for being disappointing (were people expecting 2008 bartlett/nomar garciaparra?), fangraphs has him at +.7 war over jerry hairston. the padres could do a lot worse than bringing back bartlett next year. if he is not the everyday starter (please everth, show us what made you so exciting before) I think he’d be just as capable as filling in the super-utility role as jairston. he’s definitely got the arm strength and lateral quickness to play 3b as well as baseball chops to slide to 2b.
by iheartyourfart on Aug 2, 2011 8:40 PM PDT up reply actions
p.s. kelly johnson may be available next year
i wonder if his batting average will tank his value enough to put him within budgetary reach for the pads. probably not. rafael furcal is also available and would probably benefit from a move to 2b, but i doubt the padres would want to swap one declining stopgap for another, and they would probably have to eat odawgs contract.
by iheartyourfart on Aug 2, 2011 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Either O=Dawg or Bartlett could be good utility guys
I am fine with them both splitting time with rookies and see if Efren and Logan can be everyday or platoon style guys.
My big things up the middle is defense. I don’t feel like either Hudson or Bartlett is good enough at hitting to warrant their, at least anecdotally, mediocre defensive play.
Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.
I wouldn't hold my breath
On the Padres replacing Bartlett and ODog as starters. You can pretty much write them in ink for being the starters up the middle in 2012.
"Beating the Red Sox feels SO GOOD.! SO GOOD! SO GOOD!" -jbox
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
yes and no
they almost certainly be padres next season, but i bet the team gives everth cabrera a chance to win one of their jobs in spring training. though you’re right, the likelihood of him actually winning it may not be very good.
by iheartyourfart on Aug 3, 2011 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions
The padres will play them
crossing their fingers that they show some semblance of life by the trade deadline so they can move them for a bag of balls and an ice-cream cone. Kind of like they did with Lodwick this season.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Gaslamp Ball
Related FanShots on Gaslamp Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
