by Myron Logan

On Friday, Jed Hoyer and the Padres signed veteran catcher Yorvit Torrealba to a one year, $1.25 million deal, with a mutual option in 2011.

Assuming $3.5 million per win, the Padres are paying Torrealba like a .3-.4 WAR player. That is probably a slight bargain for Torrealba, who, as a part time catcher, has averaged about .8 WAR a year over the last three years.

While the contract is fine and Torreabla actually adds something at catcher for the Pads, he’s obviously by no means a difference maker.  He’ll be 32 years old and his wOBA has hovered around .300 in hitter-friendly Colorado. He hits the ball on the ground a lot — about 55% of the time — which might help to ease the transition to Petco, though generally is not a good sign for a slow-moving catcher.

What has to be applauded about the deal, though, is that rather than overpaying for a veteran catcher, Hoyer and company, if anything, underpaid on the free agent market. You could argue, like I have before, that they would have been better off going with someone making the minimum, and putting the $1.25M to use elsewhere. But, if it’s going to be spent on this year’s roster, at least it is being spent effectively.

by Myron Logan

Bloomberg Sports is launching new fantasy and professional baseball products. Today, they unveiled their products at their NYC headquarters, which had my Twitter page abuzz. David Appelman has some really cool screenshots at FanGraphs, including this one:

I’m not sure how much of what they are doing hasn’t already been done on the ‘net, but the presentation sure looks nice. Plus, the ability to easily toggle through all MLB players is a huge bonus. This is the major league product, so I don’t think we’ll be seeing much more of it. Sure is fun to look at, though.

by Myron Logan

Dex has the humorous full report on the Padres town hall meeting.

The first edition of PECOTA is out, although they are still working on various kinks. The Padres projected record is 76-86. CAIRO projections have also been released, and the Padres come out a little worse at 72-90.

Project Prospect released their top 25. Two Padres made the list: Jaff Decker (18) and James Darnell (22). Here’s a detailed scouting report on Darnell. 

A reader at Lookout Landing created a very cool sabermetric library.

by Myron Logan

Daniel analyzed the Jon Garland signing earlier, concluding:

Expected to perform at a $7MM level for only $5.3MM, Garland provides surplus value, at a position of need.  Not a bad signing.

Daniel is of course spot-on, and his approach to evaluating the deal is precisely how I would have looked at it. However, consider the question Aaron asked in today’s chat:

Why do you guys always use WAR as a universal stat. Aren’t wins worth more or less to different teams?

He makes a great point. A marginal win has a different value for each franchise. It is something that I’ve talked about along time ago, but neglected all too often. Let’s just consider one aspect; the team’s placement on the win curve. And just for the purposes of this post, let’s say the Padres were projected to win 79 games before acquiring Jon Garland. If you look at the chart in that linked post — Nate Silver’s wonderful research –a projected 79 win team has about a 12% chance of making the playoffs.

If we say that Garland’s addition adds two wins to the Padres projection, now they are an 81 win team. That increases their playoff chances by 6% — to a whopping 18%. If a playoff berth is worth $30 million — again, according to Silver, though obviously that figure is dated — Garland gets a $1.8 million playoff bonus. Now, are those two extra wins that he’s adding worth that remaining $3.5 million — the difference between Garland’s salary and the playoff bonus — without consider their impact on San Diego’s playoff chances.

Though Garland’s deal may have been a relative bargain, even in this year’s free agent market, the Padres are still paying a premium for his services. Due to his free agent status, and the fact that all teams can bid on him, his salary gets a major bump. Would the $5.3M the Padres gave Garland be better utilized on, say, locking up young players currently on the roster, future draft pick signing bonuses, international signings, and improving the scouting, player development, and analysis departments?

I don’t know the answer, but I think that consideration is definitely warranted. It is tough to criticize the Padres when they actually do spend money, putting them into a classic “damned if ya do, damned if ya don’t” situation. That said, their payroll sat at a mere $33 million before Garland’s acquisition, clearly showing that they are not necessarily trying to compete this season. Does it make sense to spend 13% of the payroll on one player, one player who likely is not going to change the season’s ultimate fate? Should they even be competing on the free agent market at this point?

Seriously, I ask questions because I don’t know the answers. $5.3 million is not going to cripple the franchise, but I’m just wondering if it could have been better spent elsewhere.

by Myron Logan

We tried this last year and it went pretty well (for our first try, anyway). We received like 34 questions in a couple hours. It was a lot of fun, too. We are going to try it again this Tuesday at 12:30 PM (EST) – that’s 9:30 AM out West where many of you are. Please join us and ask questions about the Padres off-season, sabermetrics, or what kind of tooth paste we use:

 

I will definitely be there, and Daniel, Ben, and Mike may drop in to answer questions. See you there!

by Myron Logan

Don’t forget about tomorrow’s chat right here at Friar Forecast.

At Ducksnorts, Geoff looks into Bud Black’s handling of starting pitchers. Result: He doesn’t like to leave his starters in too long, and he’s been near the top of the NL in quick hooks over the past few years. This is good news for youngsters like Mat Latos, but it is also good because generally relievers are better their first time against a line-up than starters their third or fourth time around. Plus, in the National League, it obviously hurts offensive production to stick with a pitcher hitting in the ninth slot too long into the game.

RJ’s Fro has another interview, this one with newly acquired Padres outfielder, Aaron Cunningham. Fun stuff. Cunningham sounds excited to be in San Diego.

Jbox gives us some brief, comical descriptions of Padres starters.

Ray makes the case for starting Jerry Hairston Jr. over David Eckstein at The Sac Bunt. It is not particularly hard to make the case for anyone to start over Eckstein at this point in his career.

Bill Center has a brief report on the Padres DR campus in the Union-Tribune:

But the new ownership group led by Jeff Moorad is not nearly as enamored with the facility - which is considered to be the best in the Dominican Republic …. But the Padres will probably be de-emphasizing their Latin American efforts under the leadership of Moorad, club president Tom Garfinkel and Hoyer. Only one Dominican Republic amateur of significance was signed last year compared to six in 2008 as the facility was opening.

This is definitely an interesting development.

WebSoulSurfer takes a crack at estimating the Padres payroll, and comes up with about $33 million as of right now.

In an interview at Baseball Prospectus, Mariners GM Jack Zduriencik talks about former Padres Director of Baseball Ops, Jeff Kingston (h/t: Corey Brock):

But with Jeff … every time you’re in this chair, you want to make sure that everything around you meets your comfort level. With Jeff, there was a real bonding if you will. I’ve known him for awhile, and when the position became available, I interviewed a bunch of guys, a great group of guys, and Jeff was someone who just really fit the criteria I was looking for. He’s young, he’s smart, and he’s done a lot of things in a short period of time. There was simply a great comfort level and I think that’s important

He goes on to talk about the Mariners statistical analysis department, among other things.

by Myron Logan

I was thinking about the amateur draft the other day – both its impact on a major league franchises success and how proficient (or not) the Padres have been at it. I thought we’d take a look at each draft, year by year, starting in 2000 (because its recent enough to be somewhat relevant, but enough time has past to evaluate it). We’ll work upwards until recent years, and revisit later years if the series has any success.

Anyway, here’s my initial format. I’m going to split the draft up into three arbitrary sections: the top, the middle, and the rest. The top will consist of the first 300 picks, the middle will be the next 300, and the rest will be everybody after that (generally around an additional 600 picks). I’m also going to split each section into four groups: high school hitters, college hitters, high school pitchers, college pitchers. I’m going to place any player drafted out of a college, be it a junior college or as a junior, in the college bucket, just to simplify things a bit.

I will also provide a total WAR figure for each section, if any players drafted reached the bigs, so we can get a sense of the value they contributed to the major league club. And of course I’ll add some commentary. That’s the format for now, we’ll revise if needed. Suggested are of course always encouraged. (note: I’m not counting unsigned players: more on that in the commentary that follows).

There admittedly is not much context to these numbers, but I think they are still somewhat useful. We’ll gain a little bit of context, at least in terms of the Padres organization, as we go through the series.

The Padres drafted Mark Phillips, a left handed HS pitcher, in the first round (9th overall). Phillips responded with a 5.35 ERA in his rookie ball debut. His strikeout and home rate rates were tremendous throughout his minor league career, at 8.7 and .4, respectively. He simply could not harness any control, posting a walk rate approaching six. He disappeared from pro ball in 2003, but reappeared in an independent league in 2007 with Newark. He showed he was the same Mark Phillips, striking out one an inning and allowing just two homers in 32 innings, while walking almost eight batters per nine.

Phillips was a major disappointment, but the Padres second pick, a third basemen from Cal, Xavier Nady, has turned in a solid, if not spectacular, major league career. Nady has hit .280/.335/.458 in almost 2500 plate appearances.

The Padres fourth pick, a high school outfielder out of Louisiana, is a familiar name: Mewelde Moore. He has since gone on to have a pretty nice career in the NFL as a running back. In the minors, however, he struggled mightily, spending three seasons in rookie ball, and hitting .210/.294/.284. He did show glimpses of running back speed with ten steals in only 50 career games. While it is sort of a funny story, it is one heck of a miss for a fourth round pick.

In the 13th round, San Diego selected Justin Germano; so far he has logged 205 major league innings and a 5.27 ERA.

The Padres did select Chad Cordero, a RHP from Don Antonio High School in California, in the 27th round. However, they did not sign him. He was drafted by the Montreal Expos a few years later, where he went on to be a very good closer.

Overall, obviously, it is tough to come to too many conclusions based on this brief analysis. But, for the most part, this was not an extremely productive draft for the Pads. To put that first pick into perspective, five out of the top ten picks in 2000 did not reach the majors, so it’s not an absolute disaster. However, after Phillips came a bunch of better-looking options like Chase Utley, Adam Wainwright, and Kelly Johnson. Sure, hindsight is 20-20.

A bright spot was the selection of Xaiver Nady, who was probably the best pick in the second round of any MLB team. Nady went on to have some decent years in San Diego, then was converted into Mike Cameron in 2005.

After Nady, though, there was really nothing else. Of course, as alluded to above, there’s a lot missing here. One, is context; how good are most major league drafts? Two, there are a bunch of other potentially important factors ignored, like players that were used in trades, or valuable minor leaguers that provided something to the organization.

Anyway, we’ll look at the 2001 draft soon, and see how this one looks in comparison.

*thanks to Baseball Reference for the draft data and stats and FanGraphs for the WAR values.

by Myron Logan

From a baseball perspective, I think $6 million is a slight overpay, at the least.
–Me, on Trevor Hoffman’s departure

Even by FanGraphs’ reliever valuations, which may be a bit conservative, Hoffman was worth almost $7 million last year. He had a tremendous comeback season with Milwaukee, posting a 1.83 ERA in 54 innings. In 2008, his final year with the Padres, he notched a 3.77 ERA in 45 innings. That season marked his lowest ERA since 1995 and the second lowest innings pitched total of his career.

With the Padres in rebuilding-mode and Hoffman limping into his age-41 season, it was time to part ways. Looking back, though, it may have been a bad move, considering Hoffman’s iconic status in San Diego, and obviously his production last year. What changed from 2008 to ‘09? Well, the first thing to remember is that relievers are especially hard to predict, because they are on the field so little, relative to position players and starters. A string of bad luck or poor performance (or, conversely, good luck or good performance) can mask a reliever’s true talent. Let’s take a look at some numbers:

Everything is very close, except home runs per nine innings. You could argue, though, that HR/9 is one of the most important predicators of a pitcher’s success. And a decrease in home run rate, from a well below average 1.6 to a miniscule .3, is going to have a tremendous impact on ones ERA.

What we’re talking about here, however, is only a few batted balls. In 2008, Hoffman gave up 58 fly balls, and eight of them traveled over the fence (13.7% HR/FB). In 2009, those numbers sat at 65 and two, respectively (3.1%). The league average for home runs per fly ball is right around 10%, however, Hoffman’s average from 2002-2009 is just 6% (2008 was his only year in that stretch over 10%). That may not seem that significant, but over that same period, had Hoffman’s HR/FB rate been at the league average, he would have allowed about 20 more home runs, or 2.5 per season – a not so insignificant number for a closer.

What this exemplifies, mainly, is the difficulty in projecting relievers. Had maybe four or five of Hoffman’s 2008 home runs landed on the playing field or in someone’s glove, his ERA could have easily been a point (or more) lower. It also shows that Trevor Hoffman, even at 41 years old, is still a great closer. He recently resigned with the Brewers for $8 million. While that may be a slight overpay, please, don’t quote me one it.

by Myron Logan

It was reported today that Kevin Kouzmanoff reached a $3.1 million deal with Oakland, avoiding arbitration.

Kouz is in his first year of arbitration, so, using Tango’s 40-60-80 rule, he should be expected to make about 40% of his free agent value. As we’ve discussed recently, Kouzmanoff has been very consistent, sitting right around 2.7 WAR for the last three years (via FanGraphs). Conservatively, let’s project him a 2.5 WAR this year with Oakland.

Now what we need is a dollars per win value, the amount teams are paying for wins on the free agent market. Previously, that number sat in the mid-to-high fours, and was rising 10% each year due to inflation. With the economic downfall, however, the market has corrected itself with teams now paying less money per win. Tangotiger informed me that he is using a $3.5 million value this year (increasing by .5M each year, going forward).

That means, on the free agent market, Kouz should make about $8.75M. Multiply that by 40% and we get $3.5M. It looks like the A’s got a pretty good deal, especially considering Kouzmanoff brings a gold glove reputation to the table that probably is not deserved.

Projecting out Kouz’s long term value, in terms of how much the A’s are saving over having to replace his performance on the free agent market, now looks like this:

Due to the lower dollar/win value, Kouzmanoff’s projected value falls about $3 million from my previous look.

****

Corey Brock reported that the Padres could not reach an agreement with arbitration-eligible Scott Hairston today. Hairston is seeking $2.9 million, while the Padres come in at $2.1M. What is a fair price for Hairston? First we have to peg his value on the field, and that is a bit of a challenge since he’s been a role player for a while now, and has not logged a ton of PAs. His WAR values have hovered between 1.4 and 1.8 over the last three years; let’s go with 1.5 for this year.

On the free agent market, Hairston should make somewhere around $5.25M (1.5*$3.5) in 2010. Since he’s in his second year of arbitration, we estimate that he should make 60% of his free agent value, or $3.15. If the Padres get a deal done somewhere close to Hairston’s proposed 2.9M, they won’t be hurting themselves. Here is Hairston’s chart over the next two years in which he is under Padres control:

As I mentioned in the post on the trade, one of the reasons Kouzmanoff has a lot more surplus value than Hairston is because he is under team control for an extra year. The other, of course, is that he’s a better overall player.

****

The Padres also reached a one year deal with Mike Adams that will pay the rightly reliever $1 million in 2010. Adams has done just about all you can ask in the majors, though he has only logged 171 MLB innings since 2004. His career ERA of 2.54 is tremendous, and he got it down under one last year. His peripherals – 9.1 K/9, 2.8 BB/9, .8 HR/9 – are also sparkling.

Of course, relievers are hard to project, especially ones that throw as few major league innings as Adams has. If we, I think somewhat optimistically, call him a 1 WAR player this year, he would be expected to earn $3.5 on the free agent market. Since he’s in his first year of arbitration, we multiply that figure by 40% and get $1.4M.

$1 million is not a steal by any means, but it looks like the Padres got a decent enough deal here. And, really, you can’t go wrong when you have a reliever with Adams’ ability and you’re only paying him $1 million on a one year deal. Worst case scenario, Adams gets injured and/or is completely ineffective and you lose $1 million. Best case, he repeats his past recent performance, and logs a lot of high leverage innings in front of Heath Bell.

by Myron Logan

Note: After I wrote this, two of my colleagues at Friar Forecast, Ben and Daniel, penned their takes on the trade. Parts of my analysis is eerily similar to Daniel’s, though are conclusions are not exactly the same.

The Padres have apparently traded Kevin Kouzmanoff and second base prospect Eric Sogard to the Oakland A’s for OF prospect Aaron Cunningham and Scott Hairston. The deal is not official, and I’ll update this post if there are any changes.

Let’s run it down, player by player:

Kevin Kouzmanoff, according to the FanGraphs metrics, has been remarkably consistent in his three years in San Diego. His wOBA ranged between .339 (non park-adjusted) in 2007 and .312 last year. His fielding, by UZR, went from about average in his first two seasons, to +7.5 last year. Overall, his WAR totals ranged from 2.7 to – wait for it – 2.8. He certainly projects to be in the 2-2.5 range next season, and he’s under A’s control through 2012. Repeating an analysis I did earlier this off-season, here’s a quick-and-dirty expected value chart for Kouz:

Depending on what numbers you use, Kouz is projected to be worth around $14-15 million in surplus value over the length of his contract. Kouzmanoff’s departure, however, does not leave the gaping hole that one might expect, as Chase Headley can now leave the unfamiliar terrain in the outfield and return to his natural position at third (not to mention, the Padres have a number of solid third base prospects should Headley not live up to the hype).

Eric Sogard, the second base prospect leaving the Padres organization, was drafted in the second round of the 2007 draft. Baseball America 2009 ranked Sogard as the 17th best Pads prospect, comparing him to Todd Walker due to his solid offensive skills but questionable glove. Sogard followed with a nice double-A debut, hitting .293/.370/.400. CHONE projects him at nearly 1 WAR next season.

****

The Padres reacquire Scott Hairston, who spent parts of the last three seasons in San Diego. Hairston started hot last year, hitting .299/.358/.533 (.390 wOBA) in 216 PAs with the Padres, but struggled mightily upon his arrival in Oakland, hitting .236/.262/.391 (.279 wOBA) down the stretch. Overall, though, he has been a consistent performer, with WAR values of 1.4, 1.8, and 1.8 over the last three years, respectively.

If you project those years out (to 600 PAs), which is not advisable for many reasons, those values look more like: 2.9, 3, and 2.3. It is not advisable, of course, because Hairston has played against a disproportional amount of lefties/good matchups, being largely a platoon player, but it does help to show just how productive he has been while on the field.

If we conservatively project Hairston at 1.5 WAR next year, and 1.3 in 2011, then he should be worth about $14 million on the open market, over the next two seasons (both under Padres control). If we estimate that he will make $10 million over those two seasons, then his surplus value is only about $4 million, $10 million or so less than Kouzmanoff’s.

The Padres also acquire outfield prospect Aaron Cunningham, who was ranked fourth in the A’s system by Baseball America 2009, where they said he has “tools (that) are average or better across the board, but doesn’t have an outstanding tool that points to star potential.” Cunningham hit well in triple-A last year as a 23 year old, putting up a .302/.379/.479 line in Sacramento, and his overall minor league OPS sits at .875 (in over 2000 PAs). His short major league performance has not been impressive, as he has put up a .272 wOBA, splitting 144 plate appearances between 2008 and 2009. CHONE projects him similarly to Sogard, at just under a win next season.

****

It appears to me, on this initial look, that the A’s probably improve their team more in the short-term, and also gain an extra year of control with Kouzmanoff versus Hairston, which is important. The Padres seem to be banking on two things in this deal: one, that Headley and company can fill in adequately at third, at worst minimizing the loss of Kouzmanoff, and at best equaling or bettering his performance at a cheaper price. And two, that swapping Eric Sogard for Aaron Cunningham will cut into that ~$10 million surplus the A’s gained with the Kouz-Hairston exchange.

I do not really have a problem with the deal, as I do not think either Kouzmanoff or Hairston are the type of players a rebuilding organization needs. Kouzmanoff, a solid player, obviously, will likely begin a gradual decline, and simultaneously see yearly pay increases. The Padres have cheaper options at third. Hairston, who could probably be a serviceable everyday starter, if given the opportunity, is in a similar situation – he is a nice spare part on a contender, but does not do a whole lot for a mid-70s win team. In fact, I would not be surprised if Hairston is again traded at some point, depending on how the season takes shape.

I guess my only reservation with the deal is that San Diego used one of their valuable chips in part to bring in Scott Hairston. I like Hairston as a player, but – again – I prefer him on a contender. I would have rather seen the Padres use Kouzmanoff to bring in a couple of prospects, even near major league ready ones like Cunningham, rather than just one prospect and a 30 year old (plus, they also lose a decent prospect in Sogard).

As mentioned, Hairston can still be shipped off for another prospect or two later this season if things fall apart, and if he reestablishes his value, so either way I do not dislike the trade.Two smart teams doing business; sometimes it is tough to find a clear winner.