Quote from Brian Connelly on December 26, 2020, 9:16 am

Quote from fenn68 on December 26, 2020, 7:04 am

The deal was $6.2MM for the full two years and a $1.24MM posting fee. So, it cost Texas $7.44MM for two years of Arihara’s service.

Wonder if that is a precursor to Sugano signing for a reasonable price tag? Then again, Arihara may not have been rated as well as Sugano ... but was (from afar) not that far below Sugano’s performance in Japan .... Sugano may be cheaper than thought but also may not be that compelling.

Defer to the Padre scouts on value.

Arihara's value won't affect Sugano's much higher value at all.  I'm OK missing out on Arihara.  It's hard to compare the Japanese P's b/c the profile of the hitters /league is so different.  But when I looked at all the FA/trade SP candidates, he looked REALLY marginal to me.  As in "hoping he can stick as a #5 SP, but in danger of being optioned down" marginal.  Probably a better chance of surprising to the upside, so could argue a good signing by Texas, but think they're hoping to  get 2 years of 100+ IP @ 4.50 - 4.75 ERA for that $.

I have to believe he & his agent were looking hard at the competition on the interested teams.  Despite Padres MLB SP needs, we do still have 4-5 young talented but less experienced guys pushing him, plus current SP's he's not beating out.  Sure $ played a role, but never know; he could have chosen Texas for a little less $, but better perceived opportunity.

If we're going to spend 3-4 MM/AAV on a guy I'd rather have a more known quantity like Porcello or Archer; "give" them a rotation spot for 10 - 15 games to manage IP for younger guys.  Not saying I  WANT to do this; but approach at that $ level.

Quote from MrPadre19 on December 26, 2020, 9:32 am

What do you think the Padres interest is in Paxton?

I saw someone predict him to sign with SD.

I really would like to add a LH starter...but prefer Sugano.

Maybe Paxton a fall back option?

What kind of deal do you think he would get and in comparison with Sugano?

 

Quote from fenn68 on December 26, 2020, 9:38 am

Quote from Brian Connelly on December 26, 2020, 9:16 am

Quote from fenn68 on December 26, 2020, 7:04 am

The deal was $6.2MM for the full two years and a $1.24MM posting fee. So, it cost Texas $7.44MM for two years of Arihara’s service.

Wonder if that is a precursor to Sugano signing for a reasonable price tag? Then again, Arihara may not have been rated as well as Sugano ... but was (from afar) not that far below Sugano’s performance in Japan .... Sugano may be cheaper than thought but also may not be that compelling.

Defer to the Padre scouts on value.

Arihara's value won't affect Sugano's much higher value at all.  I'm OK missing out on Arihara.  It's hard to compare the Japanese P's b/c the profile of the hitters /league is so different.  But when I looked at all the FA/trade SP candidates, he looked REALLY marginal to me.  As in "hoping he can stick as a #5 SP, but in danger of being optioned down" marginal.  Probably a better chance of surprising to the upside, so could argue a good signing by Texas, but think they're hoping to  get 2 years of 100+ IP @ 4.50 - 4.75 ERA for that $.

I have to believe he & his agent were looking hard at the competition on the interested teams.  Despite Padres MLB SP needs, we do still have 4-5 young talented but less experienced guys pushing him, plus current SP's he's not beating out.  Sure $ played a role, but never know; he could have chosen Texas for a little less $, but better perceived opportunity.

If we're going to spend 3-4 MM/AAV on a guy I'd rather have a more known quantity like Porcello or Archer; "give" them a rotation spot for 10 - 15 games to manage IP for younger guys.  Not saying I  WANT to do this; but approach at that $ level.

No so much the signing of Arihara ... but the price paid (vs. the Smiley type signings that have occurred so far) is lower than would have expected for his reputation in Japan. Sugano is better .... but suggesting that the projection to the ML may be lower than initial speculation and therefore his price lower than expected. More expensive than Arihara (yes) but less expensive than some speculated ... basically both moving in parallel.

Yeh, would not touch Archer or Porcello or actually anyone with a similar profile and use up part available budget for that rebound gamble. Either go with more money towards a higher probability SP option or go with the high ceiling prospects and use the money on the RP / bench.

Almost would give better odds that one (or more) of Gore, Patino, Morejon, Weathers would provide the same results (maybe better) than the highly paid reclamation players.

Quote from Randy Manese on December 26, 2020, 9:53 am

I think the longer teams looked at Arihara, the more they thought he was a bottom of the rotation/possibly innings eater at best.  Not in the same class as Sugano and probably not even as good as Kikuchi.  Padres get the same kind of production from combination of Lucchesi and one of the youngsters in that #5 slot for a whole lot less money.  Boston could have easily afforded him and even they backed off despite their questionable (mainly because of injury/illness) rotation.  It's going to be a long winter for most FA's.  Let's see if the Padres attend the upcoming Kluber audition.

Quote from fenn68 on December 26, 2020, 9:56 am

Quote from MrPadre19 on December 26, 2020, 9:32 am

What do you think the Padres interest is in Paxton?

I saw someone predict him to sign with SD.

I really would like to add a LH starter...but prefer Sugano.

Maybe Paxton a fall back option?

What kind of deal do you think he would get and in comparison with Sugano?

 

Paxton on an AVV level should be well above Sugano. Paxton's clear success (when healthy) at the ML level should create a lot of demand (including returning to the NYY). The gamble with Paxton is staying healthy but his injuries have been shorter duration types. The gamble with Sugano is the unknown of his stuff playing at the MLB level. Paxton about a year older. Hard to gauge length of the deals but maybe both are 2 year types in this market.

Think Paxton was around $12MM ... so probably higher than that. Sugano had a recent "prediction" of $24MM/2 years plus posting fee. So maybe a push on contracts and then a debate as to comparative performance ... and, of course, who they prefer to sign with. Mets seem in on Sugano and maybe be a tough team to outbid if they are serious.

Quote from fenn68 on December 26, 2020, 9:59 am

Quote from Randy Manese on December 26, 2020, 9:53 am

I think the longer teams looked at Arihara, the more they thought he was a bottom of the rotation/possibly innings eater at best.  Not in the same class as Sugano and probably not even as good as Kikuchi.  Padres get the same kind of production from combination of Lucchesi and one of the youngsters in that #5 slot for a whole lot less money.  Boston could have easily afforded him and even they backed off despite their questionable (mainly because of injury/illness) rotation.  It's going to be a long winter for most FA's.  Let's see if the Padres attend the upcoming Kluber audition.

When have the Padres NOT attended any audition? They will be at Kluber's. I think Paxton is doing a January workout too.

 

Quote from Brian Connelly on December 27, 2020, 8:38 am

Remember, the Padres WERE in on Arihara.  They flat out need IP from SP.  Can't sign 100 RP's, can't "go with" untested prospects for 3 rotation spots, and double-triple their max IP's.   Dennis Lin  & others have speculated we need to add 2 SP's, which is pretty logical since we lost 2, and are approaching a season 2 - 2.5 times longer than 2020... with no Minors seasons.  I agree.  See next post.

We're wording our posts like the Padres said "no thanks", but that is not what happened.  It's possible Preller drew the line $ wise & simply got outbid, but it's also entirely possible that Arihara thought he had more long term opportunity with less guys ahead of AND chasing him for a rotation spot in Texas.  He's already done well $  wise, but if he can stay healthy & prove he's a # 5 MLB SP, he'll get much more in FA in 2 yrs.

Pads still need 2 SP's... see next post.

 

 

Quote from Brian Connelly on December 27, 2020, 9:17 am

OK, let's play a game:  Let's assume Padres MUST acquire 2 SP's.  And budget limit max is 20 MM to spend in 2021.  That includes for other "needs" too.  But for this challenge, must add 2 SP's within that budget.  CAN trade SP prospects to get a more established guy/s.  If proposing a trade to fill a spot/s, has to be a realistic "value back" to the other team.

To oversimplify, here's the price list with Trade possibles in RED (yrs control):   32 MM - Bauer,  22 MM - Darvish (3),  13 MM - Snell (3), Carrasco (3), Sugano, Tanaka, Odorizzi, Kluber.  10 MM- Sonny Gray (3), Paxton.  9 MM - Jose Quintana.  8 MM - G. Richards, T. Walker.  5 MM - Lester, Happ, Hamels, Porcello, Archer.  4.5 MM -  Joe Musgrove (2), Vince Velasquez (1).

Trades can free up $ to make moves.  For Bauer or Darvish, basically would have to.  Feel free to propose other trades.  Make your "ideal" move and "more likely" if you want.

Quote from fenn68 on December 27, 2020, 9:28 am

Preller has implied in the past that he (and this staff) set a maximum for a contract for any player after evaluating their potential going forward ... if they can sign them cheaper great ... OK if at max level ... but will not chase higher bidders. Guessing Arihara passed that threshold. So, likely Preller saw Arihara as “useful” and would have added him to the team ... but money / value is part of the equation.

========

We may see that same dynamic with Sugano, other FA, and trades. Although the Padres would like two “good” SP adds at a value price .... they will (and should be) evalutated against the expectations (by the Padres) of the young prospects (at league minimum cost). Most of the adds in play are still gambles with poor recent performance and / or injury concerns but coming in at a significant price while the prospects are just different gambles at league minimum and with a future.

So, with the “fallback” of the prospects ... probably not going to see Preller “overpay” just to get SP bodies that may (or may not) be healthy and/or likely to be > 4.00 ERA types. Remember “overpay” is in their minds ... not usually the same as us.

If it were me, I would only make a move on an add if I thought the add was a “clear value upgrade” over the mishmash of prospects.