Quote from fenn68 on December 3, 2019, 11:02 am

Yates is going to need at least $13MM for each of his extended years. Will Smith is a better comp that Pomeranz ... and even Smith is not a closer (zero saves in 2019) and a higher ERA than Yates at 2.76. At 30 ... Smith got $13-13-13-1(buyout)=$40MM.

If anything the 4 years given to Pomeranz makes a case for a minimum 3 year extension past this season (total 4 years).

$7-13-13-13-1(buyout) = $47MM minimum is Yates’ asking price. Then toss in Yates’ connection with Balsley ... now severed. Probably not an advantage to the Padres.

Quote from TatisJr on December 3, 2019, 11:42 am

Agreed Yates and Smith is the better comp and Smith was the closer last year. He supposedly won’t be the closer for the Braves, but he did have 34 saves last year.

Quote from MrPadre19 on December 3, 2019, 11:53 am

I like Yates and his season was phenomenal...but can he do it 3-4 more years?

I don't believe so.

I think I would play it by ear and see where we are at the deadline and trade him if we are out of it,or,better yet,if we have other options and are still in it trade him for something we need.

I have little faith in Closers to begin with...even less in 30+ year old ones suddenly becoming dominant.

 

Quote from Brian Connelly on December 3, 2019, 12:29 pm

Quote from fenn68 on December 3, 2019, 11:02 am

Yates is going to need at least $13MM for each of his extended years. Will Smith is a better comp that Pomeranz ... and even Smith is not a closer (zero saves in 2019) and a higher ERA than Yates at 2.76. At 30 ... Smith got $13-13-13-1(buyout)=$40MM.

If anything the 4 years given to Pomeranz makes a case for a minimum 3 year extension past this season (total 4 years).

$7-13-13-13-1(buyout) = $47MM minimum is Yates’ asking price. Then toss in Yates’ connection with Balsley ... now severed. Probably not an advantage to the Padres.

No.  There's no way Pads give Yates-- who would be an age 34 FA next year--MORE $ AND Years WHILE HE'S STILL ARB ELIGIBLE, than 30 y.o. Will Smith actually got as a FA (even with Q.O.) ...   always leave some $ on table in exchange for the security (i.e. Brad Hand, young position players, upcoming Tatis extension).   I get where you (& Kirby) are coming from, but think you're over-valuing Saves & specifically peripherals from last year... although I admit that's what Pads are doing with Pom.

Yates can, & I agree definitely might, "bet on himself" in his age 33 season... but he's taking a big risk doing so.  Even though Pads are highly unlikely to put Q.O. on him, if he suffers a downturn or injury, at 34 entering FA, that contract could fall off a cliff.  Even healthy as a FA @ 34 next year with no Q.O. I simply can't see any team giving him Will Smith's deal from this year?

Quote from JasonE135 on December 3, 2019, 12:47 pm

SFFB and CHG tend to age exceptionally well. Let’s not forget one of the greatest Padres of all time, Trevor Hoffman. He WAS Yates. 92-97 mph fastball out of the bullpen but just average results until he found his changeup later in his career. He was still destroying people with a 90mph fastball and that CHG. I think Yates will be good for at least another 3 years. Why are we so quick to move on from or unwilling to extend a player who ABSOLUTELY DOMINATED for us the last 2 years? Give him 3-years $40 million.

Quote from fenn68 on December 3, 2019, 12:53 pm

Guessing Yates will bet on himself and go to FA unless the Padres’ offer is strong and not so sure the Padres will over extend to sign him. Agree with the life span of effective RP being often short and somewhat hard to project and after committing big to Pomeranz and “closer potential” in Castillo, Munoz, Guerra, Baez pushing high on Yates at his age ... not wise.

Every indication is the Padres will start the season with Yates as the closer and see how the season progresses (so no looking like a trade candidate now) but if the Padres are not in contention a potential trade deadline move where he should have some value even as a 2 month rental.

This is where the reality between Fowler’s win now or heads will role and Seidler’s more controlled view of seeking substantial improvement but not the win or die view. With Fowler keeping Yates for 2020 seems an absolute but with Seidler could see wiggle room to move Yates (for a key return for the future) and gamble with others in the pen to handle the closing.

Quote from Brian Connelly on December 3, 2019, 1:27 pm

Quote from fenn68 on December 2, 2019, 6:18 pm

Just as a level set to were we are today in the quest to improve a very bad offense using 2019 wRC+ by position v the current contenders’ 2019 wRC+:

C (65) .......... Mejia (96), Torrens (66), Hedges (47)                          .... More Mejia (& Torrens> 15 AB) less Hedges

1B (92) ......... Hosmer (91)                          Hosmer vs LHP                 .... Profar (S) vs LHP in 2019:  .305/.378

2B (84) ........ Garcia (97), Profar (89), France (83), Kinsler (70)     ... Profar/Garcia > Kinsler/Urias except Urias Sept

SS (121) ....... Tatis (150)                                                                             ... Healthier, but Rookie Offensive #'s sustainable?

3B (102) ...... Machado (108)                                                                     ... Not FA, more settled, "his" Coaches, etc

LF (92) ........ Myers (92), Naylor (89)                                                    ... Trade Myers???  No F. Reyes 1st 1/2

CF (89) ........ Grisham (92), Margot (82)   Margot vs RHP               ... Grisham (L) vs RHP

RF (101) ...... Renfroe (98)                       Renfroe vs RHP & 2nd 1/2  ....Renfroe healthy & SOME LH OF vs RHP

As always past results may not reflect future performance but as a template there should be significant improvement at C and SS with Mejia and Tatis getting more paying time. No major drop offs but also minimal improvement at the other slots ... basically the overall still needs upgrade.

None of the OF graded out as a 100 (average).

 

Thanks for researching this FENN!  I tried to highlight the glaring weak spots in Red, Blue means "Average" or "Similar results" &/or "Uncertainty", Green obviously means "Goodd/Above Average" or "Improvement".

I have felt all offseason that the Pads already before any moves had a lot of improvement "baked into" their Overall roster, and that just some platooning & putting players in more favorable matchups than last year's ultra-heavy RH OF (with LH OF on IL or not MLB yet) & roster in general allowed will move the offensive needle in the right direction.

Adding in moves made, I've conservatively (I think) got 5 of the 8 positions Improving over last year's output, with the other 3 "Similar" or "Uncertain".   Thanks to forum poster 'Tatis Jr' for catching how good Profar (S) was vs LHP last year.  A sneaky weakness if Myers is traded was not having anyone to potentially take some games/AB @ 1B vs LHP where Hosmer REALLY struggled last year.   SS/Tatis "Similar" obviously still is really Good; I'm just "cancelling out" better health/more AB with a dip in last year's #'s to be safe.  If you call SS "Good", that's 6 of 8 Good or at least improving positions.

The remaining 2 of LF & 2B are uncertain:  2B Garcia/Profar project better than 1st 4 months of Kinsler/Urias, but maybe not better than last 2 months of Urias (or 2020 Urias).  Still, doubt 2B winds up worse overall than last year.  LF Uncertain since Myers' fate up in the air, plus have to "subtract" Franmil Reyes' 1st 1/2 power (& energy) somewhere.  Unlikely but possible that Pads subtract Myers without adding a somewhat proven MLB quantity in OF.

Quote from BoosterSD on December 3, 2019, 1:39 pm

Dont need Myers to platoon at 1B with Hosmer. That can be done by France IMO, and at league minimum. So that is not a concern of mine in losing Myers.

As Dusty mentioned, really my only concern with trading Myers is if he was "dogging it" because of his dislike for Green and does average to very good somewhere else and we gave up prospects to make him go away.

Quote from Brian Connelly on December 3, 2019, 1:44 pm

Quote from JasonE135 on December 3, 2019, 12:47 pm

SFFB and CHG tend to age exceptionally well. Let’s not forget one of the greatest Padres of all time, Trevor Hoffman. He WAS Yates. 92-97 mph fastball out of the bullpen but just average results until he found his changeup later in his career. He was still destroying people with a 90mph fastball and that CHG. I think Yates will be good for at least another 3 years. Why are we so quick to move on from or unwilling to extend a player who ABSOLUTELY DOMINATED for us the last 2 years? Give him 3-years $40 million.

I'm not!  I've been beating the "extend Yates, don't trade him" drum since LAST offseason!  Think Preller/Pads made a HUGE mistake not extending Yates LAST year at this time:  He was basically in the EXACT same position Brad Hand was when he extended; but RH vs LH, 3 years older, and 5 " shorter!   Both guys Waiver claims who came out of nowhere to be dominant closers later in career with new pitches.  Both had banked very little $ in career, since only entering their 2nd year of Arb at that time.

Hand got 3 yrs + club opt @ 20 MM.  Think they could easily have had Yates for less than that.

Now it's definitely > 20 MM, but I think what you guys are suggesting at his age & while still arb eligible is nuts;  you're actually paying him more this season than what he would get in Arb, then doubling his salary next year to (above) market rate!  Pads might as well just pay him Arb & try to re-sign him next year since they're taking risk of injury/decline & getting nothing for it?!?!

Food for thought:  Counting Matt Strahm as a SP, and assuming Garrett Richards makes 30 starts = +2.5MM incentives.... Pads right now would be allocating < 20 MM in salaries above minimum TO THEIR ENTIRE SP STAFF .   That is < 15% of 2020 total payroll of 135 MM for your 5-6 SP's.  About the same in 2021 minus Richards, plus Arb raises.

Of course it's GREAT to have cheap talent that's better than more expensive alternatives, but even the #5-6 SP has more value/typically costs more than any bench player and all but 2 or 3 guys in the Bullpen.  No "right" way to construct a total payroll; $ saved somewhere can get spent somewhere else,  but I defy anyone to find me a "Final 4" playoff team where the entire SP rotation comprised < 15% of the team's total payroll.... ever.