Quote from BoosterSD on December 19, 2019, 9:00 am

When you start a season, I think the norm now is for the SP to go 6 innings. Over 162 game season, that is 972 innings by the starting staff. With who is now on the roster, Luchessi led the pack at 164 innings, Davies at 160, Paddock at 141, Quantrill at 92, Lamet at 73, and Richards at 8. Plus some innings from Marg and Strahm, neither I think as an option for starting the season in a non injury situation.

Luchessi, will be allowed to go as long into the game as his stuff allows. 2020 est of 180. Totally acceptable as a #3 or #4 starter.

Davies, same situation as Luchessi. No 2019 health issues and should be somewhat better than 2019 going from Miller Park to Pecto. 2020 est of 170. Once again fine for his potential spot in the rotation.

Paddock. 2019 was his MLB debut and rehab season. Went 141 innings. At this moment, looking at Paddock being our #1 or #2, and that is the guy you look to 7 or 8, especially when his stuff is on. A completely healthy, veteran arm would hope to give a team about 195-220 innings. I think SD will still manage him more diligently than that. So hope for what 180 innings max? That is still 6 innings per start for 30 starts, so not to taxing on the bullpen.

Lamet. This is his full rehab season. TJ surgery. His max was 2017 at 114 innings. I think the max you can hope for is 120 innings this season. About 75 innings short.

Richards. Pretty much the same situation. I would expect the max to be about 120 innings. 75± short.

So that means we are about 160-180 innings short for a starter. Does SD go piggy back with Quantrill behind lets say Richards? And carry another long guy for Lamets starts, such as a Baez or Morejon?

Or would it be worth it to look into someone like Kuechel or another innings eater? Keuchel will want a multi year deal, so that would take a spot from someone like Gore or Patino in 2021. Or is there a FA that would be worth a one year deal?

Quote from fenn68 on December 19, 2019, 9:38 am

Padres can do a lot to manage innings early in the season with having Quantrill in the pen as long RP and spot start ... over time that cuts out a number of starts (innings) for the other starters. Then potentially with this pen, the more "at risk" arms could be 5 inning pitchers initially.

Really have to manage through the early season if you believe that with 1/2 season of minor league pitching ... at least one of the roster arms (Morejon, Baez, Bolanos) will be ready for call-up/spot starts. Then beyond that non-roster Gore, Patino, and Lawson will be toiling  in AA/AAA and they too should be ready for ML time.

Not sure about adding an "innings eater" vet to the mix ... and bumping ? Lucchesi would be logical but HE is the one with the innings history. Not going to bump Paddack, Lamet, Davies, or Richards (before the season starts). 6 man rotation just serves to take away starts (and potential wins) from Paddack, et. al.

Think they manage innings as last season with Quantrill being that swing arm that starts as needed to drop the workload on other pitchers.

Quote from BoosterSD on December 19, 2019, 10:23 am

Quote from fenn68 on December 19, 2019, 9:38 am

Not sure about adding an "innings eater" vet to the mix ... and bumping ? Lucchesi would be logical but HE is the one with the innings history. Not going to bump Paddack, Lamet, Davies, or Richards (before the season starts). 6 man rotation just serves to take away starts (and potential wins) from Paddack, et. al.

Think they manage innings as last season with Quantrill being that swing arm that starts as needed to drop the workload on other pitchers.

With the payroll constraints and the young options on the way, that was my thoughts as well. Forgo a SP add unless its really WOW!! And just manage innings with a mix of Quantrill, Beaz, Morejon, and company.

Quote from TatisJr on December 19, 2019, 10:35 am

Reports coming out that the Padres and Dodgers have both had talks with the Indians regarding Mike Clevenger. The price will be “sky high”, but with Clev you have 3 years of control. Clev is one of those rare guys, I’d be willing to part with Patino plus to acquire. He’s a bonafide young ace. Clev and Lindor have been two of my favorites to watch. They bring Tatis Jr type energy every time they step foot on diamond. Even if the Padres reported interest in the pair is just so throw a wrench in the Dodgers plans, I appreciate the effort by AJP. Both Lindor and Clev are special talents and I’d  hate to see them with the Dodgers.

Quote from onlypads on December 19, 2019, 12:54 pm

I dont see why Clev makes the trade unless we overpay. It is that simple to me. I dont want to trade Patino + because he can be Clev with greater control.  If I am the Dodgers and I am knocking on the door an overpay can be justified.

Quote from BoosterSD on December 19, 2019, 1:23 pm

Quote from onlypads on December 19, 2019, 12:54 pm

I dont see why Clev makes the trade unless we overpay. It is that simple to me. I dont want to trade Patino + because he can be Clev with greater control.  If I am the Dodgers and I am knocking on the door an overpay can be justified.

Its the old adage, one in the hand beats two in the bush. Sure, Patino could be Clevinger. However, he could also turn out to not be anything. Clevinger is a known commodity, while Patino is still a bet. Might be a good bet, but a bet none the less. Is the juice worth the squeeze? Thats the big question, right?

Quote from Henry Silvestre on December 19, 2019, 2:20 pm

Quote from onlypads on December 19, 2019, 12:54 pm

I dont see why Clev makes the trade unless we overpay. It is that simple to me. I dont want to trade Patino + because he can be Clev with greater control.  If I am the Dodgers and I am knocking on the door an overpay can be justified.

Patinos absolutely best case scenario is Clevenger.. I take the proven guy with years and years of control for a spec who may or may not ever make it.. Patino + Baez + Hunt + Miller + Potts and Naylor would be my offer and I would feel very comfortable making it.. All have been Top 10 Padre prospects at one point or another or are currently there including #2 Patino, except Hunt who is top 15... Good luck to LAD or anyone else matching that

Quote from onlypads on December 19, 2019, 2:47 pm

I am in the minority but I would rather keep Patino and Baez, and would give up Gore to do that. Patino looked better than Gore in AA imo and in the futures game. I think Patino is more electric and his stuff plays better with better competition. Similarly, Baez is somewhat tested and has shown well.

I know these sample sizes are crazy small and not ideal, but if I had to make a choice, I would try and retain two MLB talents over one. There is always so much risk when speculating, so this is admittedly more art than science.

I think Patino could have CY upside.

 

 

Quote from TatisJr on December 19, 2019, 3:37 pm

I really believe in Patino as well. It would be a steep price for sure, but getting 3 years(ages 29,30,31) of CY young caliber Clevinger would be too difficult for me to resist. Clevinger makes the Padres a serious contender in 2020. IMO a Clev, Paddack, Lamet led staff can challenge the Dodgers in 2020 for the west and no team would want to face that rotation in the playoffs. Then take into account you would have Clev in front of Paddack, Lamet and Gore for another 2 seasons. To me it’s a deal that gives you a World Series level rotation for 3 years. I would be able to deal with whatever Patino became if it meant we ended this playoff drought and became a WS contender.