Quote from fenn68 on September 22, 2020, 1:47 pm

Quote from Brian Connelly on September 22, 2020, 1:09 pm

You guys are OB-SESSED with Brandon Marsh... you're killing me.

Also obsessed about Waters (ATL) and Larnach (MINN) ... I have a great range of obsessions. 🙂

Yes, have to focus on keeping a contender in 2021 with the best line-up but need to keep an eye out for a) that unexpected injury in the OF; and 2) the OF future in 2022 post-Pham. A Top 100 OF in AAA/AA is on the cusp of being critical for the ongoing success.

Just “options” to consider to address continuity of winning.

Quote from JasonE135 on September 22, 2020, 2:25 pm

Quote from fenn68 on September 22, 2020, 1:47 pm

Quote from Brian Connelly on September 22, 2020, 1:09 pm

You guys are OB-SESSED with Brandon Marsh... you're killing me.

Also obsessed about Waters (ATL) and Larnach (MINN) ... I have a great range of obsessions.

Yes, have to focus on keeping a contender in 2021 with the best line-up but need to keep an eye out for a) that unexpected injury in the OF; and 2) the OF future in 2022 post-Pham. A Top 100 OF in AAA/AA is on the cusp of being critical for the ongoing success.

Just “options” to consider to address continuity of winning.

We live in reality. People can make trade proposals for Joe Adell but that is never going to happen. We focus on Brandon Marsh because he fits exactly what we need right now perfectly. He is basically major league ready. He could possibly use a year to settle in. We don't need him to start in 2021, we need him to start in 2022. We need a quality backup OF who can play CF next year. Check. Preferably LH. Check. High quality bat as opposed to a big power guy or a tools guy who may or may not hit. Check. A guy like him or Jarred Kelenic is exactly what we need. Of course Marsh happens to probably have a realistic price tag, unlike Kelenic. He is not a top 10, top 20 or even top 50 prospect. He is #75. The kind of guy you can get without giving up a fortune. We also just happen to have an abundance of exactly what his current team needs...young, quality, controllable pitching. There is truly no better match if Preller is looking to make a trade, unless he can get another diamond in the rough like Grisham.

Quote from JasonE135 on September 22, 2020, 2:40 pm

Quote from fenn68 on September 22, 2020, 1:05 pm

In separate speculation, reports are that Dombrowski may be the leading candidate to take over the LAA GM role.

Important in his profile is his history of going for making quick winners by dealing prospects (and spending money) ... the owner Moreno clearly is willing to spend money and wants to win now.

Clearly it is ML quality SP to insert NOW as the prime target. They have top OF prospects in Adell, Marsh, and Adams ... in that order of rank and ML proximity.

Since I don’t expect them to move any of that talent for “prospects” .... would the Padres gamble on their own pitching prospects and deal one of Lamet, Clevinger, Davies, or Paddack to get an OF that could be the 2021 replacement for Pham?

As much as I like Davies (0nly 1 year control) ... so a Davies and Baez base for Marsh (Top 100, can play all 3 OF slots, behind Upton, Trout, Adell)? Too much? Not enough to? Getting Marsh for the future is not important?

I don't think that the Padres would consider trading Lamet, Paddack or Clevinger. They are the future. Davies is a maybe since he only has 1 year of control left, but that might also mitigate the Angels desire for him. I am sure the Angels would have at least some interest in Davies, Lucchesi, Baez, Morejon, Patino and Gore . Since I am sure that Gore and Patino are off-limits it would take one of or some combination of the others to make it happen. No way to know exactly who the Angels would want exactly until you ask.

Quote from Randy Manese on September 22, 2020, 3:36 pm

Jason, put me on the side of the ledger that is not obsessed with Marsh.  I don't think he has projectable power to replace Pham in the short term or Myers in the longer term when each reach FA eligibility.  We're better off inserting Abrams in the OF and picking up Myers' option in 2023.  We are going to have to put out some big bucks to retain both Lamet and Clevinger in the next couple of years if we expect to keep them beyond their arbitration years and into maybe a year or so of Free Agency.  Paddack won't cost too much - probably take at least 2 solid years to command a salary equivalent to what Lamet or Clevinger already command this year.

I'm looking at someone who still growing into his power, like Yelich was when he was traded to Milwaukee or Grisham, when he was traded to us, as the kind of target for our future OF spot.  We have several good candidates that are high contact/average OF in Hassell and Head that are pretty good possibilities for our OF or trade chips; usually takes longer with the power possibilities like Mears and Caissie but we can dream on them.   I'm already counting on Abrams to fill the Pham void if we don't try to re-sign him for a couple more years (if he proves he is worth it).

Quote from JasonE135 on September 22, 2020, 4:53 pm

Quote from Randy Manese on September 22, 2020, 3:36 pm

Jason, put me on the side of the ledger that is not obsessed with Marsh.  I don't think he has projectable power to replace Pham in the short term or Myers in the longer term when each reach FA eligibility.  We're better off inserting Abrams in the OF and picking up Myers' option in 2023.  We are going to have to put out some big bucks to retain both Lamet and Clevinger in the next couple of years if we expect to keep them beyond their arbitration years and into maybe a year or so of Free Agency.  Paddack won't cost too much - probably take at least 2 solid years to command a salary equivalent to what Lamet or Clevinger already command this year.

I'm looking at someone who still growing into his power, like Yelich was when he was traded to Milwaukee or Grisham, when he was traded to us, as the kind of target for our future OF spot.  We have several good candidates that are high contact/average OF in Hassell and Head that are pretty good possibilities for our OF or trade chips; usually takes longer with the power possibilities like Mears and Caissie but we can dream on them.   I'm already counting on Abrams to fill the Pham void if we don't try to re-sign him for a couple more years (if he proves he is worth it).

Okay, we disagree. Which is fine. What I will say is that we have no outfield prospects who will be ready by 2022. Abrams has only had rookie ball experience so far except for a whole 8-AB in class A. He will be ready by 2023 at the earliest. What happens if he doesn't work out? What happens if any of our OFs get injured?

You want an OF who can hit for power. You like power. Everyone does. But power almost always comes with strikeouts and bat questions. See Caissie and Mears. Marsh changed his swing last year which is what allowed him to break out. He started standing taller and not squatting deeply like he used to. This not only freed up his swing allowing him to make more contact but it also gives him leverage and allows him to access his power. I can see him being a 20-HR type of guy and I personally would be fine with that. I am not looking to trade for a Luis Robert or Jo Adell type of OF. Those guys would cost a fortune. I just want a guy who can be a solid to good offensive performer and can play CF if need be. And who we don't have to give up multiple top prospects to get.

Quote from Brian Connelly on September 23, 2020, 10:34 am

Quote from Brian Connelly on September 22, 2020, 1:09 pm

You guys are OB-SESSED with Brandon Marsh... you're killing me.

Fenn:   Davies + Baez       Jason:  Morejon (or Baez) + Lucchesi      for:  Brandon Marsh

You guys aren't really "off" on the value proposition of what would be required for a top 51-100 prospect like Marsh.  That's not the issue/s.  The issues are:

1.    We simply don't need to make a trade for a 4th OF.   The $ tight 2021 FA market, sudden desirability of SD as a destination for ALL FA (not just 1 yr injury "bounceback @ PETCO" SP's), and relatively few needs to fill on one of the best teams in MLB should dovetail perfectly for Preller.  I feel like there will be good 2nd-3rd tier candidates available in FA.
2.    Need an MLB experienced player @ 4th OF, not a prospect.  If Marsh (or another prospect) struggles, as a playoff contending team, it would likely force Pads to spend even more (now limited) prospect capital at trade deadline to backfill the position.  Could happen with a vet FA signing too, but less likely based on a MLB track record.
3.   Being too cavalier with MLB/ready SP.  Next season going from 60 to (maybe?) 162 games will be a completely different animal.  The top prospect SP's WILL be working as SP's (not MLB RP's); either with Pads or in Minors.  Clevinger & Davies are "proven" up to 190-200 IP....once each in their careers.  Lamet throws more hard Sliders than anyone in MLB, has lived this season on a 2 pitch mix, TJ in 2018, and career high 153 IP... in 2017.  He definitely has the frame to go 200+, but his pitch mix combined with heavy use are a concern.  So is Paddack with TJ in rear view, but 141 IP career high last year.   It's naive to think all 4 of these guys are going to make 30+ starts / 200+ IP.  Even if they do, still need 200+ IP from some combo of prospects (plus Lucchesi) who've never gone > 100 IP in Minors.  Realistically can expect at least 8-9 guys to make MLB starts even with an entrenched 1-5.
4. Objective/timeframe different now.  Fenn, I know it's been 10+ years of "automatically" looking to trade every expiring contract for future value.  But elite MLB teams don't trade those guys-- it's "how do we keep/put together an elite MLB team THIS year".  Worry about next year... next year.   We HAD Pham's 2022 replacement in Trammell; still ranked > Marsh as a prospect.  The need for him in 2022 was not as important as the need for Nola (& maybe A. Adams) was now.
5. Davies is either an avg /above avg #3 SP OR the best #4 SP in MLB.  Even with a big arb raise he's still a bargain.  Assuming G. Richards is lost to FA, simply can't afford to lose Davies too.   Caveat would be:  when season started, I thought "#3" Richards would be much > "#4" Davies, and that if FA market was extremely "soft" for players, there was a possibility that Richards could maybe be signed on a 1 year deal for same or less $ than Davies would get in arb.  Richards (& Paddack) has more upside than Davies; but Davies' consistency is SOOO valuable.  Anyway, theoretically "could" trade Davies if re-signed Richards or another FA SP for same or less $... risky.

 

 

Quote from fenn68 on September 23, 2020, 10:50 am

We need to be a little careful about attributing Tatis' quick rise to the ML (with success) to every other top Padre prospect ... worse to the second tier prospects. Tatis is part of a limited group who have been able to achieve that rapid ascent. Yes, want the Abrams to ascend ... by not ready to expect that. 2023 makes some sense giving him two full years on the minors. Tatis spent 2017 in FW and 2018 in AMA. Not sure anyone can rely on the 2020 alternate site as a full minor league season. All the other better OF prospects are actually behind Abrams and maybe more 2024.

Therefore looking to add a ML ready OF for 2021 (Profar gone) and 2022 (Pham gone) to support continued winning. Right now the 4th OF is a selection of Mateo (can't hit), Ona (should be in AAA), Almonte (sound not be in ML), and Allen (AAAA player) and no one really on track for 2022.

Same issue going forward for the INF with Garcia in his last season then Mateo? A reach to think of any AAA/AA prospects being that middle INF support in 2022. Marcano was only in FW last year, so maybe 2023?

Need to look for some combo short term / long term moves

Quote from Brian Connelly on September 23, 2020, 11:03 am

We need to be a little careful about attributing Tatis' quick rise to the ML (with success) to every other top Padre prospect ... worse to the second tier prospects

YESSS!  One of my pet peeves!  It's like buying a winning lottery ticket and then expecting every one after that to also be a winner.

HAVE to recognize it's the exception, not the rule, for a guy to come in that young & succeed to the point he's in the MVP discussion at age 21.   He's a once a decade or "one prospect in ALL of MLB like that" per year type talent.

If anything, the "lost year" is going to push guy's debuts out a year... and that is OK!!!   Sabermetrics may say I'm wrong, but I have always felt the push for guys to debut as young as possible in MLB is completely misguided.

MLB debuts:   Lamet - almost 25, Cronenworth - 26,  Pagan - 26, Tim Hill - 28, Nola - 29

 

Quote from JasonE135 on September 23, 2020, 1:32 pm

Quote from Brian Connelly on September 23, 2020, 10:34 am

Quote from Brian Connelly on September 22, 2020, 1:09 pm

You guys are OB-SESSED with Brandon Marsh... you're killing me.

Fenn:   Davies + Baez       Jason:  Morejon (or Baez) + Lucchesi      for:  Brandon Marsh

You guys aren't really "off" on the value proposition of what would be required for a top 51-100 prospect like Marsh.  That's not the issue/s.  The issues are:

1.    We simply don't need to make a trade for a 4th OF.   The $ tight 2021 FA market, sudden desirability of SD as a destination for ALL FA (not just 1 yr injury "bounceback @ PETCO" SP's), and relatively few needs to fill on one of the best teams in MLB should dovetail perfectly for Preller.  I feel like there will be good 2nd-3rd tier candidates available in FA.
2.    Need an MLB experienced player @ 4th OF, not a prospect.  If Marsh (or another prospect) struggles, as a playoff contending team, it would likely force Pads to spend even more (now limited) prospect capital at trade deadline to backfill the position.  Could happen with a vet FA signing too, but less likely based on a MLB track record.
3.   Being too cavalier with MLB/ready SP.  Next season going from 60 to (maybe?) 162 games will be a completely different animal.  The top prospect SP's WILL be working as SP's (not MLB RP's); either with Pads or in Minors.  Clevinger & Davies are "proven" up to 190-200 IP....once each in their careers.  Lamet throws more hard Sliders than anyone in MLB, has lived this season on a 2 pitch mix, TJ in 2018, and career high 153 IP... in 2017.  He definitely has the frame to go 200+, but his pitch mix combined with heavy use are a concern.  So is Paddack with TJ in rear view, but 141 IP career high last year.   It's naive to think all 4 of these guys are going to make 30+ starts / 200+ IP.  Even if they do, still need 200+ IP from some combo of prospects (plus Lucchesi) who've never gone > 100 IP in Minors.  Realistically can expect at least 8-9 guys to make MLB starts even with an entrenched 1-5.
4. Objective/timeframe different now.  Fenn, I know it's been 10+ years of "automatically" looking to trade every expiring contract for future value.  But elite MLB teams don't trade those guys-- it's "how do we keep/put together an elite MLB team THIS year".  Worry about next year... next year.   We HAD Pham's 2022 replacement in Trammell; still ranked > Marsh as a prospect.  The need for him in 2022 was not as important as the need for Nola (& maybe A. Adams) 1. now.
5. Davies is either an avg /above avg #3 SP OR the best #4 SP in MLB.  Even with a big arb raise he's still a bargain.  Assuming G. Richards is lost to FA, simply can't afford to lose Davies too.   Caveat would be:  when season started, I thought "#3" Richards would be much > "#4" Davies, and that if FA market was extremely "soft" for players, there was a possibility that Richards could maybe be signed on a 1 year deal for same or less $ than Davies would get in arb.  Richards (& Paddack) has more upside than Davies; but Davies' consistency is SOOO valuable.  Anyway, theoretically "could" trade Davies if re-signed Richards or another FA SP for same or less $... risky.

 

 

1. 4th OFs are rarely signed, they are grown. Nobody spends real money on backup OFs in free agency. You end up signing guys like Juan Lagares-guys who have failed to earn a starting job usually because they cannot hit, but they can at least play defense. It would be incredibly naive to think that we could sign a future starter as a backup today. We could re-sign Profar but I think we are all expecting him to get starter money from another team.

2. If anyone struggles it hurts the team. You will notice that we picked up Lagares this year. He had mlb experience yet he did nothing for us. I am sure we will pick up another CF off the scrap heap to try to be our 4th OF next year. In this you are missing the point that we are not just looking for a 4th OF, we are looking for a future starter. We need a starter. The Padres will not be able to re-sign Pham after next year unless he ends up stinking. In which case we will not want him.

3. I am never cavalier about trading starting pitchers or prospects. I know that at least 8-9 ml ready starters are needed each year. We currently have an excellent starting 5.  Lamet and Paddack will not become FAs until 2024, Clevinger 2023, Davies 2022. I expect Preller to try to re-sign Richards if he can do so at a reasonable price. If not I would bet anything that he will sign 2-3 reclamation projects like he does every year. 4 starters plus Lucchesi, Gore, Patino, Morejon, Baez and 2-3 reclamation projects= 11-12 starters. Subtract 2 in a trade and you have 9-10.