Quote from fenn68 on November 2, 2020, 3:47 pm

I guess there could be a strategy that considering the uncertainty and what may be a robust number of bodies available late towards opening day .... maybe a team sheds as much payroll the can early and gamble on the build back (lower cost) late?

To that end, Padres could non-tender Pham, Davies,  and Garcia (all FA after 2021) ... avoid about $17MM commitment then replace them with lower cost options when players start to panic as few get signed (or signed at lower prices).

Quote from Brian Connelly on November 3, 2020, 9:51 am

Quote from fenn68 on November 2, 2020, 3:11 pm

One thing to remember about Guerra is that he is out of minor league options (as are a lot of the RHRP on the roster). Guerra would have to improve a lot to make the 26 man roster ... thus getting DFA at the end of ST. If they kept him ... one of the others gets DFA’d.

So, is it more strategic to DFA him now or DFA him after ST trying to get the best chance of having him clear waivers and retain his services.

For me, unless they need the 40 man slot during the winter, wait until ST and make the DFA as other teams are cutting down to 26 and probably not wanting to give him a 26 man slot.

I believe Guerra's upside ceiling is high enough that he is a "best fit" on a non contender where he can work a lot regularly.   Think there's enough there that Pads could net SOMEthing back in trade, and that might be the best route.  The best time to do this IMO would be after we (re?) sign a FA RP.  Can just reach out to teams & let them know he's available in trade.

If we don't DFA/trade until ST, he either wasn't good enough to make our team, or struggled after he did (like this season).  Still no guarantee a non-contender doesn't just claim him on waivers.  More likely to generate trade interest now than later.

Quote from Brian Connelly on November 3, 2020, 10:28 am

Quote from fenn68 on November 2, 2020, 3:47 pm

I guess there could be a strategy that considering the uncertainty and what may be a robust number of bodies available late towards opening day .... maybe a team sheds as much payroll the can early and gamble on the build back (lower cost) late?

To that end, Padres could non-tender Pham, Davies,  and Garcia (all FA after 2021) ... avoid about $17MM commitment then replace them with lower cost options when players start to panic as few get signed (or signed at lower prices).

You kind of read my mind.  The combo of the Moreland non-tender due to uncertainty about DH in NL in 2021, the Brad Hand waiver & non-claim at 1/10, and the MLBTR & Athletic top FA & salary projections have led me to these thoughts:

1.   The "thin"-ness of the bench and the NL in 2021 possibly being the "old" NL dramatically increases the value of a PH over a DH, which benefits Garcia.  I agree it is less likely but still possible Pads non-tender him.  The "sunk" cost of cutting him before ST sounds nominal, but when really only talking about having 10 MM +/- to spend in total, it's still significant $.  I could see the Pads agreeing to a 1 yr contract well below what Garcia's arb projection is (i.e. < 1 MM).   Saves $, but that entire salary would be guaranteed.
2.   From the Padres POV, the current FA market is heavy in both RP & SP.  It's weak in position players, and many (C, SS, 3B, 1B) aren't fits for us.  Only 15 of #11-#50 FA on MLBTR are position players, with 1 of those being Profar....
3. .... BUT there could be many more players really more interesting to the Pads non-tendered (arb eligible guys) soon.  Anyone want to start speculating on possible Non-Tenders targets?
4.   I now think that Clevinger & Lamet are the only 100% locks to be tendered arb contracts.  Altavilla showed enough & is cheap so he's highly likely, as is more expensive but more established Pagan.  But can definitely make arguments for Non-Tendering:   Davies, Pham, and even Matt Strahm in addition to possibly Garcia & certainly Perdomo.

• With Pham, I'm seeing guys like Michael Brantley where you could probably get them for > 1 yr, at the same AAV as Pham; maybe even less by backloading the contract, which player/agent might prefer anyway.  BUT huge risk if you don't land a guy you want.
• With Davies, the scenario is emerging that I envisioned at beginning of year:  That a 3rd year Arb guy might get more $ than a FA.  The pool of SP's while not as great at the top as 2019 is still pretty deep.  Go for either quality with > 1 yr control (like with FA OF over Pham) OR quantity: multiple "rebound"/flier guys.  Either path might free up a little more $ for another spot.
• Strahm is a good dude & a gamer; but his delivery stresses that skinny frame, he has to be labelled somewhat injury prone, not really a "K" guy, not really a 7-8-9th inning guy; getting a little costly.  But effective LHRP's always needed, so likely back.

Quote from Randy Manese on November 3, 2020, 4:05 pm

I'm looking at our catching situation and whose available in the market.  We have Nola as they everyday catcher and probably Mejia as the back-up, especially against tough RH pitchers.  Campusano's arrest makes things dicey since we don't know if he'll be in jail or suspended for any period of time.  Beyond that, we have Hunt a couple of levels below and long-time farmhand Webster Rivas.  Assuming Campusano is able to play, he almost certainly will begin to take over the catching position in 2022, if not earlier.  In the meantime, we have two catchers who are probably going to be used at other positions and as PH's (Nola primary as relief to Hosmer, and Mejia primarily in LF or RF).  That means we need a catcher who is possibly capable of playing 25-40 games and preferably is a RH hitter or switch hitter.

Padres obviously can't afford Realmuto, McCann or even Yadier Molina but oldsters Chirinos, Suzuki and even ex-Padre Rene Rivera are some of the many catchers available for this role.  Fallback position is probably Rivas, but there seems to be a large number of available catchers who could be had for around 1 million or even less.

Both Nola and Mejia don't have a lot of catching experience but Nola drew raves over the latter part of 2020.  When we had only Hedges and Mejia (and before we knew Mejia was injured most of the time he was active), I think the general impression was that Mejia had made significant strides defensively and I believe Fenn even researched his defensive stats and found them not that different from Hedges this year.   The point is that the Padres need Mejia's bat (see 2019 stats) in the line-up consistently if they are going to be able to rest some of the regulars and for that to happen, we'll need to pick up a back-up catcher.  I was not that impressed by what I saw with Castro behind the plate, so I'm leaning toward one of the other three I mentioned above or other equally experienced guys who can manage a staff, maybe Wieters or Flowers.  We only need a one year deal, maybe with an option for a second year, so some of these 35+ aged catchers might bite to go with a team that is poised for a playoff run.  Don't think this bench piece will be too difficult to fill nor too costly, but very necessary.

Quote from LynchMob on November 4, 2020, 10:14 am

Count me as being OK with a Bauer signing to a 1-year deal ... the concern is that his 2020 stats are inflated due to only pitching vs Central division teams ... I get it ... and ... if AJ/etc decide they can and want to afford Bauer's 1-year contract demands ($35M?), then I'm OK with them spending it ... it won't block any of the prospects (Gore, Patino, etc) ... and it won't prevent $ going to Tatis in 2022+ ... and it will make the team better in 2021 ...

Quote from Brian Connelly on November 4, 2020, 10:17 am

Quote from Brian Connelly on November 2, 2020, 9:02 am

Do the Padres really think that Moreland would sign for less than 2.5 mil? Is that really where the market is at?

I don't get this logic.  If we (Pads) thought he would sign > his existing salary, then he would be a bargain AT that salary, and you don't Non-Tender him (to Padres his "salary" is 2.5 MM, since the 500K buyout is a "sunk cost"; not true for all the other teams).  Obviously Pads threw "trade him" ideas out there @ 3 MM and no one bit at all.  Injuries, whatever, could change that, but....

...I think it IS where the market is at if there is no DH in NL.  Moreland signed for 3 MM/3MM over a year ago PRE-COVID.  Hot start / cold finish in year 1 of deal-- in a Covid impacted market-- why is unreasonable to think he would sign for "only"< 2.5 MM now?

I was wrong on this; thought MM would clearly be worth 3 MM for 1 year & at worst was "re-tradeable" for less than what we gave up to get him.  But think it's  "only" due to DH unknown situation.  Preller must have known before the trade that he might not get the DH in NL answer before the non-tender deadline (i.e. that this was a possible outcome), but still pulled the trigger.  Looks like a bad trade right now, but if he re-ups for a year for a little less $, then it's OK.

It just occurred to me that declining the option might be a win-win.   Moreland definitely receives 500K right now.  If there's no DH in NL with covid /attendance $$ pressure, it badly hurts his market.  But IF DH returns, suddenly 15 NL teams incl Padres need DH esp vs RHP, and maybe he is worth 2.5 MM despite the 2nd "1/2" (i.e. one month - first time in NL in his career) falloff.

Say the Pads re-sign him for 2.5 MM.  He is now likely to make more overall in 2021, b/c he receives 100% of the $500K, but his remaining salary might be pro-rated to a partial season again.  I felt like the "decision" amount was actually < 2.5 MM because of this, but the amount less is unknown, and the lack of certainty about the DH really forced Preller to decline the option.

Quote from Brian Connelly on November 5, 2020, 11:31 am

Looking at FanGraphs Power rankings... our starting 8 is something else!

• Machado & Tatis were top 10 MLB position players & look capable of sustaining that
• Myers was a top 20 MLB.  Likely to fall off from that, but certainly showed top 100 capable
• Grisham was a top 40 MLB.  Even with regression, his defense should keep him top 100.
• Cronenworth just made top 100.  Lack of power probably puts this as his near ceiling, but R.O.Y. didn't play much early in season which held him back.
• Hosmer & Nola just missed top 100.  Hosmer obviously hurt by missed time.  Nola slumped at plate in SD, but was banged up.  Reasonable that Hosmer can stay there, probably Nola's ceiling.
• Pham was the outlier @ #262.  Basically a lost season, but 3 years running 2017-2019 in top 100

The Padres entire starting 8 could conceivably be top 100 MLB position players in 2021...  AMAZING!

Only LAD (with Justin Turner), MAYBE Atlanta could possibly be in that boat too.

Quote from Randy Manese on November 12, 2020, 10:06 pm

Padres have a ton of Rule 5 eligibles, including many in their current Top 30 prospect list.  Most of these won't be protected but still feel like Marcano and Lawson are the top and maybe only two to be added to the 40 man as it is currently structured.  There are also a lot of ex-Padres minor leaguers potentially available, including many that were traded this season.  An interesting arm might be Enyel de los Santos who never seemed to find the groove with the Phillies but really caused a stir in Padres fandom when he was traded for Galvis a couple of years ago.  Expect Arias and Trammell to be protected but wouldn't it be bizarre if Padres actually took one of those they recently traded away?  Say Potts or Rosario?   Not going to get much out of our expected bench anyway, so why not?  If they flop in spring training, just return them.  Would Rosario be any worse than Greg Allen or Jorge Mateo in the OF?  Could Potts be a RH hitting utility INF a la France?  Odds are against this since bench pieces are usually experienced players but just tossing this out there on a quiet Thursday evening.

Quote from fenn68 on November 13, 2020, 7:46 am

Interesting line of thought.

Guessing that most of the better options will be protected by their current organizations (e.g. Rosario / Potts) and considering the Padres draft somewhere in the late 20s ... the better options may be already tabbed.

However, with little OF/INF reinforcements coming in AAA/AA for the Padres in 2021 (or 2022) ... and as it stands the bench maybe be INF of Mateo / Garcia then OF Ona / Allen .... Padres may take a shot at someone (at least to see them in ST). No commitment to keep a selection until the season starts and some potential non-tenders / DFA to open a roster spot by Dec 10th.

For a contender a "veteran" makes traditional sense ... maybe a signing on a minor league deal with an invite to ST. However, since little is "normal" .... and a weak set of bench options ... might make some sense to nab a Rule 5 at least to enter the competition. Also, at the end of ST the Padres should get a couple of additional roster slots since would expect at least two out of minor league option relief pitchers end up DFA (room for the veterans on minor league deals).

So, I see some logic in the Padres making a rule 5 pick (probably not a pitcher) just to expand the ST options and as a buffer until they actually sign some "better" bench options which likely will lag to near ST.