While some other youthful National League clubs have shown big strides thus far in 2018, the Padres remain buried in the NL West and don’t seem to be going anywhere this season. The rotation’s performance, to be sure, has not helped matters. But that doesn’t mean it can’t be a source of some summer trade assets.
Late last year, the Friars reached a two-year, $6MM extension with Clayton Richard. In December, they added Jordan Lyles for a meager $1MM guarantee in a deal that also includes an option for 2019. And when the calendar flipped to 2018, they brought back old friend Tyson Ross on an incentive-laden, minor-league pact.
In the aggregate, the strategy wasn’t all that different from the one the Pads used in the prior winter, when Richard joined Trevor Cahill, Jhoulys Chacin, and Jered Weaver as low-cost free agents that landed in San Diego. In both cases, the idea was to buy up some cheap innings while potentially opening the door to a mid-season trade return.
To this point, despite the generally poor performance of the San Diego starting staff, the trio of veteran assets has been rather cost-effective. Indeed, all three are worthy of tracking for organizations weighing deadline additions. The fact that none will break the bank is of particular note, especially in a world in which several contenders will be looking to improve while staying beneath the luxury tax line.
Let’s take a closer look …
At first glance, Richard does not appear to be doing much of interest. He’s carrying a 4.87 ERA with 7.7 K/9 and 3.1 BB/9 through 61 frames thus far. His typically superlative groundball rate is down, albeit to a still-excellent 54.4% rate. And he only managed a 4.79 earned-per-nine rate as a starter in 2017.
True, it’s probably not worth getting too terribly excited over the 34-year-old southpaw. But there’s much more to the story. Richard is sporting a career-best 10.2% swinging-strike rate. Fielding-independent pitching metrics such as FIP (3.78), xFIP (3.48), and SIERA (3.90) all feel he has outperformed his results thus far in 2018 — and likewise that he did so last season. Though he has been tagged when facing an opposing order for a third time, he has been much more useful in the prior two times through a lineup.
Taken together, it’s not hard to imagine the right organization viewing Richard as quite a useful asset. He’s averaging six frames per start and thus could fill out a rotation or serve as a long man down the stretch. And he has been particularly stingy against opposing lefties, who are hitting just .226/.298/.308 against him, so there’s also some postseason swingman/lefty specialist potential here. That’s an interesting combination.
Certainly, scouts will be watching to see how Richard throws as the deadline approaches. The same is true to an even greater extent with regard to Lyles, a 27-year-old who’s off to his most promising showing in some time. Over 37 2/3 innings through 16 appearances — three of them starts — he has compiled a 3.11 ERA with 8.6 K/9 and 2.6 BB/9.
To be sure, there’s a lot left for Lyles to prove. He has enjoyed a stingy .233 BABIP-against, though Statcast figures indicate he hasn’t needed much luck in the batted-ball department (.260 wOBA against a .286 xwOBA). Clearly, opponents’ success on balls in play will go up, but the lack of good contact suggests that there’s more than just sample fortune at play. Notably, too, Lyles has thus far managed a career-best swinging strike rate (10.9%) and average four-seam velocity (95.2 mph).
It’s worth bearing in mind that both Richard and Lyles come with affordable future control. While the Padres may yet have designs on making a leap in the standings in 2019, and might look to bolster their rotation further, it’ll be hard to add too many pieces in one winter (even from within). The club will surely value the right to control such useful arms at minimal rates of pay, meaning neither will be available unless the return is at least of some interest.
That’s not quite the same situation for the 31-year-old Ross, who has been the Padres’ best starter thus far. He’s only under contract for the present season, so barring a Richard-like extension, he’ll be a free agent at year end.
Since reuniting with the Friars after a miserable season apart, Ross has looked something like his old self. Over 53 2/3 innings, he’s sporting a healthy 3.35 ERA with 9.2 K/9, 3.7 BB/9, and a 46.2% groundball rate. He still doesn’t throw as hard as he used to, but has regained some (but not all) of his ability to generate swings and misses (9.9% this year).
If the deadline was closer, Ross would probably be the pitcher of the three generating the most attention. But we still have some time for things to shake out. The Statcast data does indicate that Ross has been a bit fortunate to allow only a .273 wOBA to opposing hitters, as the quality of contact would suggest a more robust .324 xwOBA rate of output. He has thus far suppressed home runs quite well, as he did traditionally, but any slippage in that area could also reverse the ERA fairly quickly.
Taken together, the Padres hardly have a slate of major trade assets in their starting five. But this trio could all draw interest over the summer.
Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.
Richard could be seen as a reliever, as he performed decently with the Cubs 2016 team, but would the Padres view a low-level, low-ceiling prospect as a good enough return for a pitcher who can eat innings for them, because Richard won’t bring much value back in return. I’d guess he has more value staying in SD and eating innings.
I don’t see any contender viewing these guys as something that they don’t already have in their system. The Indians could possibly plug their #5 starter spot I suppose? Angels could use more depth, maybe? Brewers may need to a veteran end of the rotation guy, I guess? I wouldn’t give up anything more than a sure-nothing prospect for any of them.
I mean, good luck getting them to price Richard as a reliever.
And sure, there’s not a lot of demand for back-end innings eaters at the moment but there will be in July and August.
No, they got too many up upside guys in the farm
Why would they replace an innings eatter with a decent and fair payday for someone blocking raw talent
I could see them parting with him for a guy that has promise but hasn’t unlocked it
Like a yates before the padres
Agree w your point regarding contenders except your forgetting about the Mariners. We are 9 games above .500, we currently own the 2nd WC and we’re not out of the AL West Division race despite a rotation that is one of the worst in the league. We could def use pitching help and Ross would be a great addition. Just not sure we have the resources or prospects to do so
Seattle has the prospects. I can see something like the commenter above stated as far as packaging to increase the value. Tyson Ross, Kirby Yates and Cory Spangenberg for Kyle Lewis and Art Warren? Can flip/flop Yates for Stammen if need be but Yates has more team control and is dirt cheap. Same can be said with Asuaje instead of Spangenberg if Seattle wanted a more 2B type guy to replace Cano/Gordon.
Lewis would be tough to pry away from Seattle but when they look at how much control the get over Yates and possibly Asuaje, I think something like that could work for both sides.
Not sure if I would take that as a Padres fan. We have way too much outfield depth as it is, so there’s no room for another injury prone-power hitting corner outfielder when we already have Wil Myers and Hunter Renfroe to do that for us (and Naylor absolutely mashing in AA). Padres should be looking to add more starting pitching prospects (you can never have enough), acquire a big ticket SS/3B depending on where Tatis ends up, and add maybe a catcher because Hedges and his career .528 OPS isn’t going to cut it every day.
Seattle doesn’t have the prospects to acquire anything, I mean, I guess conceivably, because it’s DiPoto, he could be talked out of Sam Carlson – if the acquiring team is optimistic about his long-term health outlook (which is not a given). But Lewis has been an unmitigated disaster as a pro and the only reason he’d be hard to acquire is because the Mariners have to hold out hope (and therefore value him in a trade) that he’ll eventually demonstrate any of the talent he showed in college, while an acquiring team wouldn’t give up much in return for a guy who can’t stay healthy and has been awful on the rare occasions he’s been on the field.
After those two players, the Mariners have a couple of mildly interesting kids from last year’s J2 class and a pile of manure in their system.
The Padres probably don’t view anything that other teams would offer for Richard as something they don’t already have in their system. Their system is stacked. Richard is making a very reasonable $3 million and has pitched into the 8th inning in his last 3 starts, so why they would want to move him doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me. A guy with a 4 ERA that goes 6 innings most starts is the perfect back of the rotation starter for most teams.
They would want to move him because whoever they get would be controlled into their contending years.
If Preller packaged up one of the three with a couple relievers like Cimber and Yates, he could likely get something of value back like he did from KC last year with the 6 man trade. We know he likes to take chances on low A players. Ruiz looks like an advanced hitter in the minors.
This is what I’m thinking too. Their best bet is to put together something similar to that trade they made with the Royals. This could work if they get in talks with teams who are right on the playoff bubble (Brewers, maybe the Angels, etc.) They don’t have to get some high-level prospect back, but if Preller can find some more hidden gems in the low minors, it would be a success.
Padres reliever assets are much more valuable right now. Although Ross has looked really good so even though Richard and Lyles have more control, a contending team would probably prefer Ross.
We have excess OF….package pitching with them. Myers must go…always hurt…go to AL and be a DH. We have 4 OF better….Pirela,Cordero,Margot,Reyes and I would keep Renfroe over Willy. Padres in no hurry to bring him back….local press silent on his progress….out of sight/out of mind.
Myers played 155 games each of the last two seasons. He also has a very large contract he doesn’t play anywhere near up to. You might as well argue in favor of cutting him.
That would be interesting to see if they can get some added value in by adding an OFer to a potential trade package. With the logjam they have, it would only help them and not hurt them. I don’t think Myers will get traded though, especially with his contract. The fact that he’s been off the grid since his injury is somewhat concerning. They never should have moved him back to the outfield.
Add that to the list of questionable decisions Preller has made this offseason…
Pirela is terrible. Can’t field anywhere, absolutely can’t hit. Not sure why some Padres fans are so enamored of him.
Because he ‘hustles’? Have no fear, Urias is near.
Package them up and put them out on the curb on Friday morning.
Send them to the Phillies for Hoskins.
the last thing they need is another 1B/cOF type guy
Brad Hand and Will Myers are the only two that would have value sorry.
ASTROS would love to get there hands on Hand
Climber would disagree
That kid is dominate
So would yates and stamen
Also, Webb has been dominate in the pcl
Do you know how hard it is for a pitcher to dominate in the pcl?
That’s a hitters league
Lyles has been amazing
Starting and relieving. That pirates games was some bad outfield defense
Ross has been really good
If the Angels can stick around until the deadline then I can see them and the Padres matching on multiple fronts.
First, Preller and his regime had huge interest in Kevin Maitain before the Braves landed him internationally a few years back. Now that he is in the Angels system I could see a match here with a package centering around him being the major piece going back to SD.
Possible trade scenario:
Tyson Ross, Jose Pirela and Craig Stammen to LAA for Kevin Maitan and Chris Rodriguez.
I never heard of maitan being an interest
He isn’t hitting and there have been some issues
In each of the last few seasons, Preller’s been able to fleece a team on the verge of a rebuild that hadn’t yet noticed that fact about themselves and thought they’d make one last run at it. Shields to the White Sox; both of the trades with the Marlins; the Royals last year.
Seems like the Angels are a good mark to play that role this year, though it’s the trio of position guys at Inland Empire and a few of the young arms in XST who would be targets, not Maitan.
I wouldn’t call the Royals trade a “fleecing” on either team’s part.
How does Wil Myers have value? Can’t stay healthy, not all that great when he is healthy and owed $74m from 2019 to 2022.
Everybody knows prospects are no sure thing…but Padres farm system is so deep that it really doesn’t make sense to trade their decent commodities just for the sake of trading for anything. It kind of showed last season when many teams wanted to seemingly lowball for Brad Hand and no deal was ever imminent. It’ll be interesting to see if this year there are actual serious offers being made and then what actually makes sense for the Padres to actually accept.
Preller’s misdeeds in 2016 will hinder him from making any real trades. It’s telling that last summer, teams weren’t even offering him top 10 organizational prospects for Brad Hand, who is probably a top 10 reliever in baseball.
Preller paid the price and knows what he has to lose if another’s mistake happens. I don’t think that’s why teams are opposed to trading with him….teams like the Cardinals and Red Sox have got caught for much worse recently…I’m sure if there’s a match to be made in a trade, a team is still going to trade with those teams.
If a team doesn’t want to pay the correct price for a valuable commodity…the team doesn’t have to just give the player away. To a team like the Padres who are just starting to see some of the fruits of their farm system…it makes sense to keep Hand (who’s got 3 more cheap years left.) while the current team continues to grow on the up and up just as much as it does to trade him while they aren’t contending…unless they are wowed by an offer.
A one month suspension during the part of the season where GM’s are the least active is not “paying the price.” Notice how Preller has not made one significant trade since the suspension.
With the way the suspensions have been handed out to player and teams the past decade…if the mlb wanted to dish out a “harsher” punishment to Preller…there’s every reason they would have. Unless he has some favor that nobody else seems to have…there must have been a reason for what the mlb deemed his supension was fair (one month suspension.) Couple that with the way Preller has been slapped on the hand for other reported offenses in the past…if the mlb wanted to ban him or suspend indefinitely…why in the world wouldn’t they have? You must have seen what the mlb did to the Braves former GM and what they did to the Cardinals & Red Sox…you going to tell me they weren’t going to punish Preller they way they actually deemed fit?
I’m not saying MLB saw fit to punish him more harshly. What I am saying is that a one-month suspension during a time when GM’s aren’t doing anything is barely a step above not punishing him at all and that other GM’s are clearly still reluctant to trade with him.
Even though you may believe it was really not a punishment…I’ll say it again…the mlb (who is not afraid to make an example of a person or team) apparently did. What you are saying is not factual. I’ll say it again….teams are still willing to trade with him (Just this past offseason, he has made trades with the Rangers, Phillies, Yankees, and Blue Jays.) I’m not saying he’s won all those trades (that’s debateable)…but the fact remains that teams are still trading with him if they both believe it’s a match…
None of those trades were significant and Preller got fleeced on all of them. If teams are only willing to trade with him if he’s clearly overpaying that doesn’t look too good. Wait until he trades for impact prospects/players and then we’ll talk.
Whether they were significant deals or not and whether he got fleeced or not (which is still up for debate)…teams are still trading with Preller…you said that they are not, when they still are. He’s just not going to give away his prized commodities. Hand being the best one…fits with the team currently or can still be traded…for the right deal.
Never said they absolutely wouldn’t trade with him. Said they are reluctant to and will only do it if they are either clearly fleecing Preller or the trade is inconsequential. Why do you think teams were only offering their 15-20th ranked prospects for Brad Hand?
And of the trades you mentioned, Preller absolutely got fleeced on the Solarte, Mitchell and Galvis trades. Brett Nicholas likely has no effect one way or the other.
Mitchell trade looks like the only trade that is going to be total failure (at the price of a career 4A player and one year of Headley)….other trades are TBD.
Galvis has made many a Padres pitcher very confident while solidifying a position that has been devoid of competent play for a good decade or more,,,and he might be re-upped for a couple more seasons (Tatis might be moved to 3rd). De los Santos does look dominating as of right now…but will he turn out to be a spectacular Corey Kluber or disappointing Joe Ross when he finally joins big leagues and all is said and done? Solarte was a fan favorite that nobody really wanted to see traded…but there’s still a current logjam at his former position with Padres and the prospect acquired still needs a couple seasons of seeing what he becomes before calling him a total loss (tho he is currently buried deep on the Padres’ current prospect list.) Don’t even recall who was given up for the former Rangers’ catcher. Btw we forgot the Royals trade….which landed the Padres a solid promising young hitter….which is what the farm is currently light on.
Point is all deals are hit or miss…up to this point…we won’t really be able to see if anybody got fleeced up until the next 3 years or so…but we do know of 5 teams that didn’t mind trading with Preller…and I think we’ll see more this trade deadline. If we see Hand, Ross, or bullpen pieces being given away for can of beans then you might be onto something…but until then, only time will truly tell.
Other trades aren’t tbd at all. Phillies had to trade Galvis and the Padres were the only team that was interested. The fact that Preller still had to give up a decent prospect in De Los Santos despite this should tell you something. One year from now the Padres’ situation at SS will be right back to where it was before and those pitchers will just lose all their confidence. The Phillies could very well re-sign Galvis and have both him and De Los Santos. The Padres re-signing Galvis won’t make the trade look better because they didn’t have to trade for him in order to sign him. Solarte was a fan favorite, a quality hitter and signed to an extremely favorable contract and all Preller was able to get for him was a C-grade prospect at a position the Padres already have a logjam at who will run into the Rule 5 draft after this season. The Royals didn’t give up anything that was of any real value to them in their trade.
Yes, we know of 5 teams that will trade with Preller if they are clearly fleecing him. I’ll have to see him make just one smart, win-win trade before I believe other GM’s aren’t leery of trading with him, like trading Hand or Ross for premium prospects. I don’t see him trading Hand for peanuts because he’s controlled through 2021, but if that’s all other GM’s are offering, it should tell you something about the way they view Preller.
Galvis was about trying to stabilize a position thats long been a detriment to the team…and the Padres are already talking about theres a chance they re-sign him. Tatis may or not be the SS of the future…but either way, the brass let it be known they already like what they’ve seen from Galvis. Theres no guarantee that he re-signs with the Padres or Phillies. If he likes the culture in SD (which he seemingly does working with the youngsters day in and day out…something he would’ve never done if he wasn’t a Padre,) why wouldn’t that give the Padres a chance to retain him?
In order to get something of value you got to give something of value…that is not the definition of a fleece…you do realize that, no? De Los Santos may turn into something or nothing…either way, he still proved integral into helping stabilizing a position that really needed to be…especially with all the young pitchers coming up (Galvis & Hosmer have both made the Padres infield much more solid as a whole and you can’t tell me that hasn’t done wonders for the pitchers.)
The Royals gave up nothing? You act as if the Padres gave them Brad Hand or Franchy Cordero…they gave up what they felt they had and the Padres and Preller gladly accepted…we’ll have to revisit this in few years to see if they truly got nothing in return…same goes for the Blue Jay’s deal.
Galvis doesn’t stabilize the shortstop position at all! What will happen to that stability after the season when he is gone? Again, they didn’t have to trade for him to be able to sign him. Freddy Galvis and his career 77 OPS+ are not the type of player you trade for in order to gain even a slight advantage in signing him. Especially if you have to give up a good prospect like Enyel de Los Santos.
The Padres didn’t get anything from that trade. They still aren’t contending and then after this season Galvis will be gone and they will be in the exact same position as before and the Padres infield defense and pitchers will go back to sucking. If you don’t realize this you are a lost cause.
Royals trade was pretty inconsequential. Blue Jays did fleece the Padres. As mentioned, Solarte is great and signed to a very team friendly contract through 2020. Olivares is meh and is about to run into the Rule 5 draft. Preller has still not been able to trade for ONE impact player or prospect since the suspension.
Were just going to consider me “lost cause because I actually see Galvis having a decent chance of being re-upped…and I’ll say it again…to get something you have to give something in return…a fleecing that does not constitute. You don’t seem to comprehend that…so I’m going to consider you a lost cause on that…because Galvis has definitely solidified the position whether you want to accept that or not. Him being with the Padres
( because he was traded on them,) taking a leadership role to the youngsters while offering solid defense, and basically fitting in with the current new culture trying to be established has every reason why the brass would want to keep him for more years.
The Royals may not have gave up much in your opinion…but the Padres basically gave them people they picked off the waiver wire themselves (ie like Ross and Richard this year) and actually turned them into something with potential or a possible future with the Padres.
Yeah you are a lost cause. If you weren’t, you would realize the following things.
1. Galvis only solidifies the shortstop position for 2018, which doesn’t matter because the Padres aren’t contending.
2. Once Galvis leaves after 2018, they will lose that stability. The defense and, consequently, the pitching, will regress. They won’t be better in 2019 and beyond by virtue of previously having had Galvis.
3. The Padres didn’t have to trade for Galvis to be able to sign him.
4. Freddy Galvis and his career 77 OPS+ are not the type of player you trade for to gain a slight advantage in signing him. Especially not if he costs a good prospect like Enyel De Los Santos.
5. Phillies got De Los Santos for a guy they were about to lose anyway and the Padres were the only bidder. Padres got fleeced.
The Royals didn’t give up anything of value. Strahm is terrible, Wood was already released and Ruiz is a lottery ticket and is blocked at his position by Luis Urias.
The only lost cause is apparently you bud…because:
1) you don’t seem to comprehend that Galvis potentially has a chance to stay beyond 2018…whether you believe me or not…but you don’t have to take my word for it:
“It’s a team that sees me with different eyes and really believes in the work I do,” said Galvis, who is playing on a one-year, $6.85 million deal. “There’s some guys who have known me since I was 16 years old, so they know pretty much everything about me. So if they try to give me an opportunity, for sure I will listen.”
Maybe it won’t happen, but it is certainly among the scenarios that the Padres’ brass continues to mull.
“We were open-minded when we made the acquisition,” General Manager A.J. Preller said. “He’s got one year of club control. We were open at the time to see where it took us down the road. At 28 years old, he’s a guy who fits in short-term and potentially long-term. That’s what this year will be about.”
((( Now where’s your straight from the horses mouth quote that they are adamantly opposed to re-signing Galvis? )))
2) see point one
3) I’ve already stated why the Padres acquired Galvis…to fill that huge black hole that has been since the Khalil Greene days (well over a decade now.)
4) To me a good team uses both analytics and the non-quantifiables equally the same…see your own point two for valid reasons why Galvis still has a solid role for this young growing team. Btw, Galvis is not same ancient one-year stop gap…he’s still relatively young himself.
5) De Los Santos is currently a hot prospect…but there’s no guarantee he turns out to be a Corey Kluber any more then Joe Ross. Bottom line is…De los Santos was the means to fill a huge hole (and even though you can’t comprehend…possibly for more then just for 2018.)
Again…you keep saying what the Royals gave up…while acting like the Padres gave them something major in return…which they really didn’t. Whether the young hitter is blocked by Urias or not…why does it hurt to have more decent options (if they pan out that way) down the pipeline again???
How many times did your mom drop you on the head?
1. I never said they were opposed to keeping Galvis. But he also had a chance to sign with the Padres even if they hadn’t traded for him. Exact same outcome, except one lets the Padres keep De Los Santos.
2. See point one.
3. It doesn’t fill that hole because the Padres aren’t contending in 2018 and then they are back in the same position as before. See point one before you say “But they can re-sign him!”
4. All the more reason why they should have just waited a year to sign him. I never said that Galvis can’t fill a role on the team, just that he only has value doing that if the Padres get him for several years which they didn’t.
5. Yes he is a hot prospect. And the Padres could have had him AND Galvis. Instead, they just have Galvis. If he ends up being another Joe Ross the Padres break even from that trade because Galvis in 2018 has no benefit for them. The Padres signing Galvis won’t change that because they would have been able to sign him without trading for him.
No, the Padres didn’t give up anything major in that trade with the Royals. But the Royals didn’t either. I’ll need to see someone trade Preller an impact player or prospect before I believe that other GM’s trust him enough to deal with him.
Do not comment again unless you are prepared to address the issue you keep conveniently ignoring that trading for Galvis wasn’t a prerequisite for signing him. Once again, Freddy Galvis and his career 77 OPS+ were never going to be a hard sign, regardless of who he played out his last year of arbitration for.
And once again, the Phillies had to trade Galvis and the Padres were the only team interested in him. And yet Preller still had to give up a good prospect to get him. Maybe if he hadn’t deceived the other GM’s he wouldn’t have to overpay to get what he wants.
Dude, it’s very hard to comprehend you when you talk from both sides of your mouth…
1) You never said they were opposed to the Padres re-signing Galvis…yet you seem to have your mind pretty made about him not being with them beyond 2018…
“What will happen to that stability after the season when he is gone?”
“Galvis only solidifies the shortstop position for 2018…”
“…then after this season Galvis will be gone and they will be in the exact same position as before and the Padres infield defense and pitchers will go back to sucking…”
“One year from now the Padres’ situation at SS will be right back to where it was before and those pitchers will just lose all their confidence.”
“Once Galvis leaves after 2018, they will lose that stability. The defense and, consequently, the pitching, will regress”
(((None of your comments sound like the Padres have any inkling of even the slightest chance of them trying to keep Galvis.)))
3) Freddy Galvis doesn’t have to be on a contending team to still mean something to the current re-building Padres…you can throw out all the analytics you want…by your own words…Galvis still offers:
“Once Galvis leaves after 2018, they will lose that stability. The defense and, consequently, the pitching, will regress.”
“Galvis will be gone and they will be in the exact same position as before and the Padres infield defense and pitchers will go back to sucking…”
4) Well when you’re convinced that the player is already all but out the door…all you see is a one year deal…when it’s been mentioned many times already on the possibility of it possibly being beyond 2018.
5) To me, AJ Preller seemingly saw a stable young pitchers coming up coupled with major defensive issues on his team and sought to do something about as his influx of young arms started coming in. Building a solid defensive up the middle is always a good start (CF was already covered)…and as I’ve said before with the SS being a major detriment to the team and it’s pitching…Preller valued guys like Galvis (worth trading for by the team by him and his brass) and signing Hosmer as people who would help as the influx started. The Padres hope Tatis and Urias turn out to be special MLB players…but Padres history unfortunately doesn’t have many Tony Gwynn’s or anybody close to his caliber to brag about and much more Sean Burroughs…so sometimes trading for known commodities is worth doing (doesn’t hurt to have solid to decent backup options.)
God this is embarrassing…
I never said they can’t extend or re-sign Galvis you moron! What I said was, if the goal was to have him for the long haul, Preller should have either a) made the trade contingent on an extension or b) waited a year, made a play for him in free agency and kept De Los Santos. Galvis as a one year rental has no value to the Padres.
Galvis only offers these things while he is with the Padres. They don’t stay after he leaves which is after the 2018 season. Again, saying “They can still re-sign him” isn’t an excuse because they didn’t have to trade for him to do that.
Preller didn’t do anything to fix the defense because Galvis will just have to be replaced after 2018. Again, don’t say they can re-sign him because they didn’t have to trade for him to do that.
You keep saying “They can still extend or re-sign Galvis” even though I have proven time and time again that they could have done that without trading for him. Why have just Galvis when you could have Galvis and De Los Santos!? Do you have some kind of mental deficiency that keeps you from seeing that? Serious question.
Your pretty full of yourself, arent you? Fact is you are trying to spin what you’ve stated on the multiple quotes…that Galvis has no chance or returning. Preller felt compelled to act on addressing the SS issue now rather then later whether the Padres were contenders or not. Doesn’t really matter if you believe he shouldn’t have gave up a prospect to make it happen…he and the brass collectively did what they had to do to make his roster solidified the way he saw fit for now and the future. Novel concept…some teams actually use their prospects to make upgrades…must be foreign to ya.
Btw…yesterday’s trade makes 6 different GMs who aren’t reluctant to trade with preller…but when you live in fantasyland like you do…you’re not too keen to what’s actually happening vs what you want to really believe, are you genius?
Mental note for ya…please just get over yourself.
Nope. Never said Galvis has no chance of returning. Whether or not he does return doesn’t matter because when you trade for a guy, you are trading for the amount of control he comes with. If you aren’t OK with him leaving after one year, you either make the trade contingent on an extension or don’t make it period. Galvis leaving after 1 year was not an acceptable outcome so Preller should have done one of the things I mentioned and he didn’t. Smart GM’s don’t trade prospects to make the team slightly less bad during a rebuilding year but I guess you have your head too far up your as to realize this. The Galvis trade doesn’t solidify the roster for the future because they didn’t get an extension along with the trade. Whether you want to admit it or not, trading for Galvis does not have the future in mind.
Well, the Hughes trade isn’t much of a trade. Barely one step up from a waiver claim. We’ll need to see him trade for actual impact players/prospects before we can say other GM’s aren’t reluctant to trade with Preller.
You still fail to address the fact that trading for Galvis wasn’t a prerequisite for signing him.
You fail to see that there are no guarantees that Galvis would’ve signed with the Padres next off-season…unless you’ve got some crystal ball that foretells the exact future…your assuming he would’ve landed in SD. Whether you want to again assume that SD would’ve made him a higher priority over another team…it’s still all assumptions and not facts.
Preller saw fit to address the SS this year…and I’ve already given you his quote straight from the horses mouth…thats he’s already had open discussions about a possible reunion for Galvis. You, on the other hand, have not provided anything factual against that point at all…other then your own assumptions and conjecture that your basically gauranteeing he would’ve been here next offseason anyways. Facts vs assumptions…so honestly now, who’s really got their head up their ( ! )?
You’re a special kind of stupid aren’t you? I never said that there are any guarantees that Galvis would have signed with the Padres in the offseason. But guess what? Trading for him doesn’t change that!
There was no reason to address shortstop for this year unless it also addresses it for the long-haul. If Preller really wanted a glove-first veteran on a one-year deal to play shortstop for the Padres in 2018, Alcides Escobar was available in free agency. He is
making less money than Galvis and wouldn’t have cost a prospect. Preller also had discussions about a possible reunion with Justin Upton 3 years ago. We all know how that turned out!
That’s the pot calling the kettle black on you saying I haven’t provided anything factual. But just for fun, here are a couple of facts for you.
1. The Padres are still rebuilding.
2. Rebuilding teams don’t trade prospects for rentals. They do the other way around.
3. Freddy Galvis entered this season with a lifetime 77 OPS+.
4. Signing a player in free agency with a lifetime 77 OPS+ is not going to be prohibitive, regardless of who he plays out his last year of club control for.
5. Many people regard Preller as a laughingstock. And it was that way before the Galvis trade.
You really should just shut up bro. This entire thread was just a disaster for you. You’re playing checkers and I’m playing chess. So checkmate BVTCH!
It’s game over when the other player bows out, ya jack ( ! )…if you can get your head thats so firmly planted up in it out…you might be able to follow, capt. oblivious.
Everything you’ve said is basically just rehashing your continued hot air…only now your showing desperation. Your hatred of preller’s leadership only depicts envy that you don’t have his job…because apparently you know how to run a team so well from the couch.
Listen mullethead, if you want to actually show AJ Preller up…then try to land one of the other 29 jobs and prove that your system works much better then his…otherwise all your tired rhetoric and assumptions mean bo-didly squat.
1) we both already knew that…
2) stated opinion from couch gm…aka “i sure wish i had preller’s job” (that being yourself)..
3) what’s sad is that galvis stats still trumps any the hacks that have manned the Padres SS position for probably a good decade..
4) see point 3…galvis is still the best SS the padres has ever had the past decade…
5) once again…opinion from couch gm aka the “wanna be preller” (yourself)…
Maybe preller didn’t want to keep going for the old stop gap ss on a one year deal because he’s already tried the Escobar route a couple times already…so he went for the younger and possibly worth re-signing route…ever think of that, genius?
Comparing justin Upton when it was a lineup comprised of mainly veterans and the padres were at much different stage of rebuilding process…to galvis & current youth movement by way of influx of young pitchers and of’ers coming up the ranks??? That’s why your an armchair gm and a wanna-be real thing, hunh mullethead?
LOL now you are busting out the “If you were really as smart as Preller you’d have a GM job” refrain. Cuz apparently every GM ever knew what he was doing (*cough* Dave Stewart *cough*). My God, you are like a living conglomeration of all the debunked arguments people make to try and defend the Galvis trade.
I’m not assuming anything. It’s all facts backed up by precedent.
1. You clearly don’t because you are defending trading a good prospect for a rental player.
2. Nope. It’s a fact. Name one time a rebuilding team traded a legitimate prospect for a rental.
3. And he only does that for one year when the Padres aren’t contending.
4. See point 3.
5. Not just me. Opinion held by a lot of people. Some who actually work for MLB.
The only reason to do that is if it either doesn’t cost prospects (which it did) or if the team is contending NOW (which they aren’t). Galvis would still be worth signing even if they hadn’t traded for him. Ever think of that, genius?
Comparing Justin Upton to Galvis because Preller also “had discussions about a reunion” with him. Means absolutely nothing. And trading for him is not going to be the difference between him signing with the Padres and signing with someone else.
CHECK. MATE.
Spoken like the true armchair GM that you truly are. If you left fantasyland, then maybe you would truly be able to see that you’re mainly a great deal of fluff, hot air, assumptions, and double-talk who we know is so jaded by his hatred of Preller that you just can’t partake in reality. Just embrace your hatred of Preller and co…maybe then you wouldn’t have to constantly backpedal on what you’ve already clearly stated and assumed…
Maybe you don’t realize what assume means…so here ya go…
assume: to believe that something is true, even though you have no proof
Examples of your assumptions and non-facts have already been given previously about how you’re all but assured that Galvis has pretty much no chance of returning and is only here on a 1 year deal…but here’s some more black and white statements straight from your mouth:…
(re: Preller) “Preller’s misdeeds in 2016 will hinder him from making any real trades,”
“A one month suspension during the part of the season where GM’s are the least active is not “paying the price.”
“I’m not saying MLB saw fit to punish him more harshly. What I am saying is that a one-month suspension during a time when GM’s aren’t doing anything is barely a step above not punishing him at all …”
“None of those trades were significant and Preller got fleeced on all of them. If teams are only willing to trade with him if he’s clearly overpaying that doesn’t look too good.”
“Galvis leaving after 1 year was not an acceptable outcome so Preller should have done one of the things I mentioned and he didn’t.”
Again clearly you are jaded by your hatred of Preller and co…and just because he does many things you wish he wouldn’t because it doesn’t align with your “armchair GM ideals”…currently all you offer is nothing but assumptions and non facts about him and the Galvis trade situation.
You’re too full of yourself to see that though aren’t you? Well i’m sorry mullethead, but there’s absolutely no pill to cure your jaded reality of how things “should be run.” I’ll say it again…there’s 29 other jobs you could work up through the ranks to try and put your money where your mouth is…until then, all you currently offer is mostly just jilted backpedaling.
Still all facts and you’d be able to see that if you didn’t have Preller cawk so far down your throat. You are the one who is backpedaling. First you say that the Padres can sign Galvis. Then when I say that they would have been able to do that without trading for him, you accuse me of “assuming that the Padres would be able to get him” when that is what you were doing in the first place! In reality, Galvis isn’t going to be a tough sign if Preller really wants him but he wouldn’t have been a tough sign if the Padres hadn’t traded for him in the first place. Trading for him doesn’t make him signing any more likely and he is worthless to the Padres as a rental. So no matter how you cut it, slice it or dice it, the trade was stupid.
Preller’s misdeeds have hindered him from making trades. Why do you think teams were only offering their 16-20th ranked prospects last summer for Brad Hand, who is probably a top 10 reliever in baseball? Why do you think Preller had to give up a good prospect in De Los Santos for Galvis when the Phillies had to trade him and the Padres were the only ones interested?
Name one trade since the suspension where Preller acquired an impact player or prospect. Your failure to do so in your next comment will be interpreted as “I can’t.”
No, Galvis leaving after 1 year is not an acceptable outcome and Preller really shouldn’t have made that trade unless Galvis signed an extension as part of it.
I am not a Preller hater. What I am is an informed fan. Preller has made some good moves but the bad ones far outweigh the good ones and there are numerous accounts indicating that he has alienated several other GM’s.
Buddy you need to get over yourself and try to learn about the game before making such idiotic comments. You have offered zero proof for any of your claims and keep spouting the same nonsense over and over again. It’s truly amazing how you can make such long comments and say so little of substance.
CHECK. MATE.
Fact: a statement that can be proven with evidence.
If you weren’t bird feeding on your own Johnson…maybe you’d be able to spew some actual facts, ya schmuck.
Now that we’ve got out of the way…let’s go over the main gist of your arguments.
Just because you’re of the belief that something should not have been done…still makes it your opinion and not fact…capt. oblivious. Example: “Trading for him doesn’t make him signing any more likely and he is worthless to the Padres as a rental. So no matter how you cut it, slice it or dice it, the trade was stupid.” To that I’ll repeat…that is your opinion, dingus…not a fact.
Again, it really doesn’t matter if you think Preller and Co. made a bad move for Galvis at the price they paid…because apparently they must’ve felt it solidified their defense (whether it was contending year or not.) I’ve even given you possible reasons why the move was made… Preller and co. maybe felt their pitchers could gain some confidence with stronger defenders up the middle (which has happened and has even been recognized by some veterans) and the fact is SS has known to have been a detriment to the team ever since Preller took over…and or possibly they felt Tatis could end up outgrowing his current position. Those are possible reasons why…you on the other hand, like to basically just bash a move just because it doesn’t align to your beliefs…you voice your rather obvious disapproval over how Preller and co. have conducted their dealings and then spew all the assumptions of how things coulda, shoulda, woulda went down if you were actually the GM instead of the armchair wannabe that you are.
Take your own advise, jerky…and stop spewing idiotic opinions and assumptions just because something doesn’t align with your self-approved beliefs.
Also…re: “First you say that the Padres can sign Galvis. Then when I say that they would have been able to do that without trading for him, you accuse me of “assuming that the Padres would be able to get him” when that is what you were doing in the first place!”
Now you’re just making up stuff…I always prefaced that Galvis had a chance to return to the Padres after the trade , or that it was a possibility, or that Padres and Phillies both lose out on him in FA after this season. Feel free to find a quote of mine where I automatically assume Galvis is back with the Padres. Unlike you…I try to steer away from making broad assumptions….you should really try it some time.
It is a fact you downer! Galvis IS worthless as a rental to a team that isn’t contending and trading for him WON’T make him signing more likely.
I know why the move was made. I’m just saying Preller and Co. got it wrong. Galvis only solidifies the defense and gives the pitchers confidence while they have him. Once he leaves, the defense and pitchers’ confidence will just regress to what it was before Galvis was acquired. They won’t play any better by virtue of previously having had Galvis at SS. Signing him beyond 2018 would only justify the trade if it were a prerequisite for signing him which, again, it wasn’t. And if you weren’t so thick-headed you’d realize this.
Galvis isn’t insurance in case Tatis outgrows SS because he’ll be gone before Tatis is even up.
Ah, so now you backpedal yet again and admit that there is a chance that Galvis signs elsewhere after the 2018 season. And therein lies the problem. The only good reason to trade for Galvis would be to eliminate the risk of him not signing with the Padres by getting an extension as part of the trade, which Preller didn’t do. Therefore, the trade was fxxking stupid.
But mentally challenged individuals such as yourself don’t get this. Not last week, not today and probably not ever. 🙂
Or…
…maybe mentally challenged pompous windbags like yourself refuse to see anything that aligns outside of your jaded beliefs and assumptions. I’ll say it again and will call a spade a spade…you’re a Preller and co. hater…but don’t just be all talk and an armchair wannabe….why not just show him and his round table how’s it really done??? All you have to do is go through somebody’s ranks and be willing to put your money where your ever growing big mouth is. Not very realistic is it? Kind of like your pompous assumptions.
Backpedaling is your game not mine, armchair wannabe…that’s why you couldn’t provide at least one quote that I asked for…unlike you who leaves plenty of assumptions that are easy to quote. But what else am I to expect? Your responses are a lot like im sure your breath…reeks of hot trash…
Once again your comment is about 99% fluff and sarcastically attempting to berate me and 1% actually addressing my comment. The fact that you accuse me of “just rehashing your continued hot air” despite this is again very hypocritical and ironic.
I’ll provide a quote you asked for when you address my earlier questions of why other GM’s were only offering their 16-20th ranked prospects for Hand last summer, why Preller had to give up a good prospect for Galvis when the Phillies had to trade him and there were no other bidders and what will happen to the stability at the shortstop position after Galvis leaves.
Oh and as for that last question, “They can sign him” isn’t an acceptable answer because trading for Galvis wasn’t a prerequisite for signing him.
I saw tonight that Christian Villanueva is still using an interpreter. Stunning, since he has been in MLB for something like 10 years starting with Texas and Chicago. He’d be the first guy I’d trade. He can’t be all that bright.
“In those situations, you’re always trying to put the ball in play and for me, personally, I love hitting in those situations,” Villanueva said through interpreter David Longley. “My teammates did a good job of getting on base and we were able to come through in those important situations.”
mlb.com/padres/news/tyson-ross-ks-9-in-win-against…
Maybe I am missing something, but don’t the Padres already have the best farm system in baseball with at least a dozen guys that will have to be added to the 40 man roster at the end of the season to protect them from the Rule 5 draft with about half those being guys in their top 20 prospects? So why would they trade for more prospects?
Possible chance of adding a top 20 prospect (overall) and or more improvements along the hitting side. Padres got some promising arms…hitters they could use more of to go along with Tatis & Urias…no?
What the Padres have is a glut of outfielders and infielders/utility players and a glut of guys that will be rule 5 eligible.
Not sure how you see the Padres getting a top 20 overall prospect for Ross when they couldn’t get a top 100 prospect for Hand.
Ross should absolutely be traded cuz he’s a pending FA. Hand is controlled for years so he won’t be traded for anything short of a king’s ransom, but I don’t think anyone will do that.
Because trading short term veteran for players with control and upside is exactly what rebuilding teams like the Padres do.
Where do the Padres put a prospect? Unless he is MLB ready, does it make sense to put anyone else in that system? They already may have a dozen guys that are Rule 5 eligible at the end of the season. Why add more prospects? That is not smart and I think their GM is very smart.
Assuming Urias is called up mid-year, they really don’t have that many guys who need to be protected this winter and there’s still plenty of fungible spots at the back of the 40-man right now. I mean, Kennedy and Allen are the two 2015 draft picks you might worry about, I guess you could be unnecessarily worried about losing Gettys from 2014.. But otherwise, that’s about it.
At SS if Tatis can’t stay there, in the outfield, in the rotation or packaged in another trade. You add more prospects because the alternative is to let the guy walk for nothing.
Actually, this winter isn’t the big one for 40-man additions. They should have decent flexibility on that front until after the 2020 season.
Luis Urias, Anderson Espinoza, Chris Paddack and sorta Edward Olivares are the big ones who are Rule 5 eligible.
Urias will be on the 40-man by the end of June, so I wasn’t even thinking about him. Forgot that Paddack was 19 in his draft year, so yes, Espinoza’s first contract was for the 2015 season, so no. Olivares would have to significantly jump his performance this year to have a chance to stick next year.
Espinoza was signed in 2014. He will have to be placed on the 40 this offseason.
Espinoza was part of the 2014 J2 class. Unless the Red Sox oddly chose to do something different with him than every team does with every 16-year-old J2 signee, his first contract was for the 2015 season.
Again some dummies put the padres as mariners….where are they ?
Padres been rebuilding awhile