SB Nation User Blog: Phantom

Khalil Happy in New Home

Phantom — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:03:09 -0000

Well I felt obligated to post this, so I did. I saw this little gem in the UT online today and thought it was worth posting here.

A couple things about this article really surprised me, but none more than the fact that I never knew the team stopped paying him outright after the locker incident. I always thought that they filed a grievance after the fact, but it turns out the player's union filed a grievance first so that Khalil would get his money. The team then countered with a grievance to recoup salary.

For whatever reason, the FO just really soured on the guy and I'm glad he's in a new place where I think he'll be given greater degrees of patience than he was here. I also like that LaRussa seems to understand that despite his quiet demeanor, Khalil really cares about the game.

As an FYI, I won't be posting here as often because my job has instituted a new zero-tolerance policy on using the Internet at work. This cuts me to the bone as Gaslamp Ball was often the only thing keeping me sane while I was trapped in front of my computer for 8 hours a day.

I'll do my best to participate in the OTs during the season. There is legitimately nothing better than watching the Padres and cracking jokes about PFOB or seeing what crazy cocaine patterns TTG regales us with next.

Talks for Greene on Ice

Phantom — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:25:30 -0000

Talks for Greene on Ice

While it makes me happy that the team may not trade Khalil this off-season (aside from my man crush, you'd really be selling incredibly low on him), I'm really interested in this alleged person with Padres ties who says that Khalil doesn't fit in. Towers defends Khalil, which is great to see, but I cannot ever remember any of Khalil's teammates ever saying anything bad about him. As far as I know and have heard, his teammates love him and he's allegedly much more engaged outside of the public eye than we ever witness.

Is Sandy Alderson hurting the franchise?

Phantom — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:28:53 -0000

I don't write this lightly. For a long time, I have been a vehement defender of the FO. I have been especially committed to Sandy Alderson's approach of trying to build a winning team by assembling under-rated parts with under-appreciated abilities. But as events have unfolded since about August 2008, I have now come to question whether or not Alderson is hurting the San Diego Padres.

From strictly a baseball perspective, I think the guy has a track record that speaks for itself. He came on in 2005 and the Padres instantly won the West two straight seasons and narrowly missed a third. He's had demonstrable success in Oakland and the Padres enjoyed three of their four best seasons under his watch.

Unfortunately, Alderson is no longer just making baseball decisions. Somehow he's become the face of the FO, and it's his interactions with both the public and the players that have forced me to question Alderson's net impact on the team. Follow me below the fold for the rest of my reasoning.

Since the day he joined the Padres, Sandy Alderson has been a distraction. There were instantly questions from the media and the fans about whether or not Towers was being replaced. Things were especially tenuous in the winter of 2005 when Towers was permitted to interview with the D-Backs, a move many people thought possible only because of Alderson's presence.

And things have never really changed since that first day. While the team has morphed and changed, Alderson has been consistently in the minds of the fans. As many on this site have noted, he's not the best public speaker. He doesn't tolerate idiocy and he's frequently abrasive and guarded during his appearances on public radio. He's made comments in the print media in the past that are enigmatic at best, and are sometimes too pugnacious.

Lest you think that this is solely a reaction to the Hoffman news, here is my litany of concerns about Sandy Alderson. Now, again, I think the guy has a brilliant mind for baseball. But I'm starting to get worried that his ego is having a net negative impact on the long-term health of the San Diego Padres.

The Jake Peavy debacle. Now, believe me, Jake is certainly shouldering his share of blame through all of this. But there does appear to be this underlying conflict between Jake and Sandy that is getting us to this place. I guarantee you that when Jake is traded, he will take the opportunity to take some parting shots, and I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of those comments center on Alderson.
Khalil Greene's tenure as a Padre. Surprisingly, this hasn't really set me off in the past, but Alderson has been campaigning publicly against Greene for some time. There were a lot of whispers about the health of Khalil's family during last winter's contract negotiations, and I guarantee some of that was manufactured by the FO to cover themselves. When Greene refused the four-year offer, I think Alderson probably decided that Khalil would be gone after 2009. The whole locker incident this year and the team publicly trying to recoup money has likely further strained relations between Greene and the team.
Wally Joyner's departure. To be sure, it was a weak move on Wally's part to bail mid-season. Yet, when it happened, many of us speculated that it was due to tension between the FO and Wally. A lot of people have accused the FO of trying to manage the team on the field, and this seemed like another manifestation of that occurrence.
The exit of Bruce Bochy. Again, this wasn't a necessarily bad thing for the Padres (although Bud was miserable last year), but public opinion was that Bochy was sort of run out-of-town by the FO. A lot of people connected this to the notion that Bochy wasn't managing the team per the FO's wishes.
Trevor Hoffman. This is now the second time that relations between the Padres and Hoffman have been strained during FA negotiations. This time, things seem worse, and the decision to completely pull the contract is just baffling. It certainly seems spiteful and a lot of us see Sandy's fingerprints all over the situation.

This is what I was able to come up with on my drive in to work this morning. I'm sure that some of you have other examples, and I invite you to post them below. Again, let me reiterate, I think Alderson is a brilliant baseball man. There's really no debating that. But I think his ego and his personality are starting to become their own narrative, which is not a positive thing for the team.

Even if Alderson is not directly responsible for all of the above situations, the public's perception is that Alderson is involved. It's kind of like the Chargers. Whenever something happens, good or bad, it's seen to be the result of a decision made by AJ Smith. The same thing is starting to happen with the Padres, and I'm starting to be concerned about the long-term viability of the team.

From a marketing/PR perspective, the team is killing themselves right now. If you lose Peavy, Hoffman, Greene, and potentially others, you're not going to draw fans to the ballpark. The City, which is already suspect of the FO, will become further embittered and it will be difficult for the Padres to break 2M fans next year. And this concerns me. I love the San Diego Padres. I want them to be the San Diego Padres for a long time. But if Sandy Alderson continues to be a media narrative unto himself (again, right or wrong, this is what's happening), what does the future hold for our team?

Poll

Is Sandy Alderson having a negative impact on the longterm health of the San Diego Padres?

Yes - He comes off as kind of a dick

38 votes

No - The man is a baseball genius and players should act like professionals.

11 votes

You're over-reacting

4 votes

This is really about Khalil, isn't it?

10 votes

63 votes | Poll has closed

Twins interested in Kouzmanoff

Phantom — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 20:49:29 -0000

Twins interested in Kouzmanoff

MLBTR reports that the Twins want to trade Delmon Young for Kouz. Young's a career 98 OPS+ left-fielder. Presumably this would mean moving Chase to 3rd. Kouz is a 102 OPS+ guy, so this seems like a downgrade on its surface. However, if we end up with a better OF and a better 3B while losing out marginally on offense, I say go for it.

Peavy: I'm not THAT good of a pitcher

Phantom — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 15:48:24 -0000

Peavy: I'm not THAT good of a pitcher

Jake finally admits that he's not God's gift to pitching and threatens to veto a trade to the Braves if it includes Escobar since "'If that kind of trade gets made, who plays short for them?"

What a tool.

Offseason speculation

Phantom — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 15:07:50 -0000

So the UT today has an extremely long article today that is supposedly about our young hitters but is really a primer for the Padres offseason. KT went through most of the lineup and gave his thoughts.

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2008/oct/03/padres-1s5padres21488/?padres

Anyone else find some of these nuggests interesting? Obviously I'm interested in the fact that the team's not really sure what to do about Khalil, but the idea of possibly trading Jody Gerut seems completely stupid to me. Thoughts?

How do we fix the Padres?

Phantom — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:22:01 -0000

I cross-posted this at Ducksnorts this morning, and there's a healthy discussion going on over there. However, I know that our two blog communities think a little differently, and I wanted to get the GLB opinion on this matter.

This is something I’ve been thinking a lot about recently, but how do we make this team better?

Our OF seems to be set. The Headley/Hairston/Gerut/Giles combination seems to be functioning well and all indicators at this juncture point to us keeping Giles next year. Unless someone offers Gerut stupid money, I can’t imagine not keeping that group together for next year.

Our weakest batting positions at this point are SS and C, two spots that are notoriously hard to fill and are notoriously light-hitting. I don’t think anyone would argue that Khalil and Bard aren’t having atrocious seasons, but are these just bad years or are they indicative of their true talent levels (as opposed to their track records as Padres)? But really, outside of these two positions, how do we upgrade the team?

Which brings us to pitching. I really, truly, honestly believe that our bullpen in particular and our pitching staff in general has killed this season for us. I firmly beleive that if our pitching staff were performing more like last year’s iteration that we’d be right in the thick of things.

It’s just interesting how little attention our pitching seems to get from “the experts.” Everyone points to Khalil and our catchers as our problems, but in reality, our pitching has killed us more than anything else.

What do you guys think? How do we fix this team?

Canham's tough season off the field

Phantom — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:46:15 -0000

Canham's tough season off the field

Went to espn.com/mlb today and the splash image was Storm catcher Mitch Canham in a dugout. Interesting read about the human side of baseball and trying to cope with loss.

Open Thread 6/12: Pads v. Dodgers - The Rubber Game

Phantom — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:30:38 -0000

So with both the season and current series tied (4-4) and (2-2) respectively, we go for our 7th win on this homestand.

Unlike previously reported, Martin is starting for the Dodgers. That is unfortunate. Some guy that won some award last year is pitching for us after taking a month off.

And if the powers that be already have one of these up, then I apologize. And yes, this paragraph is designed solely to meet the word limit.

Sports Illustrated - Staffed by Idiots

Phantom — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 17:35:45 -0000

Now I now this is a familiar refrain from me at this point, but Sports Illustrated decided to pile-on and kick the crap out of the Padres for their lack of drafting success over the past 15 years.

Now, a couple of points:

Today, the Padres are among the worst teams in baseball. There are a myriad of reasons why -- their reluctance to sign high-priced free agents, their dependence on bargain-basement veterans, and their blatant disregard for offense, to name a few.

This is so mind-numbingly stupid that I don't know where to begin. Our record sucks, but we're not among the worst teams in baseball. We missed the playoffs by one strike last year and have posted four winning seasons in a row. I understand that he tries to qualify this ass-hattery by saying "today," but then he proceeds to go through and repeat the same stupid crap that the national press constantly gets wrong about our team. We're not against signing high-priced FAs so long as it's not a stupid move. We extended Jake at a very high price. We don't "depend" on bargain-basement veterans. The only such "bargain-basement" guy was Edmonds and he's been cut. Not really fair to call Giles this, as we've had him for a while. "Blatant disregard for offense" is also stupid, as we play in a ridiculous pitchers park and our offense was really not that bad last year (as GY has pointed out multiple times over the past year).

It is not as though the Padres always pick late in the first round, either. In the past 14 years, they have picked first, second, third and fourth. Each of those bonus babies went bust.

This statement is purposefully confusing, as it makes it seem that we've had these low picks fairly recently. Directly before the quote I pasted, the author comments that we've had four hurt pitchers in a row. Again, this is all done as if to suggest that we've wasted four low picks on hurt pitchers. It's dishonest writing, and it's done on purpose to try to futher the author's point.

Our author then profiles these picks. He tries to mea culpa by saying he's from San Diego and thus he KNOWS his Padres, but here's the kind of stupid crap he writes anyway:

Sean Burroughs, third baseman: Drafted ninth out of Wilson High School (Ca.) in 1998, Burroughs was a former star of the Little League World Series. In five major-league seasons, he was a solid singles hitter, but he managed just 11 home runs.

Burroughs was pretty widely considered a hot propsect and many thought he would develop as a pretty damn good third-basemen. Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean the Padres made some egregious error in drafting him.

Khalil Greene, shortstop: Drafted 13th out of Clemson University in 2002, Greene was the third shortstop taken by the Padres in the first round in six years. Finally, they got the right one. Greene won the National League Rookie of the Year Award in 2004, is among the best defensive infielders in baseball, and belted 27 home runs last season.

I love Khalil more than anyone else here, and even I wouldn't try to pretend that he won the NL ROY in 2004. That was actually Jason Bay, Mr. Jenkins. Greeney won the honor from Baseball America, which sadly, does not mean anything.

Matt Bush, shortstop: Drafted first out of Mission Bay High School (Ca.) in 2004, Bush never advanced beyond Class A. He was converted into a pitcher early last season, but he tore a ligament in his elbow and is still recovering from Tommy John surgery.

Bush was considered a top-ten talent, and although we shouldn't have popped him 1st, it's not like this was drafting a 15th round talent with the overall pick. Yes, Bush was a bad choice for number one. But it wasn't as bad as everyone consistently tries to make it out to be. It's not like we decided to go with a hobo on the street for this pick. Bush was profiled as top-ten.

Matt Antonelli, infielder: Drafted 17th out of Wake Forest in 2006, Antonelli advanced quickly through the Padres' system and nearly made the major-league team this spring. Instead, he was sent to Class AAA and batted .180 through April and May.

I think it's pretty weak to imply that Anotnelli's hitting .180 in AAA this year somehow makes him a terrible pick. He was progressing well and has since stalled. How many other 2006 draft picks are struggling in AAA? We don't know, since Jenkins doesn't tell us, but the implication is that Antonelli was not a great pick.

At the end, Jenkins tries to recover and say that despite all of these "horrible" picks, the Padres have been pretty damn good recently. Which begs the question: Why write this article in the first place?

Was there really nothing better to do with your column space, Mr. Jenkins? How about the phenomenal season Adrian Gonzalez is putting together, despite being mired in a weak lineup and playing half of his games in a place that saps power? Or maybe an article on the weird things that have happened to this team this year?

But no. Mr. Jenkins and Sports Illustrated decide to take the easy route and pile-on with an article ripe with dubious logic and outright factual errors. Go SI!