Thursday, November 6, 2008

Rumors

So, is everyone tired of the rumors, or are you hungry for more?

The off-season rumor mill has come out of the blocks with about as much force as Usain Bolt. I think I mentioned this long ago, maybe sometime before the trading deadline, but more than 90% of deals that are discussed never actually happen. Furthermore, many of the potential deals that are written about are never actually discussed.

We had many discussions over the course of the past four days at the GM's meetings, some of which have been productive and even unexpected. At this point, however, there is nothing to report. We continue to look for deals that would shore up our deficiencies, both short-term and long-term, and we've been asked about many of our players. Vague enough? I know, I know, but when there's something of substance to be written, I promise I will.

With that said, enjoy the rumors if it's a fun distraction, but don't take them too seriously... except, of course, the few that prove to be true. :)

19 comments:

fred said...

Paul,

Don't play coy with me. I thought we agreed that won't be tolerated (wasn't it after our third date?).

Can you tell us if Kouzmanoff is getting interest from teams? It seems you need to trade him for a pitcher that could contribute in 2009.

DANIEL said...

Please do not trade Kyle Blanks!!

hector said...

Paul,

Why is the team considering bringing back Giles? Lets go with kids and continue to spend money in Latin America and the draft.
We need athletic players to cover this outfield, and not more of the same... It is easy to fall in love with some of his stats, but spending 9 million on a guy that is not a difference maker, and on a year that the Padres will not be serious contenders is a waste of money. Use the 3 million to buy him out, and use the 6 million in rebuilding the future.
Please.

fwbaseball said...

I love the rumor mill. I't slike Baseball's third season. The rumors and speculating about prospects I'll see are what get me through the winter. :)

Jason @ IIATMS said...

What rumors could you be talking about?

or


Can you separate the truth from the rumors for us?

BSquared said...

I know you cannot comment to this but please don't foreclose a deal with Peavy and the Cardinals. I'm a big Cardinals fan and we truly need that Ace at the top and we have centerfield depth and a couple of young arms which is what the Pops reportedly are looking for.

Paul DePodesta said...

One quick note - in general I'm not going to publish comments that talk about players on other teams. Obviously, you're writing the comments, not me, but I don't want to be responsible for starting rumors...

Padman42 said...

Paul,

I have to agree, as big of a Giles fan as I am, I dont see why the Padres are going to bring him back. I believe that it will still be a year before guys like Kulbacki/Hunter/Huffman are ready (which is why I assumed they would keep Giles for 1 more year), but it seems more and more likely that in whatever deal we get for Peavy we will be getting a OF prospect (who is ready to start in MLB). So if we do get (wont mention names) combined with Gerut (who earned his spot), Giles, and Hairston (who earned a spot but will be fine with a platoon), what do you do with Venable? I guess you can stick him back at AAA, but I dont think that would really help him. Not to mention the fact that between Sinisi, Macias, Huffman, Baxter, and Cooper it will already be a crowded OF in Portland. Just from a financial standpoint I dont see it making much sense.

Also it seems like KT wants to get the trade done ASAP, my guess for that is that way he has time to put the pieces into play, and be able to concentrate on adding other pieces. But IMO if a team like the Yankees dont get CC, they might be more inclined to give up more, which even if the Padres dont trade him to NYY would drive up the price. So I guess I am just wondering why not wait a bit?

Finally speaking of rumors, I have heard rumors that quite a few really good pitchers coming off injury have expressed interest in playing here (since they have appeared on padres.com I dont think its a rumor saying Mulder, Prior, and Clement). I dont know if you can answer this, but thought I would at least ask, if you know if the feeling is mutual on one or all of these pitchers? I know you really cant talk specifics and even if you did say there was some interest from the Padres it doesnt mean they will be Padres. However...I think the burden of losing Peavy will be a lot less if the Padres can have one or all of them in the rotation.

The EveryServer said...

Paul,

That sort of takes all the fun out of it.

Alex said...

hector,

it's been said by many, but Giles was the Padres best player last year by several reports. For example, Chris Dials OPD ratings (offense plus defense)

http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/dialed_in/discussion/final_2008_offense_plus_defense_opd_results/

It has Giles as one of the top 10 most productive players in the NL last year based on offense and defense. Obviously that rating is not the end all be all, but it at least gives you a conceptual idea on how good Giles is. Sure he's old and will probably get worse, but still, it's hard to not bring your best player back for a net cost of 6 million dollars.

JD said...

A general comment about this blog: I was curious about how it would really be insightful for somebody who isn't terribly interested in the Padres organization. What I mean is that I know about the tampering rules, so obviously Paul can't talk specifics about other players. And, in many cases, he won't want to talk specifics about his own player. It's not a good idea to say "Yep, we're going to shop Player X" and when nobody bites on a deal, Player X has to play for the Pads knowing they tried to ship him out of town.

That said, kudos to you Paul for making this an interesting read on a regular basis even if there's no real "dirt." I enjoy reading about the process, and, actually, I'd like more of that. So my question: What are the winter meetings like? How does it work? Can you give a "day in the life" sort of example of what you (or a GM) does at the meetings? Not asking for specifics here.

field39 said...

In the past when the Padres have made deals, the front office was quiet until the deals were done. Now, KT is out there broadcasting his intend to trade certain players. Why the change? Is there anything to be gainded by stating your intend to move certain players? Enquiring minds want to know.

hiddenbeforeyou said...

Wouldn't it be tampering to answer questions about players on other teams anyway? Like if someone said, "Would you be interested in trading Scott Hairston for Derek Jeter?" you would be required to not answer directly, right?

Come to think of it, have you just written about tampering rules before? It's kind of interesting stuff.

Ryan said...

Paul,

A lot was made in the press this week about the impact of the economic downturn on the 2009 season. Specifically, Commissioner Selig's warning at the start of the meeting, and some speculation about the contract values for "middle-market" players.

Can you divulge any thoughts on the subject of economic impact on the game?

hector said...

Alex,

I also think Giles is a good player, but what irritated me was that winning was not his priority.

Now that we know that Peavy will be dealt, it does not make sense for the team to bring him back even at an inexpensive net price. This team is going to reload or rebuild, so lets start from scratch. If they decline to option they will get 2 draft picks because he is a type A free agent.

Alex said...

hector,

I'm pretty sure that's not true, because you only get compensation for players who are offered and refuse to accept arbitration. By declining his option, you would probably not offer him arbitration and if you did, he might be inclined to accept it since he loves SD so much.

Also, just because Jake Peavy is traded, it doesn't necessarily mean the Padres are punting 2009. While I won't name any names, there are some players the Padres could get back that could bring a similar aggregate value to Peavy in terms of production. Obviously the Padres 2009 chances are largely dependent on the rest of this off-season, but I wouldn't say it's a forgone conclusion the Padres can't be above .500 next year if they make the right moves.

Obviously there is a lot that could change with this team and we won't really know just how good or bad this team will project to be until the offseason is done.

hector said...

I would like to know what does the computer say about 2009 when everything is calculated.

2009 is gone already. It is impossible to compete with the dodgers and diamondbacks in 2009, specially without Peavy.

As much as I love the front of the jerseys, I have to be realistic about 2009.

Grif said...

So. . . you can't tell me (a Rangers fan) who wants our catchers?

;)

Schlom said...

Paul,

Is there going to be any long-term effects for Kulbacki's shoulder injury last season? Also, is there a possibility that he could start the season at Portland or is he going to start at San Antonio or maybe even Lake Elsinore again? It seems like you were very conservative with him last season.