Baseball Musings
Baseball Musings
January 29, 2006
Piazza a Padre

Mike Piazza heads back to California, and it looks like he'll be the Padres first string catcher:

"The Padres told Mike that he could pretty much catch as much as he wanted to," said Piazza's agent, Dan Lozano.

Piazza is hoping to catch about 90-100 games this season, along with playing some first base and being the DH in interleague games.

The one thing that hasn't disappeared from Piazza's game is his power, and he's going to a ballpark that will cut down on his long balls. I just don't see where it makes much sense for Piazza or the Padres. With PETCO being a low run field, defense becomes very important. I don't believe Mike will be a positive contributor defensively, and in that environment, I'm not sure how much he can contribute offensively.

It's just $2 million however, so I guess it's worth the risk that he has one more great season in him.


Posted by David Pinto at 08:45 PM | Free Agents | TrackBack (3)
Comments

I'm shocked the Angels didn't sign Piazza.

Posted by: Jabes at January 29, 2006 10:18 PM

i liked this guy's idea... get doug mirabelli back to boston for david wells

http://hiretreyandjon.blogspot.com/

Posted by: randy scrambling at January 29, 2006 10:28 PM

Yeah, um, a Mirabelli/Wells trade is just not going to happen. The Sox already have two backup catchers on the line, even if one of them is, ugh, Paul Flaherty.

Posted by: Hunter at January 29, 2006 10:38 PM

Right handed power hitters fare better in Petco than lefties, and Klesko and Giles can tell you all about it. Nevin wasn't much of a pull hitter, and that hurt him there, too. But if Piazza can hit for power to left, as he has in the past, he might be able to help the Padres power-wise. Don't trade the other catchers, they'll get plenty of time back there, but Piazza will help some. I like the move.

Posted by: mike at January 29, 2006 10:49 PM

i guess i don't quite follow your thinking, david. i get the part about PETCO being a low-run environment, making defense important. but are you saying that power is therefore not as important? if so, why? couldn't one argue that the fact that PETCO suppresses power mean that the padres should get as much as they can? am i missing something?

Posted by: amos at January 29, 2006 10:58 PM

wow!!! shocker, pisses the dodgers off.

Posted by: Colin at January 29, 2006 11:44 PM

I'm a Padres fan, and I don't get it. I like Piazza enough, but his defense is just not good, and now the Loretta-Mirabelli trade looks stranger and more useless than ever - why would you trade one of the better offensive 2B in the game for a guy who is going to be a backup? I don't get it. And I don't have any idea who the Padres are going to play at 2B this year, either...

Posted by: david at January 29, 2006 11:49 PM

its a weird year all around, I am a Dodger fan and I hate thinking of piazza in padre gear.

Piazza could have waited a little longer couldn't he?
I know this past year was a catching merry go round with catchers.

I thought the twins wanted him.
and what happened to bengie molina?
I can't believe David Ross/paul lo duca have jobs and Molina is still waiting

Posted by: raul at January 30, 2006 12:05 AM

I hope now the padres can somehow package klesko, mirabelli, and woody williams for david wells and parts.

I thinking the padres made this move to piss off the dodgers. we seem to get all the junk left over from the mid to late ninetees with pedro astesio, chan ho park, piazaa?

Posted by: Colin at January 30, 2006 12:10 AM

I think Piazza will do fine playing 90 games at catcher/1st, he probaly has move left in his tank than sosa, thomas, or ralphy. finally giles can get some protection.

Posted by: Colin at January 30, 2006 12:29 AM

Colin,
Agreed that Piazza seems to have more left than those three guys. (Although that's not a lot of endorsement...) But still, Perhaps at 90 games Piazza will do okay...I am guessing 270/15 HRs and 50 RBis - with Mirabelli at 260/10/40, which makes for a pretty good starting catcher, offensively.

As far as the Pads packaging Mirabelli, et. al. for Wells, why? The Pads have six starters right now (Peavy, Young, Williams, Estes, Stauffer, Hensley) plus a bunch of other candidates (and the 14 million dollar albatross that is Chan Ho Park), so why deal for a guy who, in the very best-case scenario, might make 20 starts this year?

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 12:39 AM

The Angels never considered Piazza. It was
just various pundits who threw it around--west coast,
American Lg. DH, etc. He's not the type for the Angels
in any way.

Posted by: susan mullen at January 30, 2006 12:46 AM

i think hensley might be a better relief pitcher in games i saw at petco. this team might even win 90 games this year even with the dodgers adding more depth. for $2M he will put butts in the seats.
and with the catchers we do have it will be a big plus since last year we had had much of any offense from 3rd or catcher.
this team is getting older through but most of these contracts are 1 and 2 year deals not to shabby for kevin towers.
we just need dave roberts or whoever the leadoff guy is to stay healthy

Posted by: Colin at January 30, 2006 12:53 AM

Amos,

In a low power, low run environment, a team is more likely to play close, low scoring games (at least that's the hypothesis). Having a team that is good at getting on base and moving around the bases (little ball, if you will) becomes more important. You want an offense like the Cardinals had in the 1980s.

At this point, Piazza isn't getting on base very well. His poor catching ability will cost the Padres runs the other way. Did you see how he couldn't move if Pedro threw a pitch out of the strikezone last year? I saw one game where Pedro was charged with two wild pitches where most catchers would have the agility to move to the right and catch the pitches.

Right now, Piazza brings poor defense behind the plate and a low OBA to the Padres. In my opinion, those are the two things the Padres need the most from any player.

Posted by: David Pinto at January 30, 2006 07:05 AM

The Padres are in a holding pattern until George Kottaras is ready.

The Piazza signing doesn't change that scenario.

And Piazza will far and away outhit any of the other Padre catchers this year.

Posted by: Rotomusings at January 30, 2006 07:34 AM

The Red Sox's "Paul Flaherty." Is he any relation to John Flaherty?

Posted by: Wooden U. Lykteneau at January 30, 2006 08:11 AM

Right handed power hitters fare better in Petco than lefties

That's incorrect. PETCO had a HR index of 66 last season, but when you break it down, its RHB-HR index was 51. Righties hit WORSE in PETCO for power than lefties do.

Posted by: Benjamin Kabak at January 30, 2006 10:12 AM

Some observations on Mirabelli, Piazza and Loretta.

In a comment above, David called Loretta one of the better offensive 2B in the game. Unfortunately thats just not true, other than his 2 fluke years. Last year, he was 24th out of 27 2B with 400+ PA.

Before you say he was hurt and it was a bad year for him, look at how his other years would rank. Loretta has 10 team-seasons with 150+ AB. To make the top third of 2B would take an 808 OPS. Of his 10 team-seasons, he has bested that mark twice in his career, his two fluke years. He would make the top half of all 2B just one other time in his entire career, way back in 98. His median OPS for a team-season is 743, only slightly better than last year. If you increase his Slf% to Petco, last year was very close to a career median year (but not mean because of the fluke stretch). Its what he is most likely to put up any year.

If last year represented what Piazza can do now, he makes a nice backup to Mirabelli. He may slightly outhit Mirabelli (Piazza had a 268 EqA last year, Mirabelli a 263 career, 299,259 the last two years). Pecota projects Piazza as 259, Mirabelli as 256 this year. But the difference in throwing arm dwarfs the likely difference in offense. And Piazza does not bring notably more power to the table. Last year he hit a HR in 4.8% of his ABs. To get a comparable number of ABs, I look at the last two years of Mirabelli, where he has a HR 5.1% of his ABs. Adjust for Park and the numbers probably swap, but they are in the same vicinity anyway you look at it.

If Mirabelli starts at catcher and has a slightly above average year, he could be a legitimate allstar for the NL this year. People assume that he is not very good because he has been a backup during his peak years. But he was backing up Rodriguez and then Varitek, two of the best catchers in baseball. Both easily better (at the time) than any catcher in the NL this year.

Posted by: Craig A. Damon at January 30, 2006 10:52 AM

Hmmm, interesting about Loretta. I don't have his stats right now in front of me, but am I right in thinking he was pretty much a backup his entire career before getting to San Diego, and his one healthy year (04) that he was a fulltime starter, in a pitchers park, he batted 335/400/500, with about 65 xbh? I didn't mean to imply he was the best, or close to it, but in a league where guys like Luis Castillo and Neifi Perez are starting 2b (and fernando vina and tony womack and Kaz Matsui, etc. etc.), I would rank Loretta in the top half, until he proves that 2004 was just a fluke. We'll see, I suppose. But thanks for the numbers.

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 11:08 AM

And on the subject of the Padres, I don't think it's unrealistic for them to improve this year. I think signing Piazza is a good move - at the least they'll get a lot more production from their backup catcher than they would have from Olivo/Ojeda/Fick last year. But San Diego's bench is weaker than last year without Jackson, Fick, Sweeney and Nady. Young will probably be better than Eaton - his numbers were better last year and he pitched in the AL's version of Coors Field. Piazza's arm will hurt the team a bit, for sure, although there aren't a lot of running teams left, especially not in the NL West.
San Diego is kind of in a holding pattern until next year, when they can get Park and Klesko and the 25 million dollars they cost off the books.
And honestly, can anyone think of a worse signing than Chan Ho Park's 5 year, 60 million dollar deal? Even at the time it didn't make sense.

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 11:13 AM

This is an easy signing to defend. One of the easiest. 2M changes the catching situation from Mirabelli and 300 at-bats from some suck-ass to Piazza and Mirabelli. Piazza's just a better-than-average-hitting catcher these days, but 2M is cheap for the upgrade from Todd Greene and David Ross.

Piazza's played a lot of games in Dodger Stadium and Shea. Petco's a tougher HR park, but his power won't be diminished that much.

The option is a joke. This is a one-year deal.

Posted by: Thomas Waits at January 30, 2006 12:33 PM

looking at the lineup the padres have a different player at every position. and upgrades at each one. glad to see eaton, nady, loretta, and fick gone.
the padres finally got it right by getting a gold glove at center. and moving roberts to left. i want to see if bartfield takes over in spring training or if he spilits with bellhorn. castilla/bellhorn is better than sean burroghs or randa.

Posted by: Colin at January 30, 2006 12:38 PM

I would mostly agree, although I liked Loretta - I suppose I would like to know who is going to replace him. Fick was a good bench guy, overextended as a starter anywhere. I'm not sold on Roberts' ability to stay healthy at all anymore, whuch is why I wish Nady were still around.
I haven't ever been much of a Vinny Castilla fan - he's a good defensive player but old and pretty one-dimensional as a hitter. Bellhorn is a better offensive player but I'm not sure how good he is defensively at third - I would guess not very.
I think if San Diego stays healthy and Castilla at least hits like Joe Randa, they'll be in good shape. Worst case scenario is that Castilla hits like he did with the Devil Rays, nobody takes over at 2nd and Roberts gets hurt. Because San Diego doesn't have any bench players that can fill in at any of those positions adequately.

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 01:07 PM

Actually, the Padres have left fielders. Sledge would be better than Roberts anyway, Ben Johnson could fill in adequately.

2b and 3b, those are thin. 3b especially.

Posted by: Thomas Waits at January 30, 2006 01:12 PM

Addressing a few of comments:

  1. The Padres have Josh Barfield ticketed for 2B this year, but have veterans Mark Bellhorn and Eric Young around as insurance. They should easily be able to surpass the .675 OPS they got from their 2Bs last year.

  2. There is no way that there will be any trade with the Red Sox that involves Woody Williams. The Sox already have 7 potential starters and a well-stocked bullpen - they're not going to take back a pitcher in exchange for Wells.

  3. The Padres bench should be fine this year, with a healthy Eric Young, Bellhorn/Hill, Adrian Gonzalez and maybe Ben Johnson. FYI - pinch hitters for the Padres last year only managed a .659 OPS.

  4. Piazza's poor throwing should be less of an issue in the NL West, where the Giants, DBacks, Rockies and Dodgers ranked 11th, 12th, 14th and 15th in SBs last year. For $2M, this is a fairly low risk/potentially high reward deal.

Posted by: BosoxBob at January 30, 2006 01:34 PM

It's rare that a 37-year-old catcher who has caught more than 100 games once in the past three years is high reward. There's nothing to suggest Piazza will improve on his .326 OBP and .452 SLG in PETCO playing in a weaker lineup with Vinny Castilla behind him as "protection."

Posted by: Benjamin Kabak at January 30, 2006 01:38 PM

" 1. The Padres have Josh Barfield ticketed for 2B this year, but have veterans Mark Bellhorn and Eric Young around as insurance. They should easily be able to surpass the .675 OPS they got from their 2Bs last year."

AGain, Barfield, as good as he may be, is an unknown commodity. Bellhorn, as much as I like the walks and power, just can't be a starting second baseman anymore. And Young is 40 and his best position is left field. And he played 30 games last year.

"2. There is no way that there will be any trade with the Red Sox that involves Woody Williams. The Sox already have 7 potential starters and a well-stocked bullpen - they're not going to take back a pitcher in exchange for Wells."

Agreed. And SD doesn't need Wells. Estes will be about as good as WElls this year.

"3. The Padres bench should be fine this year, with a healthy Eric Young, Bellhorn/Hill, Adrian Gonzalez and maybe Ben Johnson. FYI - pinch hitters for the Padres last year only managed a .659 OPS."

That stat is a bit misleading - are you counting pinch-hit ABs only or ABs by subs? I forgot about Ben Johnson, who looked impressive last year. But I don't think the bench is a good place for him in his rookie season. Gonzalez seems to be limited to 1B/Left Field, and he couldn't hit in Texas, which has to give one pause.

" 4. Piazza's poor throwing should be less of an issue in the NL West, where the Giants, DBacks, Rockies and Dodgers ranked 11th, 12th, 14th and 15th in SBs last year. For $2M, this is a fairly low risk/potentially high reward deal."

Agreed. Piazza's OBP was about the same as Hernandez's last year, and, in today's economics, 2 million dollars is nothing. It's about what you'd pay for a veteran utility guy or backup catcher.

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 01:50 PM

Benjamin Kabak,

You are the only one who seems to know what he's talking about.

All you other dudes are without any sense of logic nor memory.

Posted by: Gabriel at January 30, 2006 02:05 PM

Estes be about as good as Wells this year? That's crazy talk.

Wells: 24.1 VORP in 2005.
Estes: 7.0.

Wells is old, but he's thrown more innings recently than Estes. The Padres desperately need another starter.

Posted by: Tom Waits at January 30, 2006 02:06 PM

Piazza may not be high reward, but he's still Josh Gibson compared to Ross and Greene. He can easily replicate what Ramon Hernandez did last season: 322/450. The relative improvement from the catchers the Padres would have used "before" the signing to Piazza is significant. That's worth 2 million dollars.

Is the idea of lineup protection still bouncing around?

Posted by: Tom Waits at January 30, 2006 02:11 PM

Last year scoring runs was tough the bullpen carried this team kicking and screaming into the playoffs, hopefully more runs and more homers. plus the fences are moving in right field or death valley as I call it.


too many piazza haters out there.


ramon hernandez is a wuss

Posted by: Colin at January 30, 2006 02:46 PM

"Wells: 24.1 VORP in 2005.
Estes: 7.0.

Wells is old, but he's thrown more innings recently than Estes. The Padres desperately need another starter. "

Hmmm, hadn't looked at the numbers. Agreed that Wells was better. But he's older and way the hell out of shape. The Padres could use another starter, but not Wells, at this point. He's just not going to provide anything more than 20 starts. And he's too expensive - not in terms of his contract, but I think the Padres would have to give up a prospect or somebody like Scott Linebrink to get him.

I hadn't realized how badly Estes pitched, although Aizona (and Colorado) are bad places to pitch. But still....damn.

I think the Dodgers are obvioously the favorites, considering everything they've added. But LA has a strange tendency to underperform their expectations. SAn Diego is not significantly better, but certainly not worse than before. They've upgraded offensively at Catcher, centerfield and maybe third base (not because Castilla is any good, but because Burroghs was so terrible last year that anyone would be better). Their starters, if they use Hensley and Stauffer will be younger and better than last year (Eaton's record was good, but his peripherals were not, and his declining K rate is alarming. Lawrence is a mediocre innings-eater, at best.)
This is the Padres right now:
c - Mirabelli/Piazza
1-Klesko/Gonzalez
2-Barfield/Bellhorn
s-Greene
3 - Castilla
lf-Roberts/Johnson
cf-cameron
rf-Giles
sp: Peavy, Young, Williams, Hensley, Stauffer/Estes
Not a 95-win team, but compared to the NL West, competitive. Especially when you consider a third of their payroll is going to two guys (Park and Klesko) who aren't going to play a significant role on the team.

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 02:59 PM

Wells has never been IN shape. He started 30 games last year, 31 in 2004, 30 in 2003. Of course he's a risk, any pitcher is, but the rubber in his arm has shown no sign of hardening.

VORP accounts for ballparks.

The cost to acquire him is key, but to say the Padres don't need him isn't true. They won't move Linebrink. Boston won't take Williams. If there's a middle ground, the Padres would be well served to find it.

I see the Giants as the favorites if Bond plays 100 games.

Posted by: Tom Waits at January 30, 2006 03:07 PM

I would certainly welcome Wells back to the team, but the problem with a pitcher like him is that you never know when he's going to lose it. He gave up 220 hits last year in 184 innings. Both those numbers were worse than 2004. He had a league-average era. He allowed 21 homeruns. Looking back at his last five years, I was surprised he had started 30 games eacj season. Frankly, I assumed he had missed more time with injury. It was basically just his season with the White Sox a few years back that injuries sidelined him.
But having said that, how long can he keep it up? He's 42now, will be 43 soon, he has a bad back and 50 extra pounds.
He went 15-7 with the Bosox last year, but I'm guessing his run support was a lot better than he'll get with San Diego.
The question is, of course, what do you give up to get him? Linebrink is out. The Sox don't want Williams. The Padres farm system is pretty thin, and I certainly wouldn't trade Barfield or Hensley for Wells. The other guys Boston wouldn't want. So I don't see how San Diego could get Wells, unless Towers is delusional enough to think this team is one starting pitcher away from a World Series berth. I think the Padres right now, have a team that can be competitive in a weak division while still establishing young players that can win in the future. And what they need now is more youngsters, not more guys on the wrong side of 35.
Speaking of which, I wouldn't count out the Giants either, but man, they have a lot of old guys on that team - Finley, Vizquel, Durham, Bonds, Alou. It'll be tough to keep them from breaking down. And I just don't trust Schmidt's health anymore.

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 05:23 PM

If Wells doesn't cost you any important young guys, then you get him. They really don't have anything to trade for young pitching without giving up this year. The Giles, Hoffman, Castilla, Cameron, Piazza moves suggest they're not giving up this year.

Wells' HR numbers will go down in Petco, and some of his H might too. The Padre defense will be somewhat better than the Red Sox 2005, mostly in the OF.

The unknown factor is how much stink Wells makes if he's not traded. If he's grumpy in spring training, maybe the Padres get him for a B prospect. I can't see how San Diego could convince them to take Williams.

Posted by: Tom Waits at January 30, 2006 06:08 PM

Yeah, if I was the Red Sox I sure the hell wouldn't want Woody Williams, either. Lokking at the Pads 40-man roster, I don't see anything they would be willing to give up (that has any value) unless the Sox are enamored of, like, Dewon Brazelton or Paul McAnulty (unlikely - Brazelton's a head case and McAnulty is like a poor man's Jeff Conine). My fear is that San Diego goes into panic mode and trades somebody good for one season of who-knows-how-effective David Wells. I'm thinking specifically here of Scott Linebrink, who is probably the Padres most coveted pitcher (he's cheap and effective, and not the closer so teams believe he's available), and I think the Padres are going to be, in this ballpark, a perpetually low-scoring team, which mans their bullpen is always going to need to be strong. And Doug Brocail is no Scott Linebrink.

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 06:25 PM

There's not much chance that the Padres trade Linebrink for Wells. If the Sox insist, the deal probably falls through.

The rotation right now is bad. Peavy, Young, then pick three: Williams, Estes, Park, Baugh, Etherton. Hensley if he has a great spring, Stauffer on the outside. It needs help.

McAnulty might interest the Red Sox, but he's not enough on his own unless Wells threatens to deliberately suck. Good OBP, middlin' power, defensively limited. Could play 1st after Snow retires. Boston surely wants more, but there's not much there.

Don't remind me that we signed Brocail.

Posted by: Tom Waits at January 30, 2006 06:45 PM

Maybe the 2nd time around is the charm? Maybe we can get Bryce Florie and Andres Beruman out of retirement and relive 1998 all over again!

As afr as the Pads rotation, yeah, after Peavy and (hopefully) Young it's average at best, but nobody's rotation is 1-5 strong. And I like Hensley and even Stauffer, who, considering he was thrown into a bad situation last year, pitched better than Chan Ho Park by a mile. Williams is pretty much all washed up. Etherton's not really a viable option unless he discovered a new pitch or something. Don't know anything about Baugh.

I suppose best-case scenario is that Wells just tells the Sox flat-out that he wants out and the Sox take someone like Brazelton or Mac just to be rid of Wells - like the Pacers did with Ron Artest. It would be nice if SD could sneak Klesko in to the deal - hell, Klesko might hit 30 homers in Boston - and then use the money to sign Jeff Weaver.

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 07:19 PM

Great discussion here. I just want to comment about David Wells being out of shape. Don't confuse body type with athletic ability. Wells looks a lot worse than he really is. Sports writers I know who see Wells up close believe he's a great athlete.

Posted by: David Pinto at January 30, 2006 08:15 PM

Interesting you say that, because since I posted it and really thought about it, it's not really fair to consider him out of shape. I mean, John Kruk and Sid Fernandez would never have passed as real athlestes at any point in their careers, while they were terrific baseball players. On the other side of things, Bo Jackson and Michael Jordan, while terrific athletes, were pretty awful baseball players. And I would have to say there's so many more guys who could be on that list of good athlete/bad baseball player - Terrence Long, Vince Coleman, Gabe Kapler, Juan Encarnacion...etc., while there are a lot of non-athlestes who have been good players (Ron Kittle, Kirby Puckett, Gereg Luzinski, David Ortiz) or great ones (Babe Ruth, Tony Gwynn).

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 09:07 PM

wake me up when the season starts. pads baby yeah!!! I maybe guessing here, but when a lefty starts for the opposite team maybe piazza plays first.


I want to see this barfield kid play maybe him and greene for a decade. be nice

Posted by: Colin at January 31, 2006 01:36 AM

There are really several categories: Good body, bad body, good athlete, bad athlete, good ballplayer, bad ballplayer.

Ruth, Gwynn, Puckett, Wells, good athletes, good ballplayers, bad bodies. Gwynn played college basketball and could really run when he was younger. Wells played HS basketball.

Posted by: Tom Waits at January 31, 2006 12:54 PM

I was thumbing thru my old game scorecards and programs that I had in storage for a while. I found Ozzie Smith's autograph on the scoresheet page along with Willie Montanez...1980 season...I was 13...thinking back I remember the game....that was so cool !....The very first game I went to was at Shea Stadium-1975? I remember Tom Seaver vs. Dave Winfield that day...Saturday day game....my cousin started his playing career with the Pods and played there a few years........Padres > I think that logo with the "padre" swinging the bat is cool looking too. good luck this year Pod fans.....enjoy Mike Piazza.....still think the Mets should have signed him for backing up and DH'ing in interleague. He wanted more playing time though.

Posted by: leco at January 31, 2006 05:45 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?