Why Do Padres Continue To Play Michael Barrett?
As I sat on the trolley tonight, returning from another exercise in interleague frustration, I pondered a question for which I have no answer. Not how the Padres could have prevented another loss, this one a 4-2 downer to the Seattle Mariners. Not what this season might have been had we retained Mike Cameron and Milton Bradley or if we had fewer injuries.
What possible upside is there that is convincing the Padres to continue to pu Michael Barrett out there night after night? Two things we know about Michael. He intimidates no opposing baserunner faster than Cecil Fielder and he can no longer hit anything not named Zambrano.
The eleven year veteran is hitting a paltry .184 with only eight RBI. Nor is he in the process of pulling out of a slump. In the last thirty days, that average is .162. He was an arbitration case and is on a one year contract, so it is not about investment. He is a sub-par defender with a minus arm at best. And although I have not charted recent games nor been in a position to know what came from the bench, it seems to this ex-catcher as though he is no genius at calling a game either.
Meanwhile, Luke Carlin sits the bench. While only five calendar years younger, Carlin is light years away from arbitration. True, he is also hitting poorly, .022 points below even Barrett. However, Carlin is getting his first taste of the majors and has yet to be given a solid stretch in which to make any adjustments. And the fact that he has 7 walks to Barrett’s 8 in in 27 fewer plate appearances shows that at least Carlin can recognize a ball on occasion.
But the most important thing is that Carlin adds something to the team… defense. An arm. Carlin adds an extra dimension in the field and helps blunt the running attack that even pedestrian teams are using against us. He is younger, more enthusiastic and provides something that Barrett clearly cannot.
Michael Barrett is a mistake. He was worth taking a chance on, because we hoped he would sign somewhere and get us a draft pick. But that failed. He is as glaring an error as bringing in Jim Edmonds and nearly as expensive. Sit him down, and let’s see if Luke Carlin can do anything with a little experience. Carlin was hitting .387 at the time of his call up from Portland. The only time we would associate that number with Barrett this year is if we were speculating on the number of attempted throws to second he has dropped during the transfer and seen roll to the umpires feet.






5 Responses to “Why Do Padres Continue To Play Michael Barrett?”
June 29th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
I don’t know about you, but I’m kinda missing Jim Edmonds right now. The guy is hitting over .300 with the Cubs. I don’t think the Padres should’ve signed him for the price that they did, but I also think it’s always a mistake to cut a player with less than 100 ABs because they start off slowly. Edmonds is proving that he can still play, but he’s now proving it for the Cubs
June 29th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
I think Edmonds is benefiting greatly from familiar surroundings but it is hard to argue that he might have deserved more time as a Padre. However, in the case that we are currently facing… which is to say, assuming that the focus is beyond this year… what would Edmonds offer us? Gerut may at least have a future here.
Regardless, I was one of those who thought Jim was worth the risk at the time. I would have loved to see him succeed as a Friar.
July 8th, 2008 at 9:38 am
Luke Carlin is a gigilo.
July 11th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Tint, why would he be? He already has a dream job: who needs two?
July 24th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
[…] Link to the original site […]
Leave a comment