http://www.nbcsandiego.com/spo.....etail.html

Incidentally, my rant is turning into more of a detailed textual analysis…

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Maybe after we win the World Series two of the next three years, we’ll have the money to re-sign Peavy and to sign Miguel Cabrera too.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Laz is a long time sports guy in town, probably the most respected and well known in San Diego…. anyways, I am the producer of our Sportswrap show on Sunday nights (and a Ducksnorts fan) and I am writing this from work.. I just thought Geoff in particular would like to her Laz’s comments. I’ll post his comments tomorrow, as requested.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

I think it’s OK for you to “plug my show” … we know it’s “about the money”

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Unless Jake is traded before his contract is up, I don’t see it as anyone else’s fault than his own if he won’t be a Padre after ‘09. He’s the one that signs on the dotted line. It’s ultimately his decision if he wants to have a “fair” $100 million contract, or a reasonable contract from a small market franchise.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Part of my point here is that players aren’t always good judges of a teams ability to win a WS … and there are several cases of players saying “it’s about winning, not about the money” when it sure seemed to me to “about the money”.

If you don’t stay with a team, then it sure seems likely it’s “about the money”. For Tony & Cal, it might not have been “about the money”. For most players, it’s “about the money”, and I respect that. And I sometimes respect an attitude that says “it’s about winning” … but it sure seems to me that the Padres have done some winning during Jake’s tenure with the Padres … and it seems reasonable to me that he could lead the Padres to a WS title given the Ownership and FO that’s in place. But I also agree that the facts make it clear that they are and will continue to be a lower-then-average-payroll franchise … and that that has to make it harder to win a WS … but I think Alex Rodriquez’ and Barry Bonds’ and Barry Zito’s and Vlad Guerrero’s experience makes it similarly clear that a premier player has a hard time predicting the franchise that he can lead to a WS championship!

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

After this season, you approach Jake and his agent and you tell him “Look, we want you to be a Padre for a long time, but if you want Zambrano money, it’s not gonna happen. That said, lets see if we can work out a mutually beneficial deal by February 1st. If we can’t work out something by then, we’ll table discussions and see where the world takes us.”

I think the Padres could reasonably offer 5 year/75 million at this point. You buy out 2008 and 2009 and add Peavy through 2012. Maybe even a club option for 2013.

I also think that the Padres need to make this as pbulic as possible, so they don’t get burned. They can say that they tried to make a fair offer to Jake, and if he turns it down, he turns it down. If he really means what he says about wanting to stay a Padre, then they can work something out with him.

The reason I say the February deadline is because of something I heard on the post game show today. Kenterra brought up the great point that dealing Jake after this season would net you a huge return (you’d be trading him after one of his best years and he would be under control for 2 years). If you wait until the end of 2008 to trade him, you risk him having an unmemorable 2008 and 1 less year of control.

I love Jake and I want him to stay, but it’s the San Diego Padres, not the San Diego Jake Peavys. Ultimately, this team has to do what’s best for them in the long run. Although I would miss having Jake around next year, if we dealt him to the Yanks for something like Cano/Matsui/and other awesome prospects (hell, maybe even Hughes), I think you’ve got to listen. It’s pessimistic to think about dealing him now, but if Jake makes it clear that he wants Zambrano money, then you might as well get something for him while you can.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

He does sort of use that analysis as an argument against wanting to compete for a WS title, but that’s just in his perspective. Perhaps in his mind, he thinks “if they don’t want to pay me a market-value contract, then they don’t want to win.” That can mean win at that time (after 2009). With the recent success of the team, it is a bit odd to bring this up now, especially at 2 years away from free agency. However, I am sure this is just the media asking Peavy’s thoughts on the Zambrano deal. I’m sure since the deal was announced, Peavy has probably asked himself, “Would the Padres really do something like that for me?”

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Frankly I think that the average fan is not going to blame Peavy if he leaves for a huge contract someone else. The average fan has been wanting the team to spend money in search of the Big Bat (TM) for two off seasons, and if the team doesn’t spend the cash to keep one the best players to ever wear the uniform (homegrown even), it’s just going to be more evidence to the average fan that Moores is only interested in pocketing the cash and not serious about spending the money needed to field a winning ballclub.

All I would want is for the Padres to make a serious competitive offer when the time comes. If Peavy leaves then, I will wish him luck, but will be disappointed. If the Padres were not to make a serious offer, how can I be upset at him if he leaves? The Padres would have no one to blame but themselves.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)