Peavy Ties Benes, Bullpen (Barely) Holds On to Beat Mets
Thu, Aug 23, 2007
by Geoff Young
Nice to hang on for the win Wednesday night (box score). Congrats to Jake Peavy for tying Andy Benes’ career mark for strikeouts by a Padres pitcher.
The game wasn’t without its white-knuckle moments, aka the ninth inning. Several folks have noted that the Padres are having difficulty closing out games, and I’m happy (or unhappy, really) to report that it’s not all in your head:
| Player | First Half | Second Half | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IP | ERA | BA | OBP | SLG | IP | ERA | BA | OBP | SLG | |
| Statistics are through games of August 22, 2007, and are courtesy of Baseball-Reference.
Note: Linebrink’s numbers are with San Diego only. Meredith’s second-half ERA is deceiving: 7 of the 11 runs he’s allowed since the All-Star break have been unearned. |
||||||||||
| Heath Bell | 50.2 | 1.78 | .179 | .245 | .243 | 20.2 | 4.35 | .282 | .345 | .385 |
| Doug Brocail | 35.2 | 3.03 | .212 | .283 | .318 | 19.2 | 5.49 | .269 | .318 | .410 |
| Kevin Cameron | 29.1 | 0.31 | .168 | .294 | .188 | 18 | 3.00 | .296 | .366 | .324 |
| Justin Hampson | 27.1 | 2.30 | .250 | .321 | .340 | 10.1 | 6.97 | .311 | .404 | .356 |
| Trevor Hoffman | 33 | 1.91 | .162 | .203 | .274 | 10.1 | 4.35 | .293 | .370 | .439 |
| Scott Linebrink | 39.1 | 2.52 | .219 | .274 | .390 | 5.2 | 12.71 | .360 | .448 | .640 |
| Cla Meredith | 42 | 3.86 | .300 | .339 | .394 | 19 | 1.89 | .320 | .354 | .387 |
Some of this may be due to simple regression to the mean; Cameron’s first-half performance simply wasn’t sustainable. Some may be due to the heavy workloads necessitated by the presence of David Wells and, to a lesser extent, Greg Maddux, in the rotation. Presumably this is why the Padres have carried at least seven relievers all season. Still, it’s a bit disturbing that every key member of the bullpen has seen his performance decline in the second half.
On the bright side, the offense has looked great the past two nights. Mike Cameron and Adrian Gonzalez are swinging the bat well. Gonzalez is thought to be having a down season, but the truth is, almost all of that is batting average, which is about 30 points lower than it was last year. His walks are up a little, as is his ISO. If he weren’t so freakin’ slow…
Khalil Greene has enjoyed a nice series so far, as he often does away from Petco Park. His road numbers this season are .278/.313/.504. Compare with, e.g., Troy Tulowitzki’s road line of .255/.328/.366. Not to take anything away from Tulowitzki, who is a tremendous young talent, but if Greene played half his games at Coors Field, he’d be a perennial All-Star.
Finally, it’s great to have Milton Bradley back in the lineup. Is it coincidence that the bats woke up at the same time he returned? Could be, but then again…
by LynchMob
AAA
Brady Clark: 5 AB, 1 R, 3 H, 1 RBI; 2 2B (#4)
Craig Stansberry: 5 AB, 2 R, 2 H, 4 RBI; HR (#14)
Brian Myrow: 4 AB, 1 $, 2 H, 0 RBI; 2B(#28)
Casey Fossum: 4.1 IP, 6 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 1 BB, 2 SO
AA
Matt Antonelli: 6 AB, 1 R, 3 H, 3 RBI; BB
Will Venable: 6 AB, 1 R, 4 H, 3 RBI; HR (#6), SO
Colt Morton: 5 AB, 3 R, 2 H, 1 RBI; HR (#5), BB, 2 SO
Chad Huffman: 6 AB, 4 R, 3 H, 3 RBI; HR (#5)
Wade LeBlanc: 5 IP, 3 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 2 BB, 8 K; (5-3, 4.06)
High-A
Lake Elsinore 11, Bakersfield 7
Craig Cooper: 5 AB, 3 R, 3 H, 0 RBI
Low-A
No notables.
Short Season-A
Luis Durango: 4 AB, 2 R, 2 H, 1 RBI; BB
Mitch Canham: 5 AB, 1 R, 2 H, 1 RBI; 2 SO
Kellen Kulbacki: 3 AB, 0 R, 3 H, 1 RBI; HBP
Danny Payne: 2 AB, 1 R, 0 H, 0 RBI; 3 BB, SO
Corey Kluber: 5.1 IP, 1 H, 1 R, 0 ER, 3 BB, 6 SO
Rookie
No game scheduled.
Commentary:
Who knew Casey Fossum was in the Padres organization? Very nice outing by LeBlanc!
[Ed note: Fossum only signed on Tuesday.]
Thanks, LynchMob, for once again delivering the goods! Padres go for the series win Thursday evening at Shea Stadium. IGD, blah, blah, blah…
Picking up where last year's version left off, the Ducksnorts 2008 Baseball Annual provides in-depth analysis of and commentary on the San Diego Padres. Get your copy today.
August 23, 2007 at 7:58 am
someone woke up Jobu, help Khalil hit curveball
August 23, 2007 at 8:13 am
Joyner is working on it.
August 23, 2007 at 8:27 am
Could we please never let Geoff Blum field again? I do not care if Marcus K’s every AB for the rest of the year, we NEED him on D. Blum blowing that pop-up in the bottom of the 9th last nite was unacceptable. That is just something you cannot do when another team is threatening.
Bat Marcus 8 and hope for the best. Hell, let him bunt every now and then just to switch things up. I’m done with the Silent L experiment.
August 23, 2007 at 8:30 am
But Phantom…he really has been a decent hitter for the last 2 months…the occasional dropped ball and terrible range is softened by the hitting he has done since June.
August 23, 2007 at 8:34 am
4: At this point (with the other bats starting to heat up), I could really care less about his average. He doesn’t hit for power and hits into way too many DPs to make up for that. Our pitchers need some stability behind them.
OT, here’s Alderson on the team’s finances. Take it for what you will: http://www.signonsandiego.com/.....livan.html
August 23, 2007 at 9:04 am
5: Yup, the problem with having Silent L playing 2B is that he doesn’t get taken out late in the game with leads either. What’s with that, Bud?
NOG can play defense way better than Silent L and Pepe certainly recognizes that, doesn’t he? I sure hope after last 2 games, Pepe would get NOG in the game every now and then, especially late in the game.
August 23, 2007 at 9:06 am
Perhaps, the Padres can draw some lessons from the Angels. Certainly, having some speed is advantageous especially at Petco.
http://www.sportsline.com/print/mlb/story/10312195
August 23, 2007 at 9:08 am
6: I was stunned last night when Black didn’t go to NOG for Blum’s last at-bat. You get NOG against a lefty and get the better defense. Blum’s bloop into center wasn’t worth not having the best defense against that offense.
And can we stop walking Wright to face Beltran? Peavy eats RH hitters like candy and he wasn’t even all that close with many of his pitches.
August 23, 2007 at 9:23 am
For you stat geeks, is there a site that shows the number of bullpen innings for each team as well as bullpen ERA? I know the Pads have the 2nd best bullpen ERA to the Red Sox, but I am curious how they compare to the rest of the league in innings pitched, my guess is they are in the top 3rd.
Is there a stat that is kind of weighted ERA for a bullpen, one that takes into account the number of innings pitched?
August 23, 2007 at 9:25 am
Frankly it doesn’t matter what Blum has done over the past 2 months-the organization needs to decide who is a better bet for the final 5 weeks of the season, Blum or Giles. Since Giles has shown himself to be a vastly superior defensive player and neither one is a great bet to even be average offensively(at least Giles has been average in the past, where Blum has not) I know who I would be hitting 8th.
August 23, 2007 at 9:30 am
It’s really too bad Mackowiak and Hairston are hurt. It would have been nice to see them get some time at second.
August 23, 2007 at 9:32 am
10: agreed. They rode out Blum’s hot hitting but now he’s not only not hitting well, he’s not moving the runner over, hitting into double plays, etc.
I really questioned Bud not making the defensive substitution after the 8th (9th?), when both Marcus and Blum batted in the top half. But there is a learning curve and I suspect we will start seeing more of Marcus.
August 23, 2007 at 9:36 am
#9: Here it is:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/.....p;type=reg
If you divide G by IP, the Padres bullpen has worked harder than all but those of Washington, Florida, and LA in the NL. Padres relievers pitch about one-third more inning per game than do those of the Giants, who have the least used bullpen in the league.
August 23, 2007 at 9:54 am
re: Fossum … here’s a note …
http://raysindex.blogspot.com/.....-flop.html
… but, alas, I can’t find video of the “Fossum flop” … which I’ve seen … and it’s wonderful … when it works …
August 23, 2007 at 9:55 am
Should be an interesting game tonight, the current group of Padres haven’t done well against Glavine but BB can give them some help by playing NOG and Kouz instead of Ensberg and Blum.
Interesting to see how Germano does since Shawn Green is the only Met to have ever faced him. The unfamiliarity may help at least the 1st time through the order…..bullpen better be ready to go though.
August 23, 2007 at 9:57 am
My brand spanking new HD Cable package is (hopefully) getting hooked up today so that I can (hopefully) watch the freaking game. I have not seen the Padres since wednesday or thursday of last week since I moved and it’s been horrible. I hooked up gameday on my laptop to my tv last night and that was a totally lame experience.
August 23, 2007 at 10:00 am
Totally agree that the team needs to make a decision about what’s more important down the stretch. A single in 3 of 10 ABs with crap defense, or a double in 1 of 10 ABs with superb defense.
Anyone know why Cassel hasn’t entered the discussion as a possible replacement starter for CY? I’d also rather go with Stauffer than Ledezma if it comes down to those two.
August 23, 2007 at 10:09 am
Re: 17 I think they would put Stauffer ahead of Cassel and if its a lefty dominated lineup I think they may go with Ledezma
August 23, 2007 at 10:27 am
Why not let Justin Hampson start a game instead of Ledezma?
Here’s a good read on the draft:
http://www.hardballtimes.com/m.....ft-awards/
Interestingly, he doesn’t like Matt Harvey, either, who I wanted the Padres to pick in the late rounds.
August 23, 2007 at 10:42 am
5 … Hey, Phantom, what do you think is “OT” about the link to the UT article about Alderson’s comments about Padres finances? That’s the most ON-TOPIC article I’ve read in a long time
(perhaps I’m being presumptious that OT meand off-topic?)
So … y’all … that link in #5 is MUST READ … not that it’s anything new … but it clarifies the FO position today … and it tells me how in-touch GY is … as if that were ever in doubt
…
Every quote in there is worth commenting on … and we have many time in recent comment threads … here’s a couple that summarize things for me …
“I never signed a five-year contract that turned out well.” - SA
“People don’t want excuses, they just want results.” - SA
August 23, 2007 at 10:46 am
re 19: Yeah we get it, you don’t like Schmidt. What is that like the 4th article he’s brought that up in? Let’s wait until he actually pitches, or is diagnosed with an injury(if he doesn’t need surgery it isn’t as big of a concern because they wanted to limit IP this season anyways) before jumping all over everyone about it.
August 23, 2007 at 10:55 am
19.
Thanks! Nice read. Let’s hope Schmidt doesn’t need TJ.
August 23, 2007 at 10:57 am
Re: 20 im not sure how much anyone on this board disagrees with SA philosophies I think most everyone here likes what he has done and the system he has implemented.
That being said there are a few flaws with what he said:
“I never signed a five-year contract that turned out well”
So every 5 year deal is a bad deal? Peavy is young he will still be in his prime in 5 years. Also Peavy is the one big name guy that the Padres have on the team (Trevor is a big name in SD but he will not be in baseball much longer) you need a player to market around (ie the Tony Gwynn factor) and peavey is that player at the moment.
“People don’t want excuses, they just want results.”
The A’s have had terrible attendance numbers with great on-field results over the past few years. The poor attendance is due to a poor stadium and lack of star power. Who on the A’s puts butts in seats?
I’m not saying spend money to spend money, don’t give the Adam Eatons and Gary Mathews Jr’s of the world 5 year deals but when you have a franchise player who has consistently given you great results from day 1 you have to keep him.
August 23, 2007 at 11:12 am
The main problem with the Padres is just their atrocious public relations. You cannot, let me repeat, cannot complain about costs or losing money as a major league baseball owner. If the Padres were losing money, John Moores would sell the team. Since he’s not putting the team on the market, it obviously makes financial sense to keep the team. That seems pretty simple to me and probably makes sense to a majority of people out there, so any complaints about financial losses doesn’t look good.
In the past 4 years the Padres have been very successful, especially considering that their payroll has probably been ranked in the lower half in baseball. But you have to wonder about the ability of Sandy Alderson (and John Moores) so put a winner on the field. The comment of “I never signed a five-year contract that turned out well” tells you more about his lack of ability then anything else. If he’s never been successful at re-signing players, maybe he shouldn’t be involved in the process. Towers’ track record isn’t any better (Orange Giles, Nevin, Klesko) so maybe someone else (DePodesto) should be negotiating the extensions, not Sandy “I have no idea what I’m doing” Alderson or Kevin Towers.
August 23, 2007 at 11:18 am
I’m trying to think of a FA deal 5 years or longer which has worked out well: only a couple come to mind. Bonds in SF(his original deal that brought him from Pit), Vlad in Anaheim, Arod has been uber-productive.
Guys like Tejada and Giambi who didn’t exactly help A’s attendance while they were there have been not worth the money.
Additionally some guys resigning with their own teams leave a lot to be desired like Vernon Wells.
It seems to me, that if you sign a FA to a 5 year or longer deal then said player better be a superstar.
August 23, 2007 at 11:18 am
Pedro Martinez signed a six year deal with Boston when he was first a free agent. That worked out ok, I would say.
August 23, 2007 at 11:22 am
24: Well said. The whole reason the Padres moved into Petco was because Moores couldn’t keep putting cash into the operation while they were at Qualcomm? Are they now telling us that their planning was so inept during the Petco process that it hasn’t resolved anything? And exactly right on Alderson & 5 year deals. I’m not sure any pitcher is a good bet for a 5 year contract, but if you could have locked up Clemens or Pedro during their peaks, you’d have been stupid not to.
It seems that Alderson knows he stuck his foot in his mouth with the 1090 interview, since he quickly moved to “clarify” things via Sullivan. At least the UT piece was a little less dismissive, if not more convincing.
August 23, 2007 at 11:25 am
Puljos
Tejada
Berkman
Jeter
Ortiz
Vlad
A-Rod
Helton
there’s alot more, all the top level guys have worked out for the most part. You just cant give mid level or unproven guys with lots of potential long term deals.
August 23, 2007 at 11:27 am
Re: 27 Pedro Clemens, Glaven, Smoltz, Maddux, all would have been wirth 5 year deals in thier prime.
August 23, 2007 at 11:29 am
24: I completely disagree. Towers might have had problems signing people to long contracts, but you can’t argue with this teams success over the past few years. And, as many have pointed out, there haven’t traditionally been five year contracts that have worked out well.
It’s important to note that Sandy never said, “I will never sign another five year contract.” He said that he hasn’t been successful in the past. If the situation was right, like for Peavy, then he would probably do it.
27: The Padres had a horrible deal at Qualcomm. They got hosed on concessions they sold at their own games and had a crappy lease. Just because they moved into a new stadium doesn’t mean they don’t have to pay-off the lease. Yeah, the new stadium might get you a little extra money, but since you’re now paying for 2 houses instead of one, you have a problem.
August 23, 2007 at 11:29 am
Has SA ever given out a 5 year deal?
August 23, 2007 at 11:29 am
The 5 year deals will also depend on the money. That may be implicit in Alderson’s statement, but in the rest of the interviews he didn’t leave anything implicit lest the San Diego Neanderthals fail to appreciate just how hard it is to make money in baseball these days.
I’d like to know what the qualifications for a good deal are. 3 years of elite performance, 1 year of good performance, and 1 bad year is a good deal in my mind. I have a feeling that the Padres would worry more about the 1 down year, which may never materialize, and ignore the benefits of a great performance.
August 23, 2007 at 11:30 am
#25, #27: Your posts combined struck a chord with me. I was thinking about long term contracts that turned out well. They seemed to play out better with superstars. (Mike Piazza with the Mets was another that came to mind.) Trouble is, those superstars want more money than we’ll pay them (regardless of whether the reason is “we don’t want to” or “we can’t.”).
We’ve got a legitimate superstar in Jake. It will be interesting over the course of the next couple of years to see what we do. I think it will also send a message to our up and comers as well as the fans as to how we intend to treat the star players that come up through our system.
August 23, 2007 at 11:44 am
30: If Moores is pumping 18 million a year into the operation to cover costs, then what’s the benefit of Petco? Was he pumping 36 million a year into the team in 2001?
I’m pretty sure the Padres aren’t paying anything at Qualcomm anymore. The original lease expired in 1999. Did they sign a long-term lease after getting Prop C passed? Doubtful but possible, and if true a further indictment of their approach. They seem to have negotiated a two-year extension in 1999.
http://www.fieldofschemes.com/news/news1999.html
On a related note, back in 2004, Towers expected Petco to generate 30 million more in revenue than Qualcomm.
http://findarticles.com/p/arti....._114785755
August 23, 2007 at 11:49 am
I can see a lot of situations where trading Peavy makes sense. I’d rather do what someone here suggested, use the leverage of his being underpaid the next two years to get an extension. If that doesn’t work and Peavy has a great 2008, you could practically name your price. Hughes and Chamberlain?
August 23, 2007 at 11:58 am
The projected end of the year $70 mil dollar payroll is comparing apples to oranges when you compare it to payrolls around the league. We cant compare that number to all of the other teams payrolls until we factor in their players incentives and bonus money as well. The 70 mil number is also a smoke screen as well because what incentives are they factoring into that? here are Maddux’s incentives:
$0.1M for Cy Young ($50,000 for placing 2nd, $25,000 for 3rd),
$0.1M for MVP ($50,000 for 2nd, $25,000 for 3rd)
$0.1M for WS MVP
$50,000 each for All Star selection, Gold Glove or LCS MVP,
$25,000 for Silver Slugger
Are they assuming all of them at this point or do they trim them down as the season goes on?
The Padres keep talking about look we spend money other places as well but doesn’t every other team? The Padres were one of the last teams to develop a DR academy, and their draft budget was #9 in the league (which I admit is nice but you have to remember they had the most top picks).
It would really serve the front office alot of good to just not talk about finances publicly, every time they do it always sounds like they are coming up with excuse after excuse, just say the payroll is what it is at the moment they will expand it if they see a player that they think will fit well into the system, but stop crying poor we are sick of it.
August 23, 2007 at 12:07 pm
#36: Agreed. They should answer “no comment” to every question about finances at this point. Every attempt to discuss the issue is met with skepticism and/or disdain, so they might as well just say “it’s none of your business” and leave it at that.
August 23, 2007 at 12:23 pm
37: Skepticism isn’t a sin.
August 23, 2007 at 12:29 pm
#38: No, it isn’t, which is precisely why I remain skeptical of those who claim there is something more sinister at work in the Padres organization.
August 23, 2007 at 12:37 pm
The cash-call thing blew me away but I’m not sure why it’s bad PR if you are still skeptical or disagree with S.A.
28: Todd Helton? Seriously? Yeah, that’s worked out great.
August 23, 2007 at 12:40 pm
37: Alderson hasn’t been attempting to discuss the issue. He’s been lecturing and hectoring. “You just don’t understand the complicated world of baseball finances.”
Well, you and the city built Petco because staying at Qualcomm was draining too much cash. Now you say that not only are you still putting major cash into the Padres, but that you signed a loan that won’t let you pay it off early, so we can look forward to more cash devoted to debt payments even as baseball experiences a revenue bonanza. You’re right, Sandy, I don’t understand that.
August 23, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Re: 40 yes Todd Helton he has a career BA higher than Tony Gwynn and is a gold glove caliber 1B
August 23, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Re: 42 oops it use to be her than TG he has gone down a few points over the alst 2 years, he’s still 24th all time.
August 23, 2007 at 12:50 pm
42: Coors has a lot to do with his offense. He was great for the first 3 years of that deal, and good enough for the next 2 that a 5 year deal would have been fine. But his deal is for 9 years, and he’s putting up numbers like Brian Giles would playing in Colorado. That’s while making 16 million per year playing one of the easiest defensive positions.
If the Rockies had stopped at 5 years, that’s a good deal.
August 23, 2007 at 12:51 pm
42: And has completely lost his power even in a huge hitters’ park and is signed for a ton of money through 2011ish. It was a horrible contract. They can’t give him away now.
August 23, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Re: 44 i was looking at the first 5 years i cant speculate what he will do for the next 4
August 23, 2007 at 12:52 pm
#41: What do you suggest? From where I sit, there is a certain class of fan that will not trust Alderson and Moores no matter what. Their minds are already closed to the possibility that the FO might be doing anything other than lying, misleading, etc. Short of changing the ownership and/or management team, what would you have the Padres do?
August 23, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Re: 47 I don’t blame SA, he can only spend as much as Moores will give him and its his job to do Moores dirty work in justifying the budget. I don’t think SA has lied to fans at all but I think he has done a lot of misdirection on the behalf of ownership (see comment see post 36).
SA was not here for most of the Padres debacles over the past 10 years. I do however feel that Moores does not do all he can to win and I feel like he has lied to fans over the past years, he certainly has said conflicting things to mislead fans.
August 23, 2007 at 1:06 pm
47: Open the books. Explain why the Padres signed a loan that required no prepayment. Could it possibly be because debt payments have tax benefits? Explain exactly how Petco Park has not solved the major complaint about Qualcomm, which was the requirement that Moores put his money into the team. Those aren’t “Moores is a lying bastard” questions. Those are “What sort of business are you running that this happens to you?” questions.
How does that not raise a red flag to you? Moores wanted out of Petco supposedly because he couldn’t keep putting money into the team. He now claims that he’s still putting money into the team - not only after the increased revenue from Petco, but also after infusions of cash from the Washington expansion, MLBAM, new TV and radio deals, etc.
August 23, 2007 at 1:08 pm
On the Padre financing issue, it seems to me that it doesn’t matter if or what they promised during the vote for the new stadium. All that matters is what they are going to do now and how they’re going to spend the money. That’s their choice and their business decision.
Management is going to do what they think is right for them. I seem to think that this management team is trying to build a winning franchise among financial constraints that they have imposed on themselves. It doesn’t matter the reason why those constraints are there — it’s their money. They could decide to budget $30 milliion. They may lose their fan base, but it’s still their choice.
Players are going to do what they think is right for them. They will either leave to the highest bidder or stay where they feel the most comfortable or compromise those two issues with a middle ground. It’s their career to do with what they believe is right for them — it’s their career.
The fans only option is to support the team or not support the team. Financially, if you don’t believe that the team is doing the right thing or spending enough money, your option is to not support the team by not going to the game, not buying Padre merchandise and not watching Channel 4 and not patronizing those entities that pay for the commercials. It’s your recreational dollar and you get to spend it the way you choose.
It just strikes me as a lot of wasted emotions on being upset at someone else for not spending more of their money.
August 23, 2007 at 1:12 pm
Damn you LaMar and your level headed reasoning!
August 23, 2007 at 1:15 pm
50: Since 300 million in public money was used for Petco, there’s more than an emotional issue at stake. It’s Moores’ money for operations. His place of business was 2/3 built with public money.
August 23, 2007 at 1:15 pm
No, it just comes from experience in having three sons trying to get me to spend more of my money on things that make them happy.
August 23, 2007 at 1:15 pm
But in responce to #50 I developed a love for the Padres when I was a kid I cant just stop caring about them because I think that the owner is a creep. The team is bigger than its owner.
August 23, 2007 at 1:17 pm
Re: 53 ha like living in Japan
August 23, 2007 at 1:22 pm
54: Also, the team (any team) asks for fan loyalty during the down years. They don’t want you voting with your feet when things aren’t the way you like. There’s a middle ground between accepting what the team tells you and rooting for another team.
It sounds like I’m being confronted by an angry member of the VFW in 1969. America, Love It or Leave It!
August 23, 2007 at 1:27 pm
#52: I understand what you’re saying about the public funds. But from a strict interpretation, there’s nothing in the lease with the City that requires them to do anything or pay any specific amount for payroll.
First, I think you’d be hard pressed to find a quote by a Padre FO member that promised a specific amount to be spent on the team back at the time of the vote. (As an aside, they are certainly spending more than they did in the Qualcomm days.)
Second, even if they did make that promise, that promise could be legally excused by changed circumstances. Here, pick your changed circumstance: revenue sharing, baseball’s financial rules, debt financing, delay in the stadium, etc. Real or imagined, you can easily argue there are changed circumstances.
Third, absent something in the lease contract requiring them to pay a certain amount in salary, there is no recourse against the team for not spending more. The obligation in the lease is to pay rent (likely percentages of gross revenue and concessions.)
I guess what I’m saying is that rather than be pissed about management not spending more money, I prefer to waste my energy getting pissed about B(l)um grounding into a double play or inability to get a runner in from 3rd with less than 2 outs. It’s just a matter of picking your poison, I guess.
August 23, 2007 at 1:27 pm
I think a lot of the whole money issue may revolve around Moores trying to recoup the money that he spent in the pre Petco years. I seem to remember a bunch of articles about how Moores was pumping in and losing a lot of his own money in those years. I also remember reading about how many millions the Padres spent in litigation and stuff because of all the Bruce Henderson lawsuits and ETC. Of course this is all speculation on my part but I have read that teams think typically spend between 70-80% of revenues on payroll. If those numbers are true then I can see Moores trying to run 5-10% below that to gain any money he thinks he lost back (even though the teams estimated value has tripled since PETCO). So by saying he is pumping his own money into the team again it’s probably refering to his own share of the profit. They are building a Dominican complex and did increase the draft budget this year so I can’t really condem the ownership of going totally on the cheap but if my idea is anywhere close to the truth it is frustrating that Moores is so set on making a certain profit margin so soon after going into Petco when his franchise value has increased so much. I understand that the actual media market of San Diego is very small but between the Park and revenue sharing they are not having any issues with money.
August 23, 2007 at 1:32 pm
#56: While I try to keep politics out of my Padre comments, you would be hard pressed to find a bigger liberal or morew anti-big business guy than me. I fight with auto manufacturers to build safer automobiles for a living. But, I can choose to buy a Volvo rather than a Ford. I agree with Steve C in #54, that it’s harder to choose to be a Yankee fan when you grew up a Padre fan.
August 23, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Re: 59 Hey ive seen the van you have no room to talk about automtive choice!
August 23, 2007 at 1:37 pm
57: Blum grounding into a DP occurs even more frequently than the Padres telling me they’re still hemorrhaging money. My anger may go deeper, but it happens less often.
August 23, 2007 at 1:37 pm
#60: You didn’t see me driving the van. That’s Sean’s car. It’s still parked in front, by the way, waiting for him to return from Japan.
August 23, 2007 at 1:38 pm
59: That was more for the general pro-Moores crowd than specifically at you, it just wasn’t written well.
August 23, 2007 at 1:40 pm
47: Are you crazy? No teams will agree to that, no matter how much/little money is involved. There is no way MLB will agree to that.
50,57: Well said. Enough Silent L on the field and batting 2nd.
58: Moores made enough money from his Peregrine deals, he doesn’t need any from Petco/Padres. Nobody was forcing him to pump money into the team while it was losing money. He can do whatever he damn pleases with it.
August 23, 2007 at 1:46 pm
64.
Nobody was forcing him to put money into the team you are correct but if he wanted the team to be profitable he had to get a new stadium which meant a vote if it was going to be paid for at all by tax payers. The best way for him to bring a vote to the public was with a winning team. He is a business man first and wants his team to run more like a business than a hobby that he is willing to pay for.
August 23, 2007 at 1:46 pm
BTW
Darren Smith just mentioned Ducksnorts on XX!
August 23, 2007 at 1:49 pm
re: 64 sounds like Moores would need a tax shelter then? hmmm I wonter what he could use to hide his money?
August 23, 2007 at 1:52 pm
I really dont think I would have a problem wiht moores if he didnt cry poor all the time, he did a great job by hiring SA, the team is doing well, the payroll is not terrible (hey we could be the Royals) but it pisses me off when I give my hard earned money to a multi-millionare who cries poor every chance he gets.
August 23, 2007 at 1:58 pm
68.
Totally agree. By the time I’m done at the game I usually spend $30-40 on beer and food alone. That doesn’t even count the tickets because I usually get them for free but somewhere along the line someone paid for em.
August 23, 2007 at 2:01 pm
Re: 69 goto the gasslamp before much much cheaper
August 23, 2007 at 2:03 pm
First, there is little if any evidence that the team has been actually profitable since moving into Petco. The Forbes reports properly understood demonstrate that the team is not making money in Petco, and those reports aren’t even recognized by the so-called spinmeisters of MLB. The Padres are bringing in more money overall, and they are spending more money overall.
Second, it seems elementary to me why Moores is writing a big check this year. The Dominican Academy is a large expense, not the type of thing you normally do every year. When you exceed prior draft budgets by quite a bit, well then you might just have to write a check to cover that difference. They have also talked about having made improvements to Petco Park this year; no idea what those were but those might also not be a normal expense. Expenses incurred in relation to Tony Gwynn’s HOF induction also not a normal expense. Makes sense to me in a relatively stagnant revenue area, where the Padres currently are.
Third, the interesting thing to me is the characterization of the statements from the Padres front office. Alderson appears to be doing his best to explain the situation, and also appears to get a little frustrated by the incoherence and silliness of some of the so-called criticism. Those who are skeptical of or outright predisposedly hostile to Alderson’s explanations call them “excuses” or “spin” or “lies” or worse.
August 23, 2007 at 2:05 pm
I dunno, I wouldn’t characterize Moores and SA’s comments as “crying poor”. I think that what they’re doing is saying, “look, we’d like to be able to spend more money, but the financial reality is not there right now.” It’s not like they’re not spending ANY money. I mean, we could be the Marlins with they’re ridiculously low payroll. At least there, you have no doubt that the guy is fleecing the team.
As someone else said, it’s his money, he should spend it as he pleases. Moores is not Mark Cuban. He can’t just dump money into the team because his heart is in it. He’s a businessman, for better or worse. He seems to have recognized that to be more successful, he needs to improve his product. As a result, we’ve had 3 winning seasons in a row and we’ve won back-to-back NL West titles. I can’t really see how else he could be improving the product.
August 23, 2007 at 2:07 pm
70.
Yeah I eat gaslamp all the time because I live down here. I want ball park grub when I go to a game.
August 23, 2007 at 2:08 pm
66: “Ducksnorts. A better source for information than this radio station. Oops, shouldn’t have said that out loud.”
August 23, 2007 at 2:08 pm
68: The “crying poor” meme of the sketpic is lame as well. Acknowledging the relative financial position of the Padres vis-a-vis larger market teams, and the resultant difficulty in competing for free agents, is not crying poor. They don’t dwell on it, and since Petco, the front office explanations usually only come out after ill-informed rants on the radio or in the newspapers or other commentary.
August 23, 2007 at 2:18 pm
71: According to Alderson, Moores has been writing big checks every year since Petco opened and is on the hook to do so for the next few years. That’s why it starts to sound like excuses - are there 15-20 million in one-time expenses every year? Unlikely. It’s like a never-ending series of flags that get run up the flagpole to see who salutes. All this when the Padres are actually drawing better, at higher ticket prices, and have increased revenue (compared to the opening of Petco) from XM and MLBAM.
August 23, 2007 at 2:33 pm
General rule of thumb, according to my cousin who was an accountant many years ago with the Buffalo Bisons(at the time the AAA team for the Pirates) is that the average customer will spend approximately half of their ticket price on concessions.
So if the average ticket is $29 then the average customer at Petco buys about $14.50 in food/drink….to me that seems accurate.
August 23, 2007 at 2:36 pm
Re 76: I have heard Moores say as recently as 2005 that he didn’t have to write a check for the first year of Petco; can’t recall whether it was on regular TV or those cheesy Jane Mitchell one-on-ones. In today’s UT, Alderson does not say that Moores is writing checks every year at Petco. However, if Alderson is saying what you said he said, I assume it is on the XX interview. Don’t force me to listen to that again, it would unnecessarily pain me to listen to the horrid callers trying to harangue Alderson.
August 23, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Meanwhile, one of the greatest threats to the Padres getting a playoff berth are the Phillies, who lost again today. I could care less if the Padres win the West or get a Wild Card berth, I want the Padres in the post season with Peavy and CY as the one-two punch and let the chips fall where they may.
August 23, 2007 at 2:38 pm
77.
I think that is WAY low for PETCO. Maybe because I get free tickets in expensive sections from work and from my friend with way too much money but everyone around me is always throwing down tons. $14.50 isn’t 2 beers. Maybe you are right because my opinion is really just based on my perception but that just seems low to me.