Why Can’t the Padres Capture Our Imagination (and Money)?
Mon, Mar 17, 2008
by Geoff Young
I’m working on my Padres preview for Hardball Times, and one question that confounds me is this: Why won’t San Diego get behind the Padres? I don’t have an answer, but I’d love to hear some theories.
While you’re thinking about that, here’s a nice table for your viewing pleasure:
| Year | W-L | Pct | Att/G |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference. | |||
| 2004 | 87-75 | .537 | 37,244 |
| 2005 | 82-80 | .506 | 35,429 |
| 2006 | 88-74 | .543 | 32,837 |
| 2007 | 89-74 | .546 | 34,445 |
This marks the first time the Padres have enjoyed more than two consecutive winning seasons. They also reached the playoffs two straight years (and came within one strike of making it three straight) for the first time in franchise history.
I get that it’s popular to bash the club for not being aggressive in the free-agent market (only somewhat warranted, IMO, given the nature of said market) or the amateur draft (a problem that I agree needs to be addressed), but we literally are looking at unprecedented success from this organization and yet, attendance has fallen by 7.5% since the Padres moved downtown.
To be fair, the Padres saw tremendous growth on moving into Petco Park, but still. Here’s that table again, with their final year at Qualcomm thrown in for good measure:
| Year | W-L | Pct | Att/G |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference. | |||
| 2003 | 64-98 | .395 | 25,063 |
| 2004 | 87-75 | .537 | 37,244 |
| 2005 | 82-80 | .506 | 35,429 |
| 2006 | 88-74 | .543 | 32,837 |
| 2007 | 89-74 | .546 | 34,445 |
You see, perhaps, why teams are anxious to build new stadiums? A club coming off a 98-loss season can reap tremendous rewards (especially if taxpayers help flip the bill, which is another issue altogether). Meanwhile, a club that wins 82-89 games a year struggles to keep bodies in seats.
Why is that?
Love the blog? Buy the book!
The Ducksnorts 2009 Baseball Annual provides the most comprehensive analysis of and commentary on the San Diego Padres available anywhere... featuring a foreword by Padres Executive Vice President Paul DePodesta.
March 17, 2008 at 8:39 am
I think 2.5M to 2.7 is where the natural attendance line is for the Padres. This city doesn’t have the corporate buy in to seats like an LA or NY that allows them to up their numbers with season seat sales.
You saw a natural rise in attendance with the new park, but I’m not sure that 3 million is attainable here unless the team advances deep into the playoffs every year. Even my friends who are sports fans rarely follow baseball until the playoffs. There isn’t the carryover from other sports in San Diego like there is in other towns, unless the Cubs, Mets or Red Sox are in town.
March 17, 2008 at 8:40 am
I’ll offer my opinions from afar …
- it’s expensive in both time and money to go to Petco Park compared to the Murph …
- no “star” offensive player (and while Jake is a “star”, he’s not as “marquee” yet as he will be in a few years)
March 17, 2008 at 8:51 am
2 … and one more … I think that “not being aggressive in the free-agent market or the amateur draft” translates into a current feeling of “no upside” … how much fun is 82-89 wins with a feeling a sense of upside that the team can win in the playoffs and World Series. You and I know that there is some amount of “crap shoot” in the post-season … but without a national media prognosticating a championship for the Padres, I think that most casual fans (which is where the incremental attendance that you’re asking about will come from) are left with a sense of “why invest in a team that’s not going to win it all?”
March 17, 2008 at 8:52 am
The higher prices at the park have effectively priced out certain segments of the traditional baseball market coupled with the fact that those potential ticketbuyers could just stay home and watch most games on tv.
Also, perhaps San Diego has become an even more transitory city in the last ten years, aggrandizing the common complaint that people move in and out and don’t establish much loyalty….
March 17, 2008 at 8:53 am
#1: I think there may be some truth in this. However, I also find it interesting that the Angels have been able to sustain their elevated attendance levels since winning the WS in ‘02:
http://www.baseball-reference......tend.shtml
Yeah, they won a WS, but nobody gave up on them after a 77-85 showing the following season. Granted, they’ve been even more successful than the Padres since then, but they also have to worry about the Dodgers.
Seems to me if Anaheim can support its club, San Diego should be able to do the same.
#2: I know I’m in the minority on this, but I find Petco much easier to deal with than the Q.
As for the marquee player, Jake is one (or on his way there), but I wonder if the ballpark and/or geographical location will keep guys like Adrian and Kouz from becoming as well known as they might be. Stick Adrian in Philly and everyone would know who he is.
March 17, 2008 at 9:02 am
I actually think that the Padres are steadily establishing themselves in the San Diegan mindset.
PETCO has gone a LONG way to putting the Padres into the public conciousness. Sure, the Chargers play at Qulacomm still. But really, unless you’re going to Mission Valley for a particular reason, you wouldn’t see Qualcomm. And if you did, you probably thought about the Chargers.
Any time you go downtown now, you think of the Padres. You see Padres banners and signs everywhere, and you can see PETCO. Unlike Qualcomm, which was a dual-team stadium, PETCO is for the Padres and them alone. You see PETCO, you think Padres.
This will sound somewhat ridiculous, but the new logos the team have adopted since moving into PETCO are also paying huge dividends. The homeplate logo is plastered everywhere, and I have seen many more “SD” logos these days than I ever used to in the past. And this is coming from someone who doesn’t even live in San Diego County.
As the Chargers and the Padres continue to string together winning seasons, the teams will continue to build a following. The more that one team supports the other, the better off both will be. I came into this season really hating the Chargers, but as the season dragged on and I was pissed about getting bounced from the playoffs, my civic pride ended up being translated to the Chargers.
Yes, PETCO is expensive. But it’s also geared toward a different customer. PETCO is not aimed at the same sort of fan that Qualcomm was. Young professionals have started to see PETCO as a great weekend option, as you can party in the Gaslamp directly after the game.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that support for the team is growing. As Jake Peavy gains more national prominence, the city will have a star to rally around.
The Padres are doing pretty well in PETCO, in my opinion. Weekend games always draw close to 40K, and popular East Coast teams draw well during the week. The Padres need to figure out a way to draw better during the week (and their strategy for afternoon games seems to be paying dividends here), but the team is slowly carving out its place in the City’s conciousness.
March 17, 2008 at 9:14 am
5: The important thing to remember about the Angels is how they position the stadium and baseball in general. Anaheim reached the height of their popularity under Disney, who completely remade the team and the stadium as a “family-friendly” experience. When Moreno purchased the team, he had the savy to recognize the strength of this positioning and has done everything he can to maintain this atmosphere. Angel Stadium is (relatively) affordable compared to other venues. It’s a clean facility that is rigorously policed to maintain the atmosphere (I saw them remove several vulgar fans (both home and away) the only time I was there).
As I mentioned in my earlier post, a good deal of the Padres’ current success (and possible attendance ceiling) is completely related to the way the team and the experience is positioned. The Padres are after a different market than that of the Angels, and thus far, they’ve had moderate success by positioning the team in this way. New features like the RF concourse (that comes with $20 of food & gift credit) and the Western Metal buffet should appeal more to those fans who might otherwise not be able to enjoy PETCO.
There are certainly positives and negatives when comparing the Angels to the Padres. The Angels had a lot of the groundwork laid for them by Disney. Their games still have a more family-friendly atmosphere (they do the whole bat-boy thing) and everything (including beer) is cheaper.
March 17, 2008 at 9:17 am
For those who missed it on Saturday night, Matt plugged Ducksnorts (and the 08 annual) and GaslampBall: http://www.gaslampball.com/sto.....115359/510
March 17, 2008 at 9:22 am
I wonder how much of the variance from year to year can be attributed to factors other than winning percentage? Perhaps things like scheduling or promotions make a difference as well. For example, there is probably a significant spike in attendance when the Yankees or Red Sox come to town.
March 17, 2008 at 9:27 am
OT … the uniwatch guys like Tad’s batting gloves …
http://www.sponichi.co.jp/base.....3002_l.jpg
March 17, 2008 at 9:27 am
Perhaps the low scoring games due to the park size have a little something to do with it. There’s just not a great chance of seeing a high scoring game at Petco; well, there’s at least a smaller chance than at any other ball park. I know a lot of the more “casual fans” seem to like a high scoring ball game. Maybe that’s part of the equation.
March 17, 2008 at 9:30 am
#6
Your comment about marketing toward young professionals and tourists flush enough to stay downtown is exactly what I mean by alienating other market segments (working class people, suburban families, immigrants, the military, young people). The people who used to go to five games a year are now priced out and stay home and maybe catch the game on tv. But going to the park makes an indelible impression and inculcates long-term fan loyalty. I wouldn’t be such a fan today if my mom hadn’t found some way to take her kids to a few games every year.
Also, the internet and satellite makes it much easier for transplants to stay connected to their hometown teams and disregard the local product.
March 17, 2008 at 9:49 am
Part of the problem I think is that San Diego is a city where the majority of the people are from somewhere else. I know a very large amount of Padres fans who have strong alliegiances to another club. And those fans are perfectly content to wait on the couch until the Padres host that team.
March 17, 2008 at 10:03 am
7: Clean? Angel Stadium is a dump. I try my hardest not to go their. They have the worst rat infestation in baseball. Growing up in Orange County it think its easier to understand why the Angels have more support. There is more money in OC/LA than SD. It seems like everyone I meet has season tickets. During the few years i spent in SD, it was hard to find people with season tickets.
March 17, 2008 at 10:06 am
12: Tickets are still very cheap. I dont think they are alienating anyone. $12 a ticket is cheap especially when you compare it to Chicago or NY where the cheapest seat is over $20. They definitely are not alienating the military. They give the military tons of discounts and there are a ton of family discounts as well.
March 17, 2008 at 10:18 am
#12: Especially when the local product is the Rangers!
Can’t wait for my opening day… on my couch, watching directv.
When I’ve gone to Petco from my parents’ house in University City, I’ve found it quite an ordeal to get there. I don’t mind, it being vacation and all, but it’s either tack on a bunch of time to the trip by parking at Old Town and taking the trolley, or tack on a bunch of time by parking 1.5 miles away and walking. Sure, the walk does us good, but if I have to be at work at 8 AM I really can’t see going to a bunch of games downtown.
March 17, 2008 at 10:26 am
I was hoping for a wide variety of opinions on this one, and you have not disappointed.
#3: Yes, this is a problem of perception. It exists and it bothers me, but what can you do?
#4, 13: I agree about the “people from other places” phenomenon. As a Los Angeles transplant who long ago gave up the Dodgers, I have a low tolerance for folks who live here for extended periods of time but who still cling to old allegiances.
#7: Concessions, from what I hear, are a bit problematic. Honestly, now that they play in a park that is surrounded by good restaurants, I almost never buy food or drink at the game. The Padres would probably hate me for saying this, but one of my favorite aspects of Petco Park is that it doesn’t have the same monopoly on food and drink as the Q did. There is no compelling reason for me ever to eat at the ballpark now.
#9: Certainly there is a spike when the Red Sox or Yankees come to town. Unfortunately they are seen as more of an attraction than the Padres by many folks who live in San Diego.
#11: Yes, I think the low-scoring environment is probably a contributing factor. I love a well-pitched game, but not a lot of people prefer slugfests.
Good stuff, folks. Keep it coming…
March 17, 2008 at 10:34 am
I think you can probably come up with a lot of reasons that all have some relevance as to why but I honestly think the biggest reason is… Winning and star power.
San Diego has had a really rough sports history and I think the Chargers are starting to show that if you give the fans a grat team to come out and root for there will be plenty of butts in the seats.
In my lifetime (I can’t count 84 because I was 2) there has only been one REALLY good Padres team (98) and if I remember correctly there were butts in the seats then too.
You can’t expect to build mediocre teams (ie. Our teams since entering PETCO) and draw anything more than mediocre attendance. It seems year after year the Padres keep building mediocre lineups and only thanks to how crappy the NL West has been (Arizona, Colorado and LA developed some of the top prospects in the game who are now performing) have done well in the standings. Didn’t we win the division with 82 wins 2 years ago?Honestly I think an argument can be made that with the quality of teams we have had the past few years the Padres actually drew more fans than they should have.
Outside of Jake Peavey (who pitches every 5 days) we have ZERO stars and nobody that plays everyday. Even in the farm system we are all talking about Chase and Matt Antonelli (I really like both prospects) but they are not top prospects in baseball. Projections for both put them to be good but not great major leaguers. They can obviously become better or more productive players than any of the other higher ranked prospects so in no means am I trying to dog either guys because I REALLY like both.
I realize it’s tough to find the perfect spending and development plan when you are on a limited revenue stream as the Padres are but until they get an everyday star to root for or a team that has a legitimate chance to net a world series don’t expect off the chart attendance just because you have a great new stadium.
With all that said I think the Padres are on the right path but when they go out and do things like pass up Rick Porcello for Nick Schmidt I begin to question things again. I know prospects fall through and the Padres know that really well but at least they create some buzz and some hope. If you are not willing to spend for free agents you almost have to be willing to pay for top teir prospects when they are available.
March 17, 2008 at 10:35 am
I’m sure you appreciate we ex-pat Padres “clinging to our allegiance” though, right?
It’s loyalty to your first team, nothing wrong with that. It’s really fun when I see somebody wearing a Padre hat in Dallas. Always leads to a good conversation.
March 17, 2008 at 10:37 am
For me personally, there are several reasons why I do not go to as many games as I did at Qualcomm. For reference, in 96, I went to about 10 games, in 98 to over 20, in the down years 97, 99-03, about 5. Since Petco, I go to 1 or 2 games a year. And I make a lot more now than then.
1. Cost. There were many more inexpensive, relatively good seats at the Q.
2. Passion. I don’t know how many posters used to go to the big 55,000+ games at the Q (usually a giveaway night…), but there is simply no comparison to the noise and passion of a packed Q to a packed Petco.
I have been to Padres playoff games at both parks and there is even a bigger disparity. I went to game3 against Houston, and games 4 and 5 against Atlanta in 1998 and the Q was packed a half hour before the game started. 20 minutes before the start of Game 4, the crowd spontaneously started chanting “Sweep, Sweep!” Even though they lost, the fans were passionate the entire time.
For game 1 against the Cards in 2006 with Jake Peavy starting, Petco was nowhere near full at first pitch and the crowd seemed generally uninvolved.
3. I despise the omnipresent in-between inning “entertainment.” I know every park does it, but I still don’t like it.
4. Generally unexciting team. Lack of speed combined with power.
5. The ownership seems content to be good enough. This is not about free agency. I like that the Padres have not wasted their money there. But their lack of aggression with the draft has been awful. Ownership’s decision to kowtow to Seligula’s slotting money rather than go for the best player convinces me that it is not about winning the World Series, but about being competent.
6. Last, the players seem very corporate. Going back to the mid-90s players, Caminiti, Vaughn, Brown, Finley, early Hoffman; they all seemed so driven, exciting, passionate about every game. I just don’t get that about the current players. Milton Bradley was a breath of fresh air to me. He looked like he cared if they won.
7. Convenience. I have worked in a variety of places in San Diego. Qualcomm was generally easier to get to and get out of for me than Petco.
Obviously, other people will have other views. But those are my reasons why I went to more, sometimes many more games, at Qualcomm rather than Petco.
March 17, 2008 at 10:44 am
14: I would certainly disagree with that characterization. Have you ever been to Dodger Stadium? THAT place is a dump. Rat infestation or no (which most people outside of LA/OC probably never heard about), it IS a clean stadium. Yankees Stadium is much worse in terms of cleanliness than a place like Angels stadium. Qualcom was also worse.
18: I personally don’t think that the teams have been “mediocre” since moving to PETCO. If you look at agrregate NL records since moving to PETCO, the Pads rank fairly high (I don’t feel like finding these numbers right now, has someone done this recently?)
I’m also not sure about the merit of not-having enough FA stars. LT wasn’t a star when he was drafted. He became one. Why can’t our guys do the same thing?
March 17, 2008 at 10:48 am
Is traffic really that big of a deal for PETCO? I seem to remember way worse bottlenecks going into Qualcomm.
For reference, my parents live in Santee (which is where I go to games from when I’m in San Diego). We either take the 94 all the way and make a left on like 13th, or we’ll go 94/15S/5N to Cesar Chavez. Take that down to one of the streets a little east of Harbor that drops you off right behind MTS.
I guess it probably all depends on early you get to the games. I love being at the stadium so I’m always there at least an hour early. We typically can leave right away as well, since we’ll take 12th or 10th up to G, get on the 94, and get home.
March 17, 2008 at 10:56 am
One other thing I’d like to add is that I think PETCO’s opening was instrumental in attracting a new swath of Padres fans. Although I’ve been a lifelong fan, my intrest was really rekindled when PETCO opened. I gradually began going to more and more games to the point that I finally got season tickets this year, even though I live 2 hours away from the stadium. Perhaps it has to do with my own personal timing, but PETCO’s opening really coincided with my own coming of age and becoming an adult. I’ve also got a personal family connection to PETCO that probably makes me a bigger fan of PETCO than the average fan. Regardless, I think that the team has redefined itself since the move, and in my opinion, it’s become a more serious baseball team that is interested in winning.
Am I crazy? Perhaps. But those last few years at Qualcomm were tough.
March 17, 2008 at 11:06 am
21.
You can break out numbers if you want but if it’s an NL aggregate I don’t care. The NL in terms of good teams and star power has been the AL’s ugly step sister for a while now. Since Petco opened we have gone around touting the likes of Phil Nevin, Brian Giles, Sean Burroughs, Ryan Klesko and Jay Payton as our top sluggers. We have been statistically decent IMO because the NL west has been dirt. It isn’t dirt anymore and things are going to get a lot harder from here on out.
I’m not saying everyone wants a FA but if you think that a player like Ryan Howard or A-Rod wouldn’t change attendance I think you are wrong. Keep in mind that most of the people at baseball games are not baseball nerds like most of us floating around Ducksnorts. The average fan sees the name Manny Ramirez and Andruw Jones or someone like that and knows exactly who they are and probably what they have done and wants to come see them.
p.s. LT was drafted 5th overall. He started all 16 games rushed for 1,200 yards and had over 50 receptions as a rookie and was named the AP Offensive rookie of the year.
March 17, 2008 at 11:11 am
For the record Petco is a thousand times easier to get to IMO than Qualcomm ever was. Friars road is brutal during games in and out. Downtown gives you a million different options to park eat or whatever. There are 3 major freeways with downtown exits to get to the park and there is also a major trolley stop 100 yards from the park.
March 17, 2008 at 11:16 am
If KRS1 and Kelly are representative of the “casual” fan then the Padres aren’t going to be able to really increase their attendance much. To them, scoring is the entertainment, not winning. And since Petco greatly decreases scoring the games aren’t going to be entertaining. The Padres aren’t going to sign a big-time slugger (not only would they not pay the money but no HR hitter will sign here) and there doesn’t appear to be one in the farm system at the moment. So for the next couple years they aren’t going to score any more runs at home then they have been and fans like KRS1 and Kelly aren’t going to attend.
This is the exact opposite of how I expect fans to think. I always thought that winning creates the entertainment, not home runs and scoring. Since Petco has opened, they’ve won more then they lost at home every season (178-146, .550). But it looks like that’s not enough.
March 17, 2008 at 11:21 am
24: See, I don’t think someone like Ryan Howard would even cut it. If people want “star power”, I think we’re talking A-Rod, Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz, and Derek Jeter. Maybe David Wright.
But do you notice something odd about that list? They all play for super-mega-over-exposed teams. A casual baseball fan might perk up at the reference of Ken Griffey Jr., maybe not. But I really think that there are precious few legitimate draws. The new slate of baseball superstars hasn’t quite hit the national stage, and I have no doubt that Ryan Howard will be there at one point. But right now, outside of the five I mentioned above, I’m not sure that there is a legitimate attendance booster out there.
March 17, 2008 at 11:21 am
I also think that Petco is a lot easier to get to then Qualcomm. I grew up in Clairemont and live in Bay Park now so the stadiums are about the same distance away. Only when the Padres drew about 10,000 was the parking lot easy to get out of (same with the trolley). However, when they had big crowds it took forever. If you don’t mind walking a bit, it’s much easier to get home from Petco (although the trolley can be crowded).
March 17, 2008 at 11:27 am
I’m listing my reasons with a letter scheme since you reference posts by number:
A - I agree with some that the costs are not quite as consumer-friendly as they could be. I am splitting a season plan with several others, and the Padres are not very flexible about things. We deal with it because we are big fans - but I can see how the casual fan or even an interested new fan would be completely put off by costs and ticket policies. The Padres need to make it easier for fans to come to games. Just saying “Hey, we have a swell new park” is not going to do it, IMHO. The Padres need to really try harder to reach out to fans.
B - The team needs to generate excitement. Will this be the season *someone* hustles to first to beat a throw? Just once? Please? Do we need a major star just to beat a throw? Can’t Bud Black light a fire under the bench or something? Hire a motivational speaker? Something?
C - The giveaways are an embarassment. Look at the Angels promotions, then look at the Padres. This is something the Padres organization can do something about that doesn’t involve multi-million dollar free agents. I know this is a factor because when our group splits up tickets, people are always angling for certain giveaways. Who knows why - have you ever gotten one? They almost universally stink.
D - As you said, Geoff - get some decent food. It’s part of the experience. The food vendors are plentiful, but not customer-focused. What part of “I’m here to see a baseball game, not stand in line for 2 innings because you ran out of HOT DOGS” don’t they understand? This has actually happened to me - they ran out of cooked hot dogs. At a baseball game. In America.
March 17, 2008 at 11:31 am
29: I haven’t really found timeliness of service to be a huge issue at PETCO. The only problem I’ve ever had is trying to get hot chocolate on a cold night. That is something I’ll never try to do again.
I also would take exception to your “lack of hustle” thing. The Padres have (and have had) plenty of players who care about winning. I mean our ace pitcher probably goes TOO hard. We’ve had Boomer. We had Marcus last year. We had Milton Bradley. We had Dave Roberts (who always hustled his butt off).
However, at the end of the day, I don’t think people care about hustling. They (I imagine) care about winning. PETCO typically goes bonkers when the Padres win walk-offs. I know people accuse people at the games of being apathetic, but I really don’t see it. They’re quiet when nothing goes on, but get riled up and loud when it matters. Isn’t that the way it should be?
March 17, 2008 at 11:41 am
Personally I don’t think there is a problem. Geoff, you seem to be looking at the first year of Petco, then looking at the next three which have slightly less attendance, and concluding there is a support problem. I believe if you look at most other clubs which have opened new parks, you will see much the same. The first year is larger due to the novelty and subsequent years fall off somewhat.
However, I think what you should look at is the overall trend and the difference between the last several years at the Q. What I see, not having looked at any more than the one year of Q attendance you posted, is the Pads averaging about 10,000 more per season in Petco than that last year at the Q.
Will it ever go much higher? Probably not on a consistent basis, but periodically it may spike if the team is really doing well. It also may dip if they return to mediocrity and consistently miss the playoffs or have losing seasons.
Honestly, it seems to me the city is behind the team and supporting them. But SD sports teams will always face the apathy of So Cal’s laid back sports fans, who are, in large proportion, transplants from other areas. And it seems to me most of those folks hold their allegiances rather than rooting for their adopted home town.
So if there is a problem, I think it’s not one which is addressable simply by winning over a relatively short period, but I don’t really think there is a support problem.
March 17, 2008 at 11:48 am
27: Interesting … I would think becoming a star in mlb is a combination of truly being a great player and also playing in a huge market. There’s more exposure and there’s more of a chance of playing in big games.
All that “Manny being Manny” stuff, well, I’d doubt it’d exist if he played in, say, Pittsburgh or Tampa Bay. He’d still do the same stuff, but it wouldn’t be noticed as consistently.
Derek Jeter in Texas? That’s Michael Young.
I guess the point is, it might be tough to build a star player in San Diego, especially an offensive one. It may be easier to transport one in for a year or two, if anyone thinks that will increase attendance by a significant amount.
March 17, 2008 at 11:49 am
I used to live within walking distance of Qualcom, so it was very easy to get to. Now that I am driving in form north county, I don’t have any issues getting in an out of Petco. On weekends I park for free on the street and walk in. On weekdays there are two inexpensive lots, just on the other side of Harbor.
In Qualcom the only good seats were field and lodge, all of the upper seats were too far away. I have sat in the $19.00 upper reserved at Petco and I think they are good seats.
I do not believe it is access, price, or winning. If you want to draw the casual fan, move the fences way in and turn it into a band box. If you want the best chance at winning a World Series, leave the place along and accept the limitations of the marketplace.
March 17, 2008 at 11:49 am
I think that lower home run numbers probably lower the excitement for casual fans, and I think signing free agent sluggers isn’t going to help much, but I think we should build a team around players that fit petco. Speed is exciting, and yet we’ve been one of the slowest teams in baseball. If we want to make going to games more fun (and increase our winning percentage) we need to get players that are good contact hitters with good OBP and speed. I’ve been to a few Mets games and NY fans are just as excited to see Jose Reyes come to the plate as anybody else on that team.
March 17, 2008 at 11:55 am
32: You make some excellent points. I think that while WE would get excited about Miguel Cabrera, most casual baseball fans would likely respond with a “so what?” kind of attitude. I think you are dead on in that stars are probably 50% talent and 50% media over-exposure.
March 17, 2008 at 11:56 am
26.
Wow Schlom thanks for speaking for me. So I’m the casual fan huh? Doubt it but whatever, apparently you know more about me than I do. When did I ever say scoring was the entertainment? I like scoring more than winning? Are you serious? And since when is everyone resigned to the fact that since petco is big you can’t score there? HR hitters might not thrive there but hitters should love that place. Nothing in the rule book saying that HR’s are the only way to score runs is there.
Schlom I’m curious how many games you attend every year. Because I moved specifically downtown and took a job downtown so I could be closer to the stadium and go to Padres games. I go to plenty of games and although I’m not really happy with the product all the time they are my team and my fan support will never change.
The point I was making Schlom is that big names and yes unfortunantly for you scoring DOES bring in casual fans. Believe it or not but baseball is a business and a lot of people go to games to be entertained just like they do to see movies and concerts. What is entertaining about guys you have no clue about and 2-1 games if you are a casual fan? Probably not a lot. I know it’s pretty crazy but believe it or not there are a lot of people out there not as familiar or obsessed with baseball as we are.
If Schlom is a representaticve of a “SUPER” fan than the Padres simply winning more than they loose is going to be just fine. That is exact opposite of how i expect fans to think. I want a team that is going to be able to score runs and pitch well enough to win in the playoffs but maybe that’s not enough.
March 17, 2008 at 11:59 am
#18: I don’t agree that the Padres have been mediocre since moving to Petco Park. That may be the perception, but the numbers tell a different story. As for stars, Gonzalez would be one if he played in a larger market or a smaller ballpark.
#19: Yeah, I guess maybe I’m a hypocrite that way. It’s a little different in your situation, though, since you’re in an AL town. I don’t have a good answer.
#20: Kelly, thanks for chiming in. I think your points 4 & 5 are spot-on. People don’t find the current team exciting. And the unwillingness to mess with the slotting system at all is a problem.
#21: I haven’t run numbers for the entire NL, but we’ve won 12 more games since 2004 than any other team in the NL West.
#23: Yeah, I went to maybe 4 or 5 games a year at Qualcomm. I get to about 25-30 at Petco. It’s a much nicer environment, IMHO, and less of a hassle.
#24: People should know who Gonzalez is. They don’t, and I understand that, but they should.
#27: Right, there’s a vicious circle at work here. The team doesn’t have any marquee players because it doesn’t get national media coverage. Stick Gonzalez in Philly, Boston, or New York, and everyone knows who he is. Don’t believe me? Look at Tino Martinez. Dude wasn’t the player that Adrian is, but because he wore Yankee pinstripes, everybody made a huge fuss over him.
#29: JJ, thanks for the comments. You are probably right on with C & D. Because I’m such a baseball geek, I don’t even pay attention to stuff like giveaways and concessions, but I recognize that my experience is different from that of most folks. So those might be areas that could be improved.
#30: I agree about the novelty factor. It’s possible that this is all we’re seeing — that attendance in 2004 artificially spiked because of the new park and now it’s experiencing a “correction.” The question, then, is what is the real level? Is it what we’ve seen the past couple of years, or are the Padres in danger of slipping back to late-Qualcomm levels (25-29k per game)?
March 17, 2008 at 12:05 pm
24: OT-Anthony Thomas of the Bears was AP Offensive ROY in 2001:
http://sportsline.com/nfl/history/awards/aporoy
It’s a popular misconception that LT won the award that year. It’s so popular that even wikipedia has it wrong:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N.....Year_Award
March 17, 2008 at 12:10 pm
37.
Maybe the numbers tell a different story but winning slightly more games than you loose leaves me totally underwhelmed.
You are right about Gonzalez but I think he gets decent respect throughout baseball. He probably would be a star in another market. I seriously don’t mean to sound like the free agent super star is what would impress me but I think it is something that would impress a lot of the 3 -4 million or so other fans in San Diego that don’t follow baseball as closely as we do and thus generate more attendence.
March 17, 2008 at 12:10 pm
KRS1,
My point is that with Petco playing the way it does, they aren’t going to have a “star” hitter ever unless they move in the fences. But since the Padres hit so many more homeruns at home than their opponents, I doubt that it will happen (why should they).
I’m also confused in what you call mediocre. If winning 55% of your games at home is mediocre, then what is good? I don’t have the time to go and look at all the home records for all teams over the past 4 seasons but I’d imagine the Padres are pretty high up there overall. I’ll be the first to admit that I think they’ve underachieved in the playoffs in 2005-2006 (and the end of last season) but what does that have to do with their regular season?
A couple of people have pointed out that the Padres lack power and speed and therefore are an unexciting team to watch. I have no problem with that view, that’s certainly your right. I just didn’t that really existed, I always thought people were more interested in winning then the style of play. But apparently I’m wrong.
March 17, 2008 at 12:12 pm
38.
Damn wikipedia!
March 17, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I’ll say as a North County resident (San Marcos now but Vista for most of my life) that the Q was easier to get to than Petco. I usually go with my dad - the driver in the group - and he grumbles about that aspect of going to games now. And he ain’t the “always complaining about something” type. Now he wants to leave by 5 sharp to get some food before getting to our seats without running; pre-2004, we used to leave 5:30-45 quite often and be fine.
That and the prices, but that’s been touched on already.
March 17, 2008 at 12:18 pm
42: Oh, and the food combined with speed of service stinks. And I am usually one to defend Petco but I’ve tried the food there at least 6-8 times since it opened. (Yeah, I know, “lots!”) Now I prefer to already have eaten or get to downtown early enough to eat somewhere else.
March 17, 2008 at 12:21 pm
#39: Okay, this is useful. You are “totally underwhelmed” and it’s apparent that many people share your opinion. Let me ask you a follow-up question. How does your level of enthusiasm for the current product compare with that of, say, v. 1999-2003, or v. 1987-1995? It’s clear that ‘96 and ‘98 were anomalies; I’m assuming you enjoyed those tremendously, but I’d like to hear how the current 82-89 win teams stack up against the 64-79 win teams we saw just a few years ago, or even the teams of the early-’90s that played well but didn’t draw.
March 17, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Rob Neyer is reading (but we knew that already):
http://insider.espn.go.com/esp.....=neyer_rob
March 17, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Without getting too much into semantics, I’d put the Padres record since Petco in the better-than-average category. 90 wins has always been my dividing line between better-than-average and good. 95 is really good, 100 is great.
That scale has little to do with how other NL teams are doing. If the Padres won 88 games and nobody else in the NL won more than 81, that still doesn’t make the Padres good. Their attendance seems to reflect that.
A better than average team, with a few marketable players, which plays its home games in a park that crushes offense, managed in a very risk-averse way. Is it really surprising they’re not drawing 3.1 million?
March 17, 2008 at 12:46 pm
A better than average team, with a few marketable players, which plays its home games in a park that crushes offense, managed in a very risk-averse way. Is it really surprising they’re not drawing 3.1 million?
With exception of the few marketable players, I totally agree with that. Before I got off-topic, I was going to say not only do the Padres play a risk-averse style, but the front office seems to work that way as well. They just aren’t going to spend money to improve the team by a few games (they didn’t sign Kyle Lohse or an effective backup CF to fill gaping holes, they’d rather hope that they have the parts on hand). I think the perception of John Moores valuing profit over winning probably hurts the attendance as well.
I’ve been critical of the Padres front office over many things (the amateur draft, not adequately addressing the holes in the back of the rotation and outfield defense) but there is no debating that the Padres have been successful the past four seasons. Of course, that what makes their lack of moves so frustrating as it wouldn’t take much to ensure them as favorites for the division and maybe even the National League.
March 17, 2008 at 12:48 pm
44.
The early 90’s teams were at a whole different time in my life but for what it’s worth I loved them but i was a kid.
Those teams you speak of were mostly bad. But that doesn’t make our recent teams good that just makes them better than those bad teams. I go to the park with more hope for a win than I used to be able to in the last couple of seasons at the Q but I don’t think that is saying much.
So to answer your question… Yes these teams are much better but until they can make a push and score against front line pitchers in the playoffs the seasons will continue to feel the exact same when they end.
March 17, 2008 at 12:57 pm
So only an uber-fan like me would find this interesting, but on MLB.com, they are pimping St. Patty’s day merch. And wouldn’t you know it, Khalil shows up: http://mlb.mlb.com/index.jsp
FYI, I’m wearing my Khalil jersey to work today as it’s the only thing I own with “Green” on it.
March 17, 2008 at 12:58 pm
37: Geoff, yes, I think that is a risk the Pads will continue to face if they do not consistently win on the field. Despite the more attractive venue they still face being a team in a city full of transplants and beach bums. I know those are old stereotypes people have used for years, but I do think they hold a certain amount of truth.
I was born and raised here and I’ve seen how San Diego supports a winner, but I’ve also seen them stay away in droves from losing teams. And, frankly, the Padres have a long way to go in overcoming the image of a losing franchise. I love them regardless, but most people don’t see 4 winning years as much of an offset to 23 losing seasons, plus 2 .500 seasons, out of the first 35, imo.
March 17, 2008 at 1:13 pm
50: I had started to write something similar to that last paragraph. I expect that some fans (no idea how to quantify it) simply reached their threshold before 2004. They’re not likely to give the Padres another chance unless a really gripping story emerges, and I’m not at all sure how the Padres would go about delivering that. It would almost have to be a great PR campaign or a totally unexpected run of luck, because they’re not going to start taking big risks with the management of the team.
If they’re going to take a calm, rational, risk-averse approach to baseball operations (which is certainly their right, and the correct way to do business 85% of the time), they’ll just have to live with not being able to stir the passions of every possible baseball fan in the San Diego area.
March 17, 2008 at 1:13 pm
#48: Thanks, this is helpful. Believe it or not, I’m not even playing devil’s advocate with my question. I honestly see an organization on the rise and wonder why others don’t see the same thing. Your conclusion is very telling:
I don’t share this opinion, but I definitely sense that a lot of folks around town do.
#50: Good points. I guess it just seems weird to me that the city seemed more willing to embrace a fancy new ballpark than an improved ballclub. As a fan of the sport (more than the “experience”), I don’t really get that. Like, I understand it intellectually, but it doesn’t connect with me on a gut level.
March 17, 2008 at 1:40 pm
The good thing about the Padres is that the core of the team (or at least the most irreplaceable parts) are still pretty young. Peavy is 27, Young 29, Bell 30, Meredith 25, Thatcher 26 (of the question marks Wolf is still only 31 Hensley 28, Prior 26). Trevor and Maddux are both old but they shouldn’t be too hard to replace. On offense, Kouz and AGon are both 26, Greene and Hairston are 28, and Headley is 24. Bard is 30 and a catcher so he might age quickly while Giles, Edmonds and Iguchi are all easily replaceable (Antonelli will fill one of those slots). This team doesn’t have the upside potential of the Diamondbacks, Rockies or Dodgers but not every young player pans out (look at the Padres prospects except for Jake over the years).
March 17, 2008 at 1:50 pm
53: “look at the Padres prospects except for Jake over the years”
What did I ever do to you to be asked to do something as painful as that?
March 17, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Estes drills CoJo. Absolutely drills him.
Good for Estes. If you’re not going to make the team, at least do something useful.
March 17, 2008 at 2:03 pm
I think that some people have unrealistic assumptions for the Padres. Every team but one finishes the season unhappy (to varying degrees as obviously the Rockies were less unhappy then the Padres). I admit that it was incredibly frustrating to see the Cardinals win the World Series in 2006 and the Rockies make it last year — especially when many people thought the Padres were better then both teams (I thought losing 3 of 4 to the crappy Cardinals was a lower point in team history then Trevor blowing saves in 2 of the last 3 games last season). If it’s going to take a World Series appearance for the Padres to get accepted then it might not happen. This season there are by my count 9 serious playoff contenders in the NL (COL, ARI, LA, SD, MIL, CHI, NYM, PHL. ATL). That’s a lot of teams to finish ahead of.
March 17, 2008 at 2:07 pm
45 … Thanks for the heads-up, Stephen … can you summarize what he says (ie. why he’s starting off an article with a reference to today’s Ducksnorts entry)?
March 17, 2008 at 2:10 pm
55 … CoJo = Conor Jackson?
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/boxsco.....b_arimlb_1
… yup, I s’pose so … and Iguchi gets the retaliatory HBP?
March 17, 2008 at 2:11 pm
We should start on pool on when the Padres release Estes. After seeing that he gave up a home run to Trot Nixon, I have tonight!
March 17, 2008 at 2:27 pm
As a reasonably recent transplant to SD (4 years) from orange county I really feel that San Diego is a good sports town (as far as anywhere in so. california). In fact the main reason that I got into the padres was that it really felt like the city was a lot more excited about the team then I had really seen before.
Many people in the comments want to bring up the angles as an example of a successful sports franchise. I can say from experience that nobody loved the angels before they won the world series. I had gone to angels games my whole life and do not remember them ever being all that well attended. (This is even after the Edison/Disney make over of the Big A) But once they won the world series you began even seeing angles caps in LA county, which was an odd experience to me.
In some sense I think that the advantage that LA/OC have over SD is just sheer population. There are sooooooo many people there that if you can just interest a very small percentage at any given time you can sell out an event. I really do think that a larger percentage of the SD population are padres fans, it is just a much smaller group of people.
March 17, 2008 at 2:27 pm
56: It doesn’t do any good to tell the people who aren’t buying tickets that they’re being unrealistic (or for Sandy Alderson to tell them they’re being irrational).
Mac is better than Windows and always has been. Windows has 90%+ market share. It’s an irrational result but Apple still has to deal with it.
If the Padres want those extra seats filled, they’ll have to appeal to the potential fans who aren’t coming. If their answer is going to be “we’re better than we were, and we’re playing it smart, and we’re going to build the best organization possible under certain restraints,” then they’re not going to get those fans. They have to decide how much payoff there is from pursuing them. If it’s not worth it, don’t go after them, but at the same time don’t complain that people who aren’t serious baseball fans aren’t attending baseball games.
March 17, 2008 at 2:28 pm
58: Iguchi was hit first. CoJo was hit in the third or fourth. When he got hit, Leitner just said, “Ouch”. Apparently he got it good.
March 17, 2008 at 2:31 pm
61: Not to derail this conversation, but I would ask you to qualify your statement about Macs vs. PCs. Macs are better at certain things. PCs are better at others. That kind of blanket statement is troublesome.
But your overall point stands. People have opinions about things that are typically not very nuanced. So while we can all appreciate that the team has played well recently (especially agains the backdrop of their past), there are a wide variety of people who will see that the Padres have never won a WS and just assume that they suck.
March 17, 2008 at 2:40 pm
I’ll throw in my two cents on the subject of baseball fans in San Diego. As a kid, I figured everyone in San Diego was born and raised here just like me. As I grew older, I learned that many San Diegans are ‘transplants’ from very, very freezing cold cities. I’ve met tons of people here from Chicago. If you’re from Chicago and you move to San Diego to get away from the cold, there’s a good chance you’re probably not a huge sports fan. If I grew up with the Bulls, Bears, Blackhawks, Cubs, White Sox, etc, I’d never leave that town. And if I had to leave, I’d still support my hometown teams. Many of the die-hard sport fans out here still support their hometown teams from back East.
To get to my point, many of the San Diego ‘transplants’ are here in many cases because getting away from the cold weather was a bigger priority than their sports team. Not exactly the kind of people who are going to come out and support a sports team, regardless of who is on it. While Jake Peavy is a superstar, he only pitches every five days. In order to convert casual fans into die-hards, I believe the Padres will need another everyday player, in his prime and capable of batting 3rd or 4th in the lineup, to go along with Adrian Gonzalez. The casual fan isn’t going to become a die-hard Padre fan because we get Jim Edmonds and Mike Piazza at the twilight of their careers. We lack a recognizable superstar in the everyday lineup and that’s the bottom line.
March 17, 2008 at 2:48 pm
I also have another theory. Has anyone besides me noticed that the old school brown and yellow Padre gear is worn a lot more by fans at Padre games than the blue and sand or whatever color that is? My personal favorite is the ‘84 jersey. If the Padres go back to the ‘old school’ colors, they would be a much more popular team nation wide. If you’re a casual fan, it’s hard to tell the difference between them and the Brewers and about 5 other teams in the league.
Bring back the brown and yellow!
March 17, 2008 at 2:50 pm
61: The unrealistic portion of the potential fanbase is the people that may be saying “The Padres haven’t won the World Series, therefore they suck and I’m not going.” I don’t know that there are a lot of people that think like that although there is at least one poster today that seems to have that view. Obviously the Padres aren’t going to say outright before the season that they aren’t going to win World Series (even if it’s probably accurate).
Even the things that we agree on (like the drafting of Porcello over Schmidt) wouldn’t affect attendance the slightest (short-term at least). Things such as shortening the fences to increase scoring might help them draw short-term but might make them a worse team which will lower it long-term. Same thing with increasing team speed — I’m sure they could get Juan Pierre for nothing and play him everyday in CF and have him leadoff but the negatives would probably outweigh the potential attendance game.
March 17, 2008 at 2:52 pm
63: No, Macs are better, period. More reliable, almost exponentially. Far faster and more efficient. More resistant to viruses. More intuitive (easier to use). And I don’t even use one, but they’re plainly the best computer around.
What they’re not suited for (deployment in an office) is largely because Apple decided not to waste money pursuing a market they couldn’t get. The fact that many software companies don’t develop products for them in no way detracts from their superiority as a platform.
What’s troubling is conflating the reasons why someone might not attend a Padre game as a lack of thought. A casual fan, by definition, is not following the team that closely. They’re far less likely to express a strong opinion like “they suck” than they are to express “meh.” If the Padres want those fans, they have to do something to grab them.
Of course it could be that there are enough dedicated fans to fill Petco every night, so the attraction of casual fans is less important. But if that’s true and the Padres still aren’t reaching them, then some of the reasons stated by others in this thread probably pertain.
March 17, 2008 at 2:58 pm
66: I agree that they shouldn’t tinker with the composition of the team or the fences in order to entice casual fans. That would be crazy. They’re already going to carry 12 pitchers, the last thing they need is to waste a roster spot on the designated Eric Owens Dirty Jersey Player. What they’d need to do, if they want to draw those fans, is find a cost-effective way to break through the apathy.
As I said before, that could be totally wrong. Maybe they’re getting 15,000 casual fans a night and there aren’t many more to be had. On the larger point of “Why can’t the Padres….”, I still think it’s simple. They’ve got a fairly attractive team playing in a fairly attractive venue that has performed fairly well and their attendance is fairly good. I don’t see why its surprising that attendance hasn’t jumped to great when none of the contributing factors has, either.
March 17, 2008 at 3:01 pm
67: We’ll agree to disagree. As someone who works for a software company, I have strong opinions on this matter and we’ll leave it at that.
I think it’s generally interesting to talk about the attendance issue at PETCO. The larger question is whether or not there are realistic actions the team could take to remedy this concern. I say realistic because no matter how much people revile the club and the ownership, they’re never going to sign a big-name FA. It’s just not going to happen.
So, are there viable solutions? Would better amateur drafts translate to more attendance? How do we evern judge what is “better”? Who’s to say Porcello blows out his arm next year and that Schmidt goes on to be a solid #3? Sure, there seem to be better decisions the club could have made. But there are tons of people drafted every year that never sniff the big leagues, whether they’re drafted first-round or not. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t Burroughs seen to be a good selection at the time?
Does anyone have any “realistic” methods for fixing the attendance problem? Can it even be fixed?
March 17, 2008 at 3:05 pm
In order to convert casual fans into die-hards, I believe the Padres will need another everyday player, in his prime and capable of batting 3rd or 4th in the lineup, to go along with Adrian Gonzalez. The casual fan isn’t going to become a die-hard Padre fan because we get Jim Edmonds and Mike Piazza at the twilight of their careers. We lack a recognizable superstar in the everyday lineup and that’s the bottom line.
I hate to keep kicking this horse but a post just like this has appeared a bunch of times today. With the stadium playing the way it has the Padres aren’t going to have a player like this. When Ryan Howard becomes of free agent in a few years, if the Padres could sign him, he wouldn’t lead the league in HRs anymore. Therefore, he wouldn’t be a recognized superstar anymore. It wouldn’t make him any less of a player obviously, the public perception of him would be lessened. The only superstars the Petco Padres are ever going to have is pitchers — unless they draft the next Albert Pujols (by the way, 19 picks before the Cardinals drafted him, the Padres 3B Brian Ward from NC State. D’oh! Shows how lucky you have to get in the draft).
March 17, 2008 at 3:08 pm
38 … wikipedia has been fixed … that’s the beauty of wikipedia!
March 17, 2008 at 3:17 pm
70.
You keep bringing up HR’s as though they are the end all and be all of scoring and superstardom. They are not. Need I remind you of Tony Gwynn?
March 17, 2008 at 3:20 pm
#63, 67: Yeah, let’s drop the Mac vs PC thing. I have very strong opinions on this as well. If you see me on the street, ask me about it and you’ll get a very animated response. Seriously, you might as well ask me if I think Kerry Robinson is better than Tony Gwynn.
#69: This isn’t necessarily realistic, but winning the World Series would help a lot. See David M’s comment in #60, and read Vince Gennaro’s Diamond Dollars.
March 17, 2008 at 3:23 pm
58 … Gerut with a HR this afternoon …
March 17, 2008 at 3:26 pm
69a: I thought you were working in baseball now? But regardless, I work in software as well, with a product that is entirely oriented towards Windows, and I’ll always pick the faster, more efficient, more robust system if someone asks me which is better. Then I’ll sit down at my XP and wait for the next Unexpected Error.
69b: Or is it really even a problem? I’m not worried about less than sell-out attendance because the Padres are getting increased revenue from other sources, and because I don’t see any reason to believe increased revenue would lead to increased investment in the product.
70: IIRC, a lot of scouts were high on Pujols’ bat, but he was considered a bad body. Some team asked him to catch at one tryout, because he looked like a catcher to them. The draft would only have a tangential effect on attendance, because the majority of fans aren’t following the minors. But if they were drafting better, they could afford to do more things at the major league level.
March 17, 2008 at 3:26 pm
73: It’s always a possibility. I think we would have had a semi-legitimate shot against the BoSox last year had we made it into the playoffs. We had the pitching that eluded the Rockies.
March 17, 2008 at 3:27 pm
#70: We also got Peavy in that draft.
#72: Yeah, but how many Gwynns are there? I count one. Most of todays superstars hit home runs, and as long as that’s true, the Padres will be at a disadvantage. Between their unforgiving home park and the fact that their games end after the east coast (ESPN, NY Times, etc.) has gone to bed, it’s going to be extremely difficult for the Padres to produce a star offensive player. Or to be more accurate, it’s going to be difficult for them to produce a player who is recognized as a star. I keep harping on this example, but Adrian Gonzalez is likely to remain underrated as long as he plays here.
March 17, 2008 at 3:28 pm
75: Sadly, I do not work in baseball….yet. I just started an internship with a Minor League club and I’m hoping it proves to be a viable career path. Till then, still gotta pay the bills.
I would mostly agree with what you say when you suggest that there really might not be a problem. Given all of the factors, which you listed in 68, the are probably getting the most out of what they’ve got.
March 17, 2008 at 3:29 pm
75: I typed that before I saw GY start to go Berserker on the computer topic.
March 17, 2008 at 3:31 pm
A lot of people have brought up the Angels as a model for the Padres and I think that’s the most logical goal. They might not be able to get near the 3.5m mark like the Angels have done the past 4 seasons but there is no reason the Padres can’t beat 3 million. The Angels turn-around in attendance has been pretty miraculous since Arte Moreno bought the team in 2003. From 1996-2002 (the Padres were awful after the Tom Werner fire-sale years, 1996 was the first good season) the Angels only outdrew the Padres in 2002 (their World Series year when they won 99 games). Overall, those seven years the Padres outdrew the Angels by 11%. Since 2003, the Angels have outdrawn the Padres by 23%. The greater population in the Angels area helps, but that can’t be the only reason.
March 17, 2008 at 3:31 pm
77: Excellent point, and though it likely qualifies as “beating a dead horse,” Adrian would be a STUD if he played east of the Mississippi.
March 17, 2008 at 3:39 pm
31 … I’m with Pat on this … I’m not sure there is a “problem” … attendance seems healthy … prices seem high enough that revenue seems healthy … how are the Padres doing with media revenue (ie. TV and radio rights fees)? Are their ratings healthy?
GY … are you trying to suggest that the “problem” is that the Padres are in a Catch-22-kind-of-rut? ie. to get better attendance they need a high-priced star … but to be able to afford a high-priced star, they need better attendance? … perhaps … and so while looking for the right opportunity to break out of this cycle, they are doing what TW describes as a conservative approach that is the best thing to do (for a business) 85% of the time …
Going for a WS championship is risky … with the possibility of commensurate rewards … but it truly does feel like current ownership/management has chosen to not go that route … and I’m actually OK with that … they seem to be creating a solid foundation … one which will make “going for WS championship” a bit less risky in the near future … and I’m enjoying watching that evolve/develop …
March 17, 2008 at 3:43 pm
KRS1,
I don’t think that HRs equal scoring but that is the general belief. The Padres had an above average offense last season but you wouldn’t know it if you just watched espn. You said above that you found the Padres to be a boring team at home — yet they were the 2nd in the NL in road HRs and 4th in scoring. Put the Phillies or Brewers offense in Petco and they wouldn’t be as exciting.
I brought up the Pujols thing more as a joke plus I was curious about who was drafted around him. It shows how lucky you have to get in the draft as there have been plenty of players drafted in lower rounds that every team but one could play “what if” with. Usually the only “guaranteed” pick is the #1 overall selection — the Padres had the chance twice in the past four years to either have the first pick or take the consensus #1 player and probably squandered both (althought passing on the #1 talent in 1990 really helped out the Braves).
March 17, 2008 at 3:46 pm
77 … re: only one Gwynn … an example of a comparable non-HR-hitting “star” today might be Ichiro! … especially when you qualify it with “a player who is recognized as a star”.
80 … re: Angles … I think the Angels kept their appearance of being a team with the upside of winning a WS by signing Vladdy … he belongs on the list in comment #27 … when he was a FA, I hoped he’d be the guy that the Padres “broke the bank” for.
58 … Rusch with 2 good innings today
March 17, 2008 at 3:49 pm
58 … and Crabbe with 3 hits today …
March 17, 2008 at 3:58 pm
70 … IF the Padres were to sign a Ryan Howard-type player in free agency, he would already be a recognizable superstar so people would be coming out to see someone they already know to be great. He wouldn’t have to lead the league in homers. On the other hand, it will be hard for someone like Adrian Gonzalez to ever become that superstar because he plays at Petco and isn’t going to lead the league in HR’s. If he played in Philly, he would be hitting 40 bombs easily.
BUT realistically, they are never going to sign a player of that caliber in free agency, so you make a good point when you say they are going to have to get lucky in the draft. Unfortunately, they have not had much luck in that department since they drafted T. Gwynn.
March 17, 2008 at 4:03 pm
77.
Ichiro
Derek Jeter
Carl Crawford
Hanley Ramirez
Chase Utley
Jose Reyes
Grady Sizemore
Jimmy Rollins
Curtis Granderson
BJ Upton
Nick Markakis
Those are just a few I can think of off the top of my head and there are plenty more I’m sure. Some of them obviously hit for more power than others but I don’t think any of them are known for their power. Not to suggest that any of them are the quality of hitter that Tony was but you get where I am going with the comparisons.
83.
I certainly did not say that I found the Padres to be boring at home!
March 17, 2008 at 4:04 pm
58 … and Mitch Canham with his first hit in a Padre uniform today (digging deep for good news out of today’s box score) …
March 17, 2008 at 4:05 pm
87 … you mis-spelled Ichiro!
March 17, 2008 at 4:13 pm
58 … and Bard threw out a base-stealer
McAnulty with 2 Ks in 2 ABs
March 17, 2008 at 4:30 pm
I dropped out of the attendance conversation earlier today but have enjoyed reading the comments of everyone
OT: I am happy the competition for the bench and bullpen spots has been so fierce this spring, there will be some dudes who don’t make the squad but deserve to
March 17, 2008 at 4:44 pm
The Padres can’t capture San Diego’s imagination because:
A. They’re old.
B. They’re slow.
C. They’re white.
D. They’re cheap.
March 17, 2008 at 4:48 pm
91 … I like the bench competition … the bully and #5 competition has been disappointing thus far …
March 17, 2008 at 4:50 pm
#82: I’m not sure what I’m suggesting. I do suspect a certain “Catch-22″ is at work, and I also believe a World Championship would take care of many things. Sadly, those are hard to come by.
#84: Ichiro! is a unique case. He’s not the player that Gwynn was, and yet the perception (even by normally smart folks, e.g., Baseball Prospectus) is that Ichiro! is better. Either way, we’ve identified two players who fit that profile in the last quarter century. Throw Wade Boggs in there, too. That’s still not a lot of guys.
#87: Yeah, I’ll give you Jeter. Crawford and Reyes steal an ungodly number of bases. The rest of those guys hit for power. In fact, if we’re recognizing Markakis as a star, then there’s the east coast thing at work. He’s basically the same hitter as Adrian.
#91: Agreed, this has been some terrific discussion. Love the spirit. I’m so fired up for Opening Day. (As if that weren’t obvious.)
March 17, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Re: 91
I, for one, would love to see LeBlanc get some on the job training in the the number five spot. Or Rusch. Anyone but Germano. I’m surprised he is even in the mix considering he lost his spot in the rotation during the dog days last summer.
March 17, 2008 at 4:53 pm
57 … anyone else out there with ESPN Insider access that can tell us what Rob Neyer wrote about today (referencing today’s Ducksnorts post)?
March 17, 2008 at 4:54 pm
52: I’m with you in that boat, GY. It frustrates me no end to be at a game at Petco and people are wandering around as if there aren’t even players on the field. They’re clearly not baseball fans but just out for an evening and thought it would be cool to go to Petco, or something. I guess it’s the fate of a diehard baseball fan.
March 17, 2008 at 5:04 pm
87:
What exactly is the Padres problem in your opinion? I think we can all agree that unless they have a Pujols type they aren’t going to have anyone with overwhelming offensive numbers. Of those players you named the only one that’s going to be available is Hanley Ramirez — I’d trade everyone on the team with the exception of Jake and CY to get him — but all the rest aren’t going to end up here.
Again, that’s why the passing of Porcello for Nick Schmidt was such a huge blunder. I wonder if the Marlins would take Porcello, Headley and another prospect for Ramirez? That’s probably more then they got for Cabrera (just including Maybin and Miller).
March 17, 2008 at 5:07 pm
There is no attendance problem. Attendance is higher than it has ever been, including the 1998 team and the 1984 team, both of which has greater “star” power than any of the Petco incarnations have had.
I love being nostalgic about the Q too, and I still go there for events, but those 55,000+ Sky Show and giveaway nights were needed to balance out the 10k Monday through Wednesdays (except when they had the Super $5 buck Mondays with $1 concessions).
What you are seeing now is a repeat of what happens to most teams with new stadia. Attendance spikes in the first year of a stadium; it declines pretty much every year after that until it finds its equilibrium, then is spiked by championship years, followed by sharp declines with continued losing. Teams’ experience does vary; the Cleveland Indians maintained sellouts because they were WS contenders most of their early years at the Jake; the Giants maintained attendance due to winning and the uber atttraction of Bonds*; watch what happens to them over the next three years.
Also, the perception that Moores is more concerned about profit than winning is garbage. The team wins more now under Moores than it ever has. The team also doesn’t make a profit, and in most years loses a little with cash calls from ownership to make up the difference; however, it was losing a lot more toward the end of the Q run.
While the stadium helps the team stay out of the red and allows a bigger payroll, the team simply doesn’t have the revenue streams from TV and radio (like Anaheim, LA, SF, NY, Chicago) to keep up with the big boys in terms of attracting star power, plus the stadium isn’t conducive to attracting offensive fire power. So, they will continue to have to be creative in maintaining and hopefully buiding upon what they have accomplished the last four years, which has never been done in Padres history - consistent, winning baseball.
March 17, 2008 at 5:21 pm
And if you would like to see what happens to a team that doesn’t win in their new ballpark, I give you:
The Pittsburgh Pirates
2000: 21591 avg (last year in Three Rivers)
2001: 30430 avg (finished 6th in first year in PNC)
2002: 22312 avg (26% drop)
2003: 20207 avg (another 10% drop)
2004: 19750 avg (another drop)
2005-2007: 22,300 avg - equilibrium reached, still just a little below what the Pirates averaged during 3 year run of divisional titles
March 17, 2008 at 5:22 pm
the perception that Moores is more concerned about profit than winning is garbage.
Why would people think that? How about the fact that in order to fill gaping holes in the team (backup CF and injury replacement for Edmonds, a rotation that may need 30 more starts out of their top 5) they are using minimum salary players or non-roster invites? There was a cheap, better alternative in Kyle Lohse available for around $4m yet the Padres would rather have Germano, Rusch, Estes fill those starts. Other then to save money what other motivation could there be? Lohse was better then all of them last year, is coming into his prime, and has the benefit of gaining a draft pick when he signs with another team for 2009.
Same thing with the pick of Schmidt over Porcello. The only explanation is that the Padres wanted to save money (although with their track record of developing young players it might be smart to save money but that’s a whole other problem).
March 17, 2008 at 5:58 pm
84: You misspelled Angels… if you want to be the spelling police haha
March 17, 2008 at 5:59 pm
87: You could add Michael Young to that list
March 17, 2008 at 6:12 pm
102: N/M I get it
March 17, 2008 at 6:50 pm
96/Neyer: Don’t want to paste everything, obviously, as Neyer reads DS. He listed his answer(s) to Geoff’s original question: They have not established a winning tradition, they play in a relatively small market, they’re not sexy. That was the main gist of it. If you want to know anything else, let me know.
March 17, 2008 at 6:52 pm
101: I’m not sure that signing Kyle Loshe would have done much to change the public’s perception about FA.
I hate to say it, but I don’t think the public will even react to “reasonable” or “intelligent” FA signings. They’ll always be accused of being cheap if they do that.
Then, the second we over-spend on a FA, everyone will be going back to the Nevin/Klesko debaucle.
March 17, 2008 at 6:56 pm
I don’t see any problem with attendance. Like The Fathers mentioned, those gigantic attendance at Jack Murphy was driven by the giveaway and the specials (Sky show, 4th of July, $5 Mondays etc.)
Take those away, I bet Jack Murphy attendance is far fewer than the averages suggest. I average 40-50 games in 97-99 and there are nights when only about 9K-11K people at the games and yet, the average for those years were above 22K, I believe. I think Petco averages higher than 11K even with limited sold-out capacity. Jack Murphy was hosting about 50K-65K for special nights.
The reason I don’t go to more games at Petco are:
- more travelling time (I used to work 3 miles from Jack Murphy) trying to get to Petco during traffic rushhour is no fun,
- more expensive tickets (walk-up that cost $2 more/ticket),
however, when I go it’s quite easy to get in and out of the area, certainly not any harder than getting in and out of Jack Murphy,
- catch games on radio/TV is pretty easy during the week.
None of my reasons are due to the team but there are plenty of fans who are disgruntled by the construction of the team.
Low scoring games for an extended period of home games seem to really bug the casual fans. I’ve had arguments against this notion but to no avail. They’d rather the team ‘tried’ for the big name players than for the alternatives who may be more suited to the ballpark and team. These people, I simply cannot convince that the team has been winning with the new philosophy and are not willing to give the team a chance. I believe that El Hombre and Mashing Macedonian are going to be the sluggers the team needed in the lineup along with the flawed Khalil Thabit Greene.
Even my optimistic outlook on the Padres cannot blind me to the flaws in the roster. I believe the team still needs more pitching and defense, and I have yet to see those addressed. I’m willing to wait breathlessly to see if the plethora of OFs and suspect arms will pan out. This uncertainty is also a reason for some fans not to turn out at the ballpark. Perception of the team not trying to win is hard to shake off short of the team going on a winning streak early and often which really is not what the team has shown since moving to Petco (slow April, hot May, slow June).
I have no answer on how the team can sell out every home game as I don’t believe they will do that even the year after winning the WS.
Good news: 2 weeks until Opening Day 2008.
March 17, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Sorry, busy day at work. I just wanted to respond to a something. My problem is not with a lack of scoring. My significant issues are cost and lack of passion, both fans and players.
March 17, 2008 at 7:26 pm
105 … Thanks, MB … that’s exactly what I wanted … and I buy each of Neyer’s points … and I think they are establishing a “winning tradition” (but still need being to establish a “winning in the post-season tradition”) … and doing that will go a long ways towards making them “sexy” … a lot further than OG’s behavior has gotten them, anyway
March 17, 2008 at 7:31 pm
My 2 cents:
Petco better for anyone to watch a game that had to deal with the supposed ADA seating at Qualcomm, and for me, cheaper!
Access to Petco better but not perfect. And although I do occasionally eat at the park, the chance to eat outside the park is great.
Product on the field better - I’ve been attending games since 1975 and four winning seasons is great - not that I don’t want more.
Re: Star players - One reason that Adrian, and likely Chase should he live up to expectations, will never be “big” stars is that this is tiny media market. Players in LA, and even SF, play in cities where media exposure is huge, even if it’s 3 hours behind NY. LA is likely the most paparazzi ridden city in the US, if not the world. Being seen with Alyssa Milano will raise your notoriety whatever the reason. San Diego is a place that Hoffa could come to disappear and no one would notice, and it’s been like that forever.
Re: San Diego fans - I believe that one reason San Diego has a smaller group of die hard fans for the Padres (and even the Chargers, but I digress), it that professional baseball came to SD so late - not in the heyday of baseball. The east coast teams, even the ones that are now bad, have multi-generational families of fans. They have the tradition of being fans of the Red Sox, or the Yankees or the Cardinals. And even native born San Diegans don’t have more than 3 generations (and that’s pushing it). I have heard that rooting for a team is a bit like the music of high school - for most people that is the music they are connected to them most strongly regardless of how old they are. And it is the teams of the youth and young adult years that often hold the most significance for fans even after they have moved away. Did 1996 and 1998 effect who is now buying tickets?
Sorry for the long post - I got in a lot for my 2 cents. I leave tomorrow for Peoria.
March 17, 2008 at 7:52 pm
CY with a good outing today …
http://sandiego.padres.mlb.com.....mp;c_id=sd
… including working with Barrett to catch a base stealer! Woo-Hoo!
March 17, 2008 at 8:59 pm
LM, Sorry I didn’t follow up with you about Neyer’s post; just got too busy, but MB summed it up pretty well.
March 18, 2008 at 6:57 am
At the Murph, I could walk up and buy a ticket on the field level between the bases and the cost would be $27.00. Add in two beers at $5.50 each, a couple of dogs at $1.50 each and park the truck for $5.00. I could have an entire day of fun for less than $50.00 bucks.
If I want to sit on the field level between the bases the first stop I have to make is at the ticket broker web site or enter some stupid auction for tickets. Then there is the good old cattle car ride on the big red thing, through Encanto or Barrio Logan at 10:00 PM. Cost = $$$Holy Crap$$$ not to mention the possibility of being mugged, shot, stabbed, raped, assaulted or any combination of the above
Because I’m a poor uneducated working stiff I find the following much more cost effective: Channel 4 Padres - HDTV - Matty V and Mud cutting up and having a good time.
I only go to the park for day games on weekends now.
March 18, 2008 at 8:17 am
113 … I assume someone has figured out that attendence is higher for night games, but I prefer day games (I like baseball in the sun, and evenings @ Petco have been pretty chilly the few I’ve been to) … it especially grieves and confuses me when “Opening Day” is at *night*! It’s a game that’s going to sell out no matter what … so why not play it during the *day*? OK, OK … now that I do a post-rant think about it, it’s for the TV ratings … eh … OK …
March 18, 2008 at 8:55 am
re 101:
I’m sorry, but I have to agree with Phantom on Kyle Lohse. He is not a big name player and most San Diego fans have never heard of him. If the Padres chose to allocate their payroll resources elsewhere, then question those moves so that Lohse could be brought in. Same with Edmonds; criticize the team’s allocation and provide alternatives available at the time, and please don’t say Andruw Jones or Torii Hunter - they did not fit within the budget without gutting too many other areas of need so as to stay within resource limits.
If the team is not making a profit and is putting all of its money into its product at one level of another, by my logical reasoning it cannot be cheap, unless you redefine cheap to require the ownership to continuously take big operating losses.
Your point regarding Porcello over Schmidt relates to resource allocation and also the attempt at ownership solidarity in terms of not paying more than slot (a collective bargaining and draft fairness related ploy), not whether or not the team is cheap. On resource allocation, I would have preferred the Padres invested more in the draft, and less in retread pitchers for the 40 man roster. On the slot issue, that is designed to allow the non-big market teams to at least try to level the playing field more in the draft; the more defectors from the slot issue there are, the more that benefits Boras clients and the big market teams. I still would have preferred them taking Porcello over Schmidt, but imo that has nothing to do with the organization being cheap.
March 18, 2008 at 9:56 am
110: Great post Mary! Have fun at ST!!
March 18, 2008 at 11:17 am
I think Padres fans want to see the team go for broke instead of shooting for a healthy long-term plan. The problem is that the team isn’t that good, in my opinion. They’re good enough to make the playoffs if things go well, but they don’t have a realistic chance of really doing damage once they get there. I think the fans sense this.
Not that this means anything, but I bought MLB 2K8 for my 360. Playing with the Padres is depressing. The national perception is that the Padres offense is terrible, and they don’t make up for it with a lot of athleticism or fire. You can only say “Check out their home/road splits” so many times before people start to ignore you and think you’re crazy.
March 18, 2008 at 12:06 pm
One last point from me on “Woe is the Padres, for they cannot capture our money.”
Attendance has gone up significantly, and ticket prices are much higher than at Jack Murphy. The average ticket price in 2003 was $16. The average ticket price in 2007 was $22. Just in tickets alone - leaving aside concessions, any money the team gets from parking, etc - that’s a bump of 4.5 million. If they’d maintained the 2004 attendance levels the bump would have been 5.8, not very big. Those are average ticket prices, not actual tickets sold, but it should track.
If the concern is that the Padres need more community support, I don’t see it. An extra 1.3 million in attendance revenue wouldn’t change the 25 man roster one bit, or change who we draft. The difference in attendance money between 2004 and 2007 is a drop in the bucket compared to the increased revenue from the national media deals and MLBAM.
115: The big market teams aren’t benefiting from “defecting.” The real beneficiaries are the small and mid-market teams who realize that every dollar they spend in the draft is worth a hundred dollars spent on mediocre free agents.
March 18, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Maybe in the short run, the small and mid market teams who defect benefit, but all such systems inevitably break down as the defectors overrun the system, the agents recognize this, and the big market teams’ market resources overpower other teams. As long as there are defectors, a smart agent will go to the later drafting big market teams to set the value of the player, which can always increase if earlier drafting teams are willing to meet that price.
Now, if you can convince me that only the Padres will defect, and that all other teams will follow slot, then I am all for the Padres defecting.
IMO, they need a mandatory slot draft system to provide all teams a fairer chance and to eliminate defections, similar to what is done in the NFL, with the understanding that unlike the NFL, these players, particularly high round picks, usually don’t see the major leagues their first year.
March 18, 2008 at 4:33 pm
and I sure was surprised to see the small market Tigers get Rick Porcello in the draft. Oh wait . . .
March 18, 2008 at 4:59 pm
119: You can’t predict that at all. Agents don’t set the player values in a vacuum. If ALL teams were willing to make their own assessments of value, it would be a lot closer to Marvin Miller’s nightmare of universal free agency. Instead we have an artificially low demand.
All teams have an absolutely fair chance right now, without any tweaks other than eliminating MLB’s ability to “punish” slot offenders. The Pirates wouldn’t go over slot in the 2007 draft, but the commissioner’s office (and slot-fans) don’t question them spending 9 million on Matt Morris. No, not just 9 million. About 3 million last year, 9.5 million this year, and at least 1 million in 2009. Yes, that’s a much better investment for a perennial last place team than a 3.5 bonus to Porcello that could push it to 7 million. Talk about penny-wise and pound absolutely idiotic.
It’s amazing how owners will howl about their rights to engage in capitalistic activity while a certain percentage of those owners want to saddle would-be employees with the most anti-capitalistic obstacles possible. They consistently want to be mandated to act in a certain way rather than simply acting intelligently.
Porcello was far from the only player who signed over slot, and I don’t see how Detroit is “big market.” 11th largest TV market, which overlaps a region that has been economically savaged over the last couple of years. A lot of smaller market teams went over slot and benefited. Any of the teams picking before Detroit could have afforded Porcello without breaking a sweat.
March 19, 2008 at 8:02 am
I’d say it’s pretty simple: 9 out of 10 people in San Diego are not from San Diego.
March 20, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Living on the East Coast and Midwest, I rarely heard about the Padres because their games didn’t start until 10:30PM EST. There was no mention in the morning papers because the games did not finish before the publishing deadline. On the morning news, you might hear how the star players performed for the Giants or Dodgers. Since San Diego usually does not have the big names, you essentially never hear about them in the major media markets east of the Mississippi. This makes it tough for transplants to relate to their new home team. I was lucky because I moved here in September of 1998 as the Padres worked their way into the World Series. It was hard not to get caught up in the hoopla. Let’s hope that happens again in 2008!
April 7, 2008 at 5:14 pm
I cant believe you downplay the Padres not spending any money this year. we have a good year and miss the playoffs because our closer is washed up and then we sit back and watch everyone else in the division get better except for us. We have no outfield and we need a quality bat in the lineup so we go out and get a has been oft injured center fielder and we hang on to our closer who cant close any more. I am a baseball fan and I think both Trevor Hoffman and Jim Edmonds were awesome but I want to keep this winning tradition going and management doesnt want to spend the money to make it happen. Of course they have no problem raising ticket and concession prices. I almost didnt renew my season tickets I was so mad; but here I am and have watched two blown saves and 4 or 5 plays in centerfield drop that Cameron would have made and I wonder if anyone in the organization cares??