I paid a visit to Chicago last week for three reasons:
- To escape the lack of extreme heat and humidity prevalent in San Diego this time of year; it was becoming downright comfortable back home
- To avoid hearing any mention whatsoever of the Padres, who are actually a figment of San Diegans’ collective imagination; I’ve been thinking the team should change its name to Snuffleupagi
- To watch the Cubs and Astros play at Wrigley Field, one of baseball’s great temples, and to be reminded that there are at least two teams even worse than the Padres; there is nothing quite so liberating as witnessing awful baseball while not caring one bit about the outcome
Speaking of which, while I was away, the Padres traveled to Miami and swept the Marlins. The Padres, who generally have trouble scoring runs, broke out in a big way. They outscored the Fish, 23-6, during the three-game series.
Padres center fielder Cameron Maybin, acquired from Florida this past winter for a couple of relievers, led the charge. Maybin went 9-for-15 with a double and five stolen bases. He also robbed former teammate Logan Morrison of a home run on Thursday.
Meanwhile, I met up with a few former colleagues at Hardball Times — Chris Jaffe, Harry Pavlidis, and Dave Studeman — to watch the Cubs and Astros play on Friday afternoon. I had been warned of triple-digits heat (temperature, not velocity), but it never materialized.
Game time temperature was 77 degrees, with some cloud cover. It was more humid than back home but very pleasant. Our seats, upper tank on the third-base side of home plate, couldn’t have been better.
The Cubs won, 4-2. As if to make me feel more at home, Houston loaded the bases with one out in the second and third innings, and managed to score a total of one run. I chuckled.
Beyond the history of Wrigley Field and its beautiful view of the Chicago skyline, what struck me most was the size of the crowd, listed at 39,855. Two teams “battling” for last place in the National League Central, weekday afternoon game, heat wave, threat of thundershowers?
I was amazed at the turnout and said as much to Harry, who expressed disappointment at the empty seats. According to the team’s official web site, Wrigley Field holds 41,160.
Petco Park holds 42,445, but as I told Harry, it almost never gets that full. Maybe on Opening Day, or when the Yankees or Red Sox come to town every few seasons.
In fact, the Padres have broken 40,000 at home five times in 50 dates this year — three against the Giants, one against the Dodgers, and one against the Phillies. As we lamented when the Giants came to town last week, several teams draw more of their own fans to Petco Park than do the Padres.
“Because they’re having a bad year?”
No, that’s just how it is in San Diego. I always get strange looks when explaining this to people from cities that support their home team. It’s like we’re speaking different languages.
After the final out was recorded, most of the fans (less than the number announced, which represents tickets sold) stood around for a few minutes and sang “Go, Cubs, Go.” People wore Cubs gear and didn’t seem to be in a hurry to get home. They acted like they were glad to be out at the ballpark, supporting their team despite its poor showing this season.
I am pleased and saddened to see a city embrace its team in such manner. Pleased because this is as it should be… saddened because San Diego doesn’t have that relationship with its teams and probably never will.
When I told Harry about the current season ticket numbers (10,300 as of March 2011), he again couldn’t believe it and wondered why. Then I explained that the new ownership group has worked hard to expand the fan base and that this actually represents an improvement over 2010, when the team sold 9,100 season tickets.
Different languages…
Whenever I broach the subject with San Diegans, I am met with defensive assurances that if the Padres spent more money (how much?) and won more games (how many?), folks would support the team. This is usually where the argument ends because they have proven my point without even realizing it, and no amount of further discussion benefits anyone.
On the bright side, because nobody really cares, the pressure on a young player like Anthony Rizzo isn’t as great as it would be in many other markets. Replacing a team’s franchise player isn’t an easy task for anyone, let alone for a 21-year-old with 50 or so games above Double-A.
But Rizzo and his silly numbers at Tucson forced the Padres’ hand. And, as young hitters sometimes will do regardless of their talent, he struggled mightily in his first exposure to big-league pitching.
This was a known risk at the time but one deemed acceptable by the front office. If either of the two imported veteran stopgap options — Brad Hawpe or Jorge Cantu — had done anything, the temptation to push Rizzo might not have been so great.
As it now stands, Rizzo will be viewed by some as a disappointment, as yet another example of a young hyped player that failed to deliver on his promise (or on the promises made by others on his behalf). This is an unreasonable stance to take, of course. History is littered with players who struggled on first arriving in the big leagues.
Some of them never make the necessary adjustments and see their careers fizzle faster than you can say Shawn Abner. Others, like Ozzie Smith, end up in Cooperstown. In San Diego, we have seen young players who “failed” with other organizations come here and thrive — Phil Nevin and Adrian Gonzalez immediately spring to mind… Maybin looks like another.
The upside to sending Rizzo back to the minors is that now he can try to fix whatever is broken in a less demanding environment than the big leagues. Yes, the pressure to succeed in San Diego is lower than the pressure to succeed in other markets, but it does exist.
The downsides are twofold: First and foremost, Triple-A pitching isn’t big-league pitching. We know that Rizzo can dominate the PCL. There is nothing left for him to prove at that level. And in a hitter’s paradise, such as that found in Tucson, even poor process can lead to favorable outcomes (Dante Bichette sends his regards).
I’m not suggesting that Rizzo has poor process, just that in such an environment, it’s almost impossible to separate the wheat from the chaff simply by examining the numbers. They are not a reliable indicator of future performance elsewhere, particularly when “elsewhere” involves facing the world’s best pitchers in a ballpark that destroys left-handed batters.
A secondary concern is that in shuttling Rizzo back and forth between San Diego and Tucson, the Padres risk eroding the young man’s confidence. Given Rizzo’s background (he has survived Hodgkins Lymphoma), I like his chances to emerge unscathed, but you never know.
In Rizzo’s place, the Padres have recalled Kyle Blanks. He and Jesus Guzman, whose Triple-A success has followed him to the big leagues thus far, will split time at first base.
Blanks started the season rehabbing from last July’s Tommy John surgery at Double-A San Antonio, where he hit .282/.353/.475 in 44 games. He moved up to Tucson when Rizzo came to San Diego and, as hitters will do, abused PCL pitching to the tune of .351/.421/.716 in 35 games.
Blanks has played some outfield, but his future is at first base, although probably not in San Diego. With Rizzo having been drafted by the current Padres front office and acquired for the face of the franchise (“Hey everybody, look at what we got for Gonzalez!”), it’s difficult to imagine Blanks being a part of the long-term plan. The Padres must hope that he plays well enough in the second half that they can move him this coming off-season to address areas of greater need.
Meanwhile, Guzman gets a chance to show what he can do at this level. He is likely too old to become a regular but could be a useful weapon off the bench. Those are handy to have, especially at his price.
Going to the Cubs game is an event. Sadly, going to a Padres game is not. A friend of mine who is a native Chicagoan once told me that it’s acceptable in Chi-town to tell the boss you have Cubs tickets and have to leave early (day game obviously).
Cubs games as “event status” has happened in the last 10-15 years. Even the 1984 team didn’t have that mystique. If they want to bring more fans, they have to figure out the event aspect. Dodger stadium with Manny Ramirez is an event, etc.
The Angels have figured out how to wake-up their fanbase, maybe the Padres could take a page from their book. Right now, going to Petco is like a visit to the morgue, unless the Giants or Dodgers are in town…
Wrigley and the Cubs are a unique case….an iconic park with a team that is embraced as lovable losers. Only a handful of teams have had that luxury.
The crosstown White Sox are a better comparison. Always playing second fiddle, they need to win (or at least give the impression of trying to win) in order to draw fans. I remember going to games in the 1980′s when both teams were having awful seasons. Wrigley was packed while (old) Comiskey was a ghost town.
************
Also…your comment about being warned of 100-degree heat, when the temperature was 77 degrees made me laugh. Every winter, I receive emails and phone calls from friends back in San Diego telling me about the subzero temps and blizzards they just saw on the news. Meanwhile, it is 40 degrees outside with not an inch of snow in CT.
When you need to know the weather or forecast for a specific place, without the sensationalism of cable TV or local SD news, go to the NOAA website.
Here are the attendance numbers for 2011 in avg fans per game:
1 Philadelphia 45,467
2 NY Yankees 44,467
3 San Francisco 41,808
4 Minnesota 39,298
5 LA Angels 39,089
6 St. Louis 37,696
7 Boston 37,597
8 Chicago Cubs 37,034
9 Texas 36,990
10 LA Dodgers 36,629
11 Colorado 35,762
12 Milwaukee 35,435
13 NY Mets 30,965
14 Detroit 29,826
15 Atlanta 28,602
16 Cincinnati 27,815
17 Houston 26,745
18 San Diego 25,570
19 Pittsburgh 24,456
20 Chicago White Sox 24,376
21 Arizona 24,036
22 Washington 23,391
23 Seattle 23,342
24 Toronto 23,030
25 Baltimore 22,344
26 Cleveland 21,224
27 Kansas City 20,156
28 Tampa Bay 19,971
29 Oakland 19,059
30 Florida 17,616
You be the judge on how SD fans stack up. I think this notion that we don’t have real fans is BS compared to the rest of league. The numbers speak for themselves.
Backing up Foster’s statement, I too have heard the “if you have tickets” it was described to me not that they had to ask for permission, they just tell the boss they are going to the game.
As for fans. Sadly the Padres will have to put up a nice little run of winning for three to four years in a row of constant playoff appearances and win some of those appearances. They’d also have to be better than that 2005-07 run since no one believed in those teams anyway.
I live in SF and try to get to one Padre game a season here. The fans here are great (I hate them with every fiber of my being). Maybe it’s easier to dress in black and root for your team, but they have to deal with that god awful orange & they embrace it. Maybe the constant uniform changes have something to do with it, the lack of identity when you copy the Brewers god awful uniforms and other constant changes. I personally go to games wearing Brown & Yellow and I see that it appears to be making a push back home. Hopefully that is the possible uniform changes that are supposed to be around the corner.
@FBR: Yeah, Anaheim did a great job. Revamping the ballpark, winning a World Series, and branding the Angels as a Los Angeles team has been an effective combination for generating interest in the team.
@Parlo: Good point about the White Sox… and I actually got my heat warnings from locals who were concerned for themselves as well as for me.
@Ford: The numbers do not speak as loudly as Giants fans cheering wildly for their team and taunting Heath Bell at Petco Park. Any attendance is good for the bottom line, but the occasional appearance of Padres fans is better for our collective psyche.
@Mike: I don’t know that a “nice little run of winning” will do the trick. We tried that before and it didn’t work.
If you think about where you live, or where you work, and the people you see, how many of them grew up in San Diego, and rooted for the Padres as kids? Probably not many. For better or worse, San Diego is a city of transplants, and our teams hurt because of it. 10,000 Giants’ fans did not fly down to San Diego for the game – most of them live and work here. Same with Cubs fans, Yankee fans, Sox fans, and even probably with Dodger fans. That’s the way San DIego works.
Teams like San Francisco, LA, Philly, New York, etc., have fan bases that stretch back generations, and for the most part, that doesn’t happen here. And let’s face it, fans pick their teams based on who they rooted for when they were kids. Now, as the population gets more and more entrenched (and it is happening), more and more kids will grow up Padres fans, and more will attend Padres games.
The one thing that bugs me is that the Padres haven’t marketed in TJ as much as they used to. Sure, TJ is a lot poorer than San Diego, but its the same size as San Diego (population wise), and a good number of its residents have dual citizenship. If every kid in San Diego, TJ, Imperial County and maybe Riverside County grew up wearing a Padres cap, Petco would be a lot more full.
@Mike: I could not agree more with the identity crisis that seems to engulf the Padres. I grew up a Pads fan in San Diego my whole life, and now currently live in Portland. I honestly can’t tell the difference between a Pads game or Brewers game if I am not 10 inches from the TV.
One example that comes to mind of how valuable a team identity can be are the Portland Timbers (I know, it’s soccer, but still valuable). The fans/Timbers Army were largely responsible for the appearance of their club as well as aspects of the newly revamped stadium (where the Beavers used to play) and are continually asked for their input regarding the team. Games are constantly sold out and you can just see how the city has embraced this team.
Obviously, it’s comparing apples to oranges, but I still think the new ownership should embrace the fans and the fact that we do have a rich history that extends beyond the occasional throwbacks.
Geoff: How did the run of winning in the mid-2000′s not work? We had per game attendance figures in the mid-30,000′s for 2006 and 2007 if I remember correctly. It fell off slightly in 2008 and much more in 2009. We’ve been under 30,000 every year since, with a slight peak last year.
@ Jim T
nicely put.
It wouldn’t hurt if we build a consistent winner. Maybe a team that finished with a winning record 5+ years in a row. Instead of good one year and embarrassingly bad the next.
@ Geoff
If the Padres won the world series and the dodgers were horrible I bet we would be very loud at dodger stadium, taunting their players as well. Fans come out of nowhere when you win just one championship. Ex. Boston Red Sox fan.
@ Big Worm
You’re right. From 04-09 the avg. attendance was 33,948. That’s 80% capacity.
@Jim T
The SF Giants, LA Dodgers, Angels and Mets are only about a decade older than the Padres. Not sure why their fanbases would span back generations while the Padres would not.
I think the “everybody in San Diego is from somewhere else” argument gets overplayed. I had plenty of classmates in both San Diego and Encinitas when I was in school in the 1970′s. Lots of them are Chargers fans, why aren’t they Padres fans?
@Ford
I don’t think being 12th out of 16 NL teams is proof of a strong fanbase.
Most of the teams below the Padres attendance average have one or more of these issues:
-Coming off a dreadful 2010 season (Pirates, Seattle, KC etc)
-Are the second team in a two team city (Oakland, WhiteSox)
-Play in an uninviting stadium (Oakland, Tampa, Miami)
Since a sizable chunk of tickets are sold during the offseason and April, the Padres, coming off a 90-win season in a relatively new stadium, should be faring much better.
@Jim T: The fact that San Diego is a city of transplants is a definite factor. There is very little sense of history here (not just in baseball).
@BigWorm: How much of the attendance boost was due to New Ballpark Shine?
@Ford: The Padres reached the World Series in 1998 (not the same as winning, granted, but the closest we’ve seen). The Dodgers sucked the next year but still drew 3M+. I don’t remember ever hearing Padres fans dominate Chavez Ravine.
@ Geoff
Not only did we not win the World Series we were swept. There is a BIG difference. The Dodgers were 77-85 in 99 and we were 74-88. Hard to start a “Go, Padres, Go” chant when your team was swept in the World Series and was bad the next year.
The Chargers were terrible for many many years and often outnumbered by opposing fans at home games (I know season tix for 10 years). Now after 5+ years of compeitive/playoff football we have a strong following and a home field edge.
Agree to disagree
I don’t understand the consensus that Blanks’ future is at first base and on another team. He’s a big guy but he’s no Headley out there, and it’s not as if there are Padres of the Tucson variety banging the outfield doors down. He is also a player with humongous power, the kind that PETCO might not be able to hurt, and that’s the kind of player that the Padres should hang on to.
@ Geoff
Sure, the new park had something to do with it – but I would think MOST of that boost would be seen in 2004. And it was – I’m pretty sure attendance that year was the highest it has ever been (37k / game). But I think the “new park” angle gets overplayed. If the Padres were losing in 2005, 2006 and 2007, would they have averaged 30k+ / game? I’m guessing no.
But it is impossible to say which had the greater impact, the winning or the new stadium. When the Padres sucked and were still at Qualcomm, they would average about 25k / game. Which is right around where they are now. When they were good and were still at Qualcomm (very rare, not many data points), they were just over 30k.
I actually ran a regression on baseball attendance as part of a project I worked on while in business school, and the ONLY thing that correlated with increased attendance on an annual basis was winning percentage both during that year and the year before. I know smarter people than me have done similar studies and I’ve seen different conclusions so take that for what it’s worth.
I will support the lack of a consistent winner angle until the Padres win the NL West three years in a row or make the World Series again. With the exception of that mid-2000′s period we have never had sustained success. And even in that period, only the 2007 team really appeared to be any sort of threat to win the whole thing. That 2005 team was incredibly average.
I like the FO and think they are on the right track. I think attendance will pop as the prospects mature and we win more games. We will always have an issue with fans of other teams because San Diego is full of transplants and it is a nice vacation spot. And probably a whole host of other reasons.