Analyzing "Padres: The Sad Truth"

Baseball fans traditionally associate early February with the fondest of emotions. The failures of the last season are soon forgotten as the hopeful turn their gaze and calendars to April. Even San Diego, a hard-luck baseball town if there ever was (ask us about our indoor soccer team!) is generally not immune.

Change The Padres is trying to convince Padres fans that "enough is enough".

In the midst of the fond expectancy of spring, one fan decided that he's had enough. Change the Padres (nee David Marver) showed his documentary to Scott Miller of CBSSports.com, and then to a national audience.  His bones-to-pick with the front office are numerous, divided among three central arguments (The Padres have lied to you., The Padres are the cheapest team in baseball., New ownership = old ownership.). Like any good PSA, the final segment dedicates itself to informing you, disgruntled viewer, how to hit the Padres where it hurts.

The video is long-winded, as such, my response will be exasperatingly lengthy.

The crux of Marver's frustration I am inclined to agree with. The Padres have been cheap, primarily at the major league level, with a lower-case c. The previous off-season passed with little fanfare, and the franchise player (nee Chase Headley) heads into the season lacking an extension and fast approaching free agency. The starting pitching profiles to be a real weakness in terms of productivity (though not in depth as Marver ascertains, more on that in a moment). I can't say that ownership is far different from when Moorad was running things, though I'm in favor of the direction the organization is seemingly heading. 

Like any good appeal piece however, Marver's documentary plays fast and loose with the facts, primarily in the second section. In some particular order lost to the author, here follows rebuttals, refutations, and possibly some other re- words of "Padres: The Sad Truth":

• Marver lists the Pirates' amateur draft spending at $43 million and 2nd in baseball from 2009-2012 and lists the Padres' payroll expenditure at $35 million. The Padres rank 6th over that time in draft spending (calculated using the Baseball America links provided in the video).

          1. Nationals - $43.3 M

          2. Pirates - $41.6 M

          3. Blue Jays - $37.9 M

          4. Red Sox - $36.7 M

          5. Mariners - $36.5 M

          6. Padres - $35.4 M

          Disingenuous to mention the Pirates' rank and not the Padres' 

          rank. They've been one of the most heavily invested farm 

          systems in the last four years, in fact.

• The comments about the 2010/2011 1st round draft picks are a little misleading. Taken first overall, he initially expressed his desire to quickly sign with the Padres. As the signing deadline grew closer however, Whitson recanted and apparently was in tears as the clock struck midnight. I've even heard Whitson was asking for figures as high as $3.5 M (almost double the recommended slot signing bonus). The $2.1 M offered by the Padres' was both above slot and in-line with other top ten draft signings. In the 2011 draft, the Padres took Cory Spangenberg 10th overall and signed him to approximately, if not exactly, slot value. The reason for this was signability, not finances: in the previous CBA, teams first round-picks on the year they were awarded were protected, meaning that any club that failed to sign its first round pick would get a new first round pick in the following draft. This new first round pick was no longer protected, which is why teams would generally take safer picks in the second go-round (which is exactly what Spangenberg was).

•  Marver plays a clip of Moorad talking about the state of the farm in 2011, which Marver presents as hypocrisy or double-talk. While the Padres had some notable and inexcusable signing issues in 2010, Moorad is most likely referring to the 2011 draft, which saw the Padres sign Austin Hedges and Joe Ross from strong commitments to UCLA. The 2011 draft was lauded throughout the industry, and Hedges is commonly scouted as one of the best C prospects in the game.

• Trading Ludwick was much less about his contract and much more about his inability to produce in Petco. The cash opt-out was bogus, I agree, though I don't believe there was anything of real prospect value coming back from him.

• Trading Rizzo was not "lying to a season ticket holder" (it was however, a bad move, at least to this point). Jed Hoyer, GM at the time expressed his trust and belief in Rizzo, made all the more obvious by his trade to acquire him a few months down the line. Current GM Josh Byrnes was not as high on Rizzo and felt that ultimately his left-handed power would not play in Petco. Different GMs, different opinions.

• Padres had no chance of signing Sanchez. Why would he turn down 5/80 from a contending club with a sure-fire path to the playoffs to join the Padres? SD would have to massively overpay just to get him considering, and at that point, you're wasting far too much of your finances on a pitcher when you're probably a year away from serious contention. Not a smart allocation of resources. Haren had some fairly large red flags concerning his hip, and I think that 13 million is a huge overpay (but a livable one if you're the Nationals, especially since it's only a one-year contract). I am disappointed the club wasn't able to sway Jackson (Byrnes matched the AAV, but wouldn't add the 4th year), and Blanton, Marcum, or Myers would be nice for the price they signed.

• Probably due to recency, but the video didn't mention the minor-league signings of Stauffer or Garcia. Won't set the world on fire, but will help to avoid a situation like last year, which helped to allay some fears of the depth of the pitching staff. Not world-beaters, by any means, but insurance against a catastrophe like 2012's pitching staff.

I am not an apologist for the organization, I am just a fan. I do think this club, despite it's frugality at the major league level, is heading in the right direction after years of failure in the drafting and development department. While the Padres have yet to top the 2/11.5 awarded to Hudson, they have been extending a few of the more promising or productive pieces the last few years; Maybin, Luebke, Hundley, Denorfia, Quentin, and Street. Seemingly, Marver wants to watch the Padres entertain offers for Hamilton, Greinke, and the like, and while I don't disagree with the sentiment, I do find fault with the implementation. If the Padres want bona-fide success, they need to build themselves up through the farm and extend core players before they become too expensive, not attempt to outgun the Dodgers, Yankees, and Angels of the world. There will be a time when the Padres can address FA regarding gaps and depths in the major league roster. There will be a time when the Padres will be the ones acquiring major league talent, not jettisoning players for prospects. That time is not now.


Do you think he has a valid point? Let us know.