clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

What does a potential Peavy trade mean to San Diego Padres fans?

Remember throughout the season how the Padres were trying to get us to buy into the idea that the first four seasons of Petco were so good and the team was so competitive that we should give a pass for 2008 because it was something like a hiccup. An anomaly.

The pieces were essentially the same as the previous year, so we should be good, right? We shouldn't have to rebuild. We should just reload. Oh well.

Sullivan's latest piece breaks down the situation the Padres are in right now.

Yet the real issue here is not front office flexibility, but fans' faith. Time after time, the Padres have signed key players to long-term contracts only to develop buyer's remorse before the ink dries. When your foundation is forever in flux, your customers may be prone to cynicism.


Given the bait-and-switch allegations that still linger from the campaign to build Petco Park, the Padres have to be careful to explain themselves and to cushion (as much as possible) the frustration fans feel when popular players are sent packing.

Personally, I wish there was a way for us to keep Peavy. I'm familiar with the situations that exist when a team trades away their best player and improves the next season. That doesn't mean that I have to like it.

Trading away a guy like Peavy means you're trading for prospects. And by definition, prospects are just that: They're prospective. You have to look to the future, because they haven't done anything in the past. And that means we'll likely be in a tenuous position next season, which is basically where we've been for several seasons, only the Padres FO wasn't telling us that.

Just because Sandy Alderson has a particular philosophy that has worked in the past doesn't mean that I have to like it. There's a good chance that I won't like it regardless of how hard he and his supporters try to convince me that I'm stupid for not liking it. It's a philosophy that forces me to learn the names of players that will be useful for a few years and go on to be stars for other teams. It's a philosophy that builds a lot of support on the internet, where fans can discuss and strategize, but doesn't build support in the ballpark where people are forced to watch it.

Still, it's what we have. I understand the reasoning behind it. Don't tell me I don't. I understand the necessity of it. Don't tell me I don't.

I don't like it. Don't tell me I have to.