Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=33455:date=Apr 27 2009, 11:41 AM:name=cherp)-->QUOTE (cherp @ Apr 27 2009, 11:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=33434:date=Apr 27 2009, 09:57 AM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Apr 27 2009, 09:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I bet Kevin Towers is might proud of that hard line he took with the Peavy negotiations. "I want all of your good prospects, AND I want you to take this 81 million dollar contract off of my hands during the middle of a recession".
Nice job Kev.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
BT - His team is 10-8 with a 43mm payroll and under 30mm in obligations for 2010. Why should he not be proud?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, if he is basing his happiness on an 18 game stretch in April, he is a complete dipshit. Were the Marlins allowed to start printing playoff tickets when they were 11-1? Because they've lost 6 in a row. By the way, the Padres have lost 5 of their last 6. So their record on April 27 is about as relevant as the release date of Frank Stallone's next record.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Unless he is forced by ownership to dump Peavy later, and he is forced (by the market and by JPs NTC) to take less than they feel he is worth, he should be proud that he held his ground and didn't take it in the shorts and give up the (expected) best player on his team.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why in God's name should he be "proud" that he didn't "take it in the shorts"? What negotiations are you looking at? He has a pitcher who in all likelihood will be owed roughly 52 million dollars for 3 years, or 81 million for 4 years. Do you have any idea what a fucking albatross that is in today's market? Getting ANY decent prospects, plus getting someone to take 52 million dollars off of your hands, would be a coup, not taking it in the shorts.
So, for Peavy to have value to Kevin Towers, the Padres need Peavy to lead them to the playoffs. That is unlikely to happen as
1: The Padres suck. This will become apparent over a 162 season, despite their 9-3 start.
2. The Dodgers are a lot better than the Padres
3. Peavy is pitching poorly.
So when Kev gets done patting himself on the back for taking a stand against the man, he will come to realize some very depressing truths. He is now stuck paying a guy 20 million dollars a year to pitch for a bad team, in a shitty economy. He also could have traded that guy and gotten no worse than 80 cents on the dollar. Now, until Peavy shows differently, his stock has dropped dramatically. So even if Towers wanted to deal him, unless he finds a brain dead GM, he will be lucky to get 50 cents on the dollar.
Even IF Peavy turns it around, he is not going to command the kind of package he would have netted the Padres in December. Most teams are starting to see the reality of the economy right now, and I can't imagine anyone is going to be shoveling 5 star prospects in Towers direction, while taking on a 50 million dollar contract. He had an opportunity, and he blew it.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=33471:date=Apr 27 2009, 12:39 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Apr 27 2009, 12:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=33455:date=Apr 27 2009, 11:41 AM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Apr 27 2009, 11:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=33434:date=Apr 27 2009, 09:57 AM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Apr 27 2009, 09:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I bet Kevin Towers is might proud of that hard line he took with the Peavy negotiations. "I want all of your good prospects, AND I want you to take this 81 million dollar contract off of my hands during the middle of a recession".
Nice job Kev.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
BT - His team is 10-8 with a 43mm payroll and under 30mm in obligations for 2010. Why should he not be proud?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, if he is basing his happiness on an 18 game stretch in April, he is a complete dipshit. Were the Marlins allowed to start printing playoff tickets when they were 11-1? Because they've lost 6 in a row. By the way, the Padres have lost 5 of their last 6. So their record on April 27 is about as relevant as the release date of Frank Stallone's next record.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Unless he is forced by ownership to dump Peavy later, and he is forced (by the market and by JPs NTC) to take less than they feel he is worth, he should be proud that he held his ground and didn't take it in the shorts and give up the (expected) best player on his team.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why in God's name should he be "proud" that he didn't "take it in the shorts"? What negotiations are you looking at? He has a pitcher who in all likelihood will be owed roughly 52 million dollars for 3 years, or 81 million for 4 years. Do you have any idea what a fucking albatross that is in today's market? Getting ANY decent prospects, plus getting someone to take 52 million dollars off of your hands, would be a coup, not taking it in the shorts.
So, for Peavy to have value to Kevin Towers, the Padres need Peavy to lead them to the playoffs. That is unlikely to happen as
1: The Padres suck. This will become apparent over a 162 season, despite their 9-3 start.
2. The Dodgers are a lot better than the Padres
3. Peavy is pitching poorly.
So when Kev gets done patting himself on the back for taking a stand against the man, he will come to realize some very depressing truths. He is now stuck paying a guy 20 million dollars a year to pitch for a bad team, in a shitty economy. He also could have traded that guy and gotten no worse than 80 cents on the dollar. Now, until Peavy shows differently, his stock has dropped dramatically. So even if Towers wanted to deal him, unless he finds a brain dead GM, he will be lucky to get 50 cents on the dollar.
Even IF Peavy turns it around, he is not going to command the kind of package he would have netted the Padres in December. Most teams are starting to see the reality of the economy right now, and I can't imagine anyone is going to be shoveling 5 star prospects in Towers direction, while taking on a 50 million dollar contract. He had an opportunity, and he blew it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
whoa. thats all i got. whoa. and nice. whoa, nice. that's it.
whoa. nice.
Wang.
Posts: 14,116
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
I may disagree with BT from time to time on certain trivial issues, but that's about as airtight an argument that anyone can make about the situation. And if we have anyone worth a damn to trade in a few months for Peavy, I especially want a deal done now more than ever.
Posts: 209
Threads: 2
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
BT - He refused to give up a Triple Crown calibre pitcher for anything less than a top tier package. I don't see how that's a bad move. What package should he have taken that you think he missed out on? The Cubs continued to deny that they ever offered him the farm for Peavy.
Had Peavy not had the NTC and had he not limited Towers' options to virtually the Cubs or nothing, I'm sure he'd have been able to get fair market value for a Cy Young type arm.
I can't see how it is a bad move - unless you had line of sight to him suddenly having a 6.00 ERA.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=33516:date=Apr 27 2009, 02:01 PM:name=cherp)-->QUOTE (cherp @ Apr 27 2009, 02:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->BT - He refused to give up a Triple Crown calibre pitcher for anything less than a top tier package. I don't see how that's a bad move. What package should he have taken that you think he missed out on? The Cubs continued to deny that they ever offered him the farm for Peavy.
Had Peavy not had the NTC and had he not limited Towers' options to virtually the Cubs or nothing, I'm sure he'd have been able to get fair market value for a Cy Young type arm.
I can't see how it is a bad move - unless you had line of sight to him suddenly having a 6.00 ERA.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's a bad move because they waited until their best asset, an asset that essentially HAS to be moved (unless you believe they can make the playoffs with their current squad), an asset which is only valuable to them as a trading chit, is now worth much less than in December.
There is no reason to keep Peavy on bad team. There is no reason to pay Peavy 50 million dollars for a team that won't make the playoffs. Therefore he needs to be moved. Even without his decline in effectiveness, he would be worth less simply because teams are going to be even more leery of dealing for a contract that huge in today's market.
If Towers could have simply got rid of that contract, and got Vitters and a bag of peanuts, he would be better off than he is now. That is why it's a bad move.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
BT, I see your point, but having just watched the NFL draft, even hardcore draftniks will concede that a lot of moves are made for "public relations." And as much as we hardcore fans don't like to admit it, sports are a business, too.
Peavy is the face of that franchise. The Pads are going through a really rough stretch, but do you alienate your fans to the breaking point by trading away your only marketable star for a bunch of minor-leaguers?
Because that's exactly how the trade would be perceived by the Pads fanbase: "We've waived the white flag, we've traded off our #1 Dodger-killer, he's a Cy Young winner, and all we got back are a bunch of fuckers we've never even heard of."
Logical? No. But who ever said that fans are logical?
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 540
Threads: 26
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
It is not clear cut on the Padres side. If Peavy starts to pitch well, they could make the playoffs.
I think the Cubs are better off, not making the trade. They now have the money and the trade chips to get what they need at the deadline. Right now, it looks like they might need offense more than starting pitching, but if they end up getting Peavy at the deadline, he will be cheaper plus they save a 4 months salary.
I like you guys a lot.
Posts: 209
Threads: 2
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=33520:date=Apr 27 2009, 02:23 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Apr 27 2009, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->It's a bad move because they waited until their best asset, an asset that essentially HAS to be moved (unless you believe they can make the playoffs with their current squad), an asset which is only valuable to them as a trading chit, is now worth much less than in December.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why do they have to move him? Why can't they keep him, signed, for a few more years? I don't understand why they only have an option of trading him before the season or trading him during the season.
<!--quoteo(post=33520:date=Apr 27 2009, 02:23 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Apr 27 2009, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->There is no reason to keep Peavy on bad team. There is no reason to pay Peavy 50 million dollars for a team that won't make the playoffs. Therefore he needs to be moved. Even without his decline in effectiveness, he would be worth less simply because teams are going to be even more leery of dealing for a contract that huge in today's market.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here's where we disagree. If that were the case, there'd be no reason for a lot of teams to keep a lot of players. But that's not the case. Peavy is the best player that team has. Fans come to see him. Fans will depart in droves if that franchise waives the "white flag" (trust me on this one).
<!--quoteo(post=33520:date=Apr 27 2009, 02:23 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Apr 27 2009, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If Towers could have simply got rid of that contract, and got Vitters and a bag of peanuts, he would be better off than he is now. That is why it's a bad move.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sure that is true. If that team stays around .500 most of the season, it will be considered a "contender" in the NL West. That alone is worth a lot of tickets sold. That alone is worth a lot of morale. That alone is a positive. Vitters is a 19 yo in Single A. Yes - he is a top prospect in his league - but he is a long way away from making the majors. Towers can wait it out and see what else comes up. Not knowing that Peavy would start off with a 6 ERA (and his team still be a few games over .500 after the first 15 games) isn't something to blame Towers for.
Lots of teams are bad, many of them have star players. But few trade them out of necesity. When GMs make moves like that, they get shafted. It's way too early to say that the Pads can't win that division. It is fairly weak - I think anyone can win it. (except Colorado)
Towers may just be holding Peavy long enough to get him to expand the list of teams he'd accept a trade to, and thus expand his value just based on the creation of a market which right now doesn't exist. Who knows?
I just don't see how it is a bad idea to not give away a Triple Crown type pitcher for a 19 year old.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->It is not clear cut on the Padres side. If Peavy starts to pitch well, they could make the playoffs.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No they can't.
Posts: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=33528:date=Apr 27 2009, 02:44 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Apr 27 2009, 02:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->It is not clear cut on the Padres side. If Peavy starts to pitch well, they could make the playoffs.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No they can't.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, I don't think they can finish out of the cellar even but we'll see.
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 14,116
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
I don't think that any serious Padres fan would say, oh we're waving the white flag now that Peavy is being traded. They should have realized that when management traded away or let go of 2/3 of their roster and 60% of their payroll in the offseason. They know the team is already in rebuilding mode, so keeping one player who only plays every 5 days and paying him close to half of the team's payroll for the next 3-4 years is irresponsible management. If they can get 3-4 good prospects in return, they'd be stupid not to pull the trigger as it would speed up the rebuilding process and get fans back sooner rather than later. And the idea that keeping one star around for marketing purposes will somehow keep fans in the stands and maintain their loyalty is a bit of a stretch unless we're talking about the Cubs in the 80s and 90s, not SD during a horrible recession.
Posts: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=33561:date=Apr 27 2009, 05:43 PM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Apr 27 2009, 05:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I don't think that any serious Padres fan would say, oh we're waving the white flag now that Peavy is being traded. They should have realized that when management traded away or let go of 2/3 of their roster and 60% of their payroll in the offseason. They know the team is already in rebuilding mode, so keeping one player who only plays every 5 days and paying him close to half of the team's payroll for the next 3-4 years is irresponsible management. If they can get 3-4 good prospects in return, they'd be stupid not to pull the trigger as it would speed up the rebuilding process and get fans back sooner rather than later. And the idea that keeping one star around for marketing purposes will somehow keep fans in the stands and maintain their loyalty is a bit of a stretch unless we're talking about the Cubs in the 80s and 90s, not SD during a horrible recession.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yep.
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Why do they have to move him? Why can't they keep him, signed, for a few more years? I don't understand why they only have an option of trading him before the season or trading him during the season.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Because it's a comical waste of resources. There is simply no reason to keep someone like Peavy when the team is clearly in rebuilding mode. And regardless of how they did in the first 12 games of the season, they are in rebuilding mode.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Here's where we disagree. If that were the case, there'd be no reason for a lot of teams to keep a lot of players.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Really? Like who? Name some players that a bunch of teams are paying huge sums in order to be a non contender, and my guess is that you will be naming guys that are untradable, on the trading block, or terrible signings. Add to this the fact that the Padres are not going to spend any money to get better (at least any time soon), and the reasons to trade him become more pronounced.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Towers can wait it out and see what else comes up.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, that's what he can do, it's what he DID do, and as of right now, he has completely screwed himself. If Peavy suddenly rights himself, and some team magically find 55 milllion and 5 star prospects it can afford to get rid of, then maybe he won't be screwed. I find that scenario about as likely as the Padres contending in September.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->I just don't see how it is a bad idea to not give away a Triple Crown type pitcher for a 19 year old.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that makes perfect sense. IF you continue to ignore the fact that people aren't willing to spend 55 million on almost anyone right now. Any team can have Pedro Martinez right now for only 5 million. That's less than the Rockies are paying Marquis. Yet NO ONE will spend 5 million to find out if Pedro still has anything left. what makes you think they are going to spend 55 million on Peavy, PLUS their best prospects?
Put it another way, I can't imagine Hendry would even match what he originally offered Towers for Peavy. So by holding onto Peavy, by demanding both high quality prospects and that someone spend an assload of money, Towers is now stuck holding onto an asset with less value than only 4 months ago. He gambled, and it appears he lost.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 209
Threads: 2
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
BT - it will be interesting to watch this play out.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=33652:date=Apr 27 2009, 11:59 PM:name=cherp)-->QUOTE (cherp @ Apr 27 2009, 11:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->BT - it will be interesting to watch this play out.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not really. Whether Peavy performs up to his previous abilities or not, it's basically a forgone conclusion that Towers won't be able to get the value he perceives Peavy should be worth in a trade in the current state of baseball.
|
