2813

Peaved! An Era Comes To An End

by Chris Ello on August 1, 2009

Do you remember where you were the last time the San Diego Padres played a significant baseball game?

From His First Start, Peavy Was Something Special

From The Moment Of His First Start, Peavy Was Special

I know where Jake Peavy was — right there on the mound with the ball in his hand. It was Oct. 1, 2007 (only 22 months ago, though now it seems like at least five years), and the Padres were playing the Colorado Rockies in a one-game playoff to determine the National League’s final postseason participant.

Peavy didn’t have his best stuff that night. He departed in the 7th-inning with his side trailing, 6-5, but at least he hung in there long enough to give his team a chance to win.

The same can not be said about his departure this time.

Think about what the Friars were before Jake Peavy arrived on the scene. Padres? Hardly. They weren’t even good enough to be considered altar boys.

So, well on their way to a fourth-consecutive losing season and the franchise’s 14th last-place finish in 34 years of existence, the Padres trotted out young Jake Peavy on a Saturday afternoon in June of 2002 to face the New York Yankees in front of 60,021 fans.

Right away, a star was born. (Though in what had to be considered a sign of things to come, Peavy received no run support and lost his Major League debut, 1-0).

Peavy’s arrival that day gave birth to something even more important: hope. Just slightly the opposite of what his trade to the White Sox at Friday’s trade deadline leaves: hopelessness.

The end of an era. With Jake, we have been juked.

With Peavy, There Was Plenty of Champagne To Go Around

With Peavy Leading The Way, There Was Plenty of Champagne To Go Around

And we’re left with nothing but the memories of the only real “era” this franchise has ever had. Think about it. In the club’s history, San Diego fans have been party to only four back-to-back winning seasons. And only once was the successful run longer than back-to-back.

That would be the four-year stretch from 2004 through 2007. A four-year run that included two division titles and two near postseason misses. A stretch that produced seasons of 87, 88 and 89 victories.

And, of course, it was Jake Peavy who led the way. He went 58-33 during that four-year span, a recorded a pair of ERA and strikeout titles apiece. In ‘07, he delivered the pitching “triple crown” and the Cy Young Award.

Some day (considering the way things are now, maybe that day should be now), we’ll look back fondly on what must be regarded as the Glory Days of the Padres. And the guy we’ll think of is Peavy.

The Peavy Era Is Over. Let the Poreda Era Begin.

The Peavy Era's Over. Now It's Time To See What the Poreda Era Brings

Of course, the Padres will do their best to soften this blow by reminding us that trading Peavy to the White Sox — actually, trading him anywhere — was the only thing they could do to save the franchise.

Something about money and the poor economy and the salary limits and the “how in the world can we improve the rest of the team with one player taking up so much cash?” Something more about how Jake would eventually leave as a free-agent anyway, so why not get something back for him in return?

They have to say these things. It’s what bad baseball organizations do. Good organizations have younger players coming up to keep the team rolling. Younger players they can trade to get other star players — not the other way around.

So, if you want, you can buy what they’re selling. Clayton Richard, Aaron Poreda, Adam Russell and Dexter Carter. Maybe these newcomers can help get the Padres going in the right direction. Maybe one or a couple of them can become solid big league starters.

But I’ll just go out a limb here and predict that none — not alone or together — will ever be able to replace Jake Peavy. How do you make a trade to “save your franchise” by trading the guy who saved your franchise?

Some say it’s sad. But, it’s a lot more than that. Trading Jake Peavy — having to trade Jake Peavy — puts into full focus just how far the Padres have fallen.

Trading Jake Peavy leaves me feeling one way, and one way only.

Peaved.

– Ello

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks

Related Posts

  • bobbym51
    Chris wrote: "How do you make a trade to “save your franchise” by trading the guy who saved your franchise?"

    Indeed! I've been a fan of San Diego baseball since '76 so I have become accustomed to the cycle of boom and bust, the problem being that I have seen only 3 booms totaling 7 years or so and 27 years of mediocrity.

    Why do I stay interested? I don't know for sure, but maybe it is because I lived in Cleveland before '75 and put up with the Indians for 10 long years. When a person gets abused for so long they begin to think that the abuse is normal.
  • Bowen
    Very few times are we able to have the privilege to have a pitcher of the height Jake Peavy chiseled, yes, we did have a Kevin and the team went to the MLB Big Dance, but few Padres have worn this team´s uniform with the name of our town across their chest as Peavy did, with the dignity he did, his true commitment for excellence, his pride, this fierce warrior is not playing for us anymore, I, along with tents of thousands of other fans will miss him while rooting for him when he is pitching for that AL team, the White Sox. Jake set the bar much too high for an average pitcher to reach and I believe that is good for everyone.

    Jake, thank you for the thrills, thank you for the memories, have a great career you will not be forgotten in San Diego.

    Bowen
  • Peavy had a 4.52 ERA his first year and a 4.11 ERA in his first full season.

    That is ok, but not special.
  • 6 of the 7 "Boom" years have come since Moores bought the team in 94.
  • Let me say it a different way, instead of a specious argument that because Peavy was traded the Padres days of winning are over, you should be talking about the 4 winning seasons in a row and 4 of the last 5 seasons.

    You should be talking about the 4 playoff appearance in 14 seasons before 2009 for the Moores owned Padres after having only one in the first 25 years.

    Instead you are doing what too many have done. Whine.

    Whine about 2 losing seasons in the last 6.
    Whine because a low revenue team has to rebuild instead of reload like a high revenue Yankee or Red Sox or Dodgers.

    What you should be doing is praising the Owner and FO that has consistently delivered more winning than any other low revenue team in the NL.

    Face it, with the revenue the Padres have, you could be watching the Pirates or Reds who haven't been to the playoffs in that period. Or even the Brewers who had 12 straight losing season prior to 207-2008.
  • 619Sports
    The specious argument is to state that the Padres are a "low revenue" team like the Pirates or Reds. The Padres have had solid success at the box office since opening Petco Park, and the park was approved by voters in part thanks to the argument made by management that it would PREVENT Padres fans from experiencing these "low revenue" arguments anymore.

    Six years after the driftwood seasons of 2002-2003, the Padres are right back where they were before, rebuilding with a 40 million dollar payroll that doesn't look to increase any time soon.

    Poor drafting for years on end, Moores' divorce, and the dismantling of the payroll have put the Padres in their current pickle. Moving Peavy, who the team committed to just two offseasons ago, is a clear sign that times have changed.

    Polyanna commentary aside, this franchise has drifted into the lower division of the National League thanks to mismanagement, so I cannot agree that the owner and front office deserve praise for building a team that will lose 90+ for the second straight year.

    And it is certainly not "whining" for Padres fans, who are asked to pay through the nose, to be upset about the direction of the team.

    I personally believe the Padres made a pretty good baseball deal moving Peavy, but it came as the result of the dark turn this franchise has taken the past 18 months.
  • The Padres ARE a low revenue team.

    They ranked 29th in media revenue and 16th in overall revenue.

    That IS low revenue.

    Do your homework before you come at me.

    The Padres were able to win for 4 straight years because they had enough young players to trade away to bring in the guys that helped them win. So don't even try to trot out that tired argument that they had poor drafts. It just isn't true. The players they drafted and developed are dong just fine in other organizations.

    And the Padres are doing a damn sight better than the other NL franchises with lower revenues, or would you like to be living in Pittsburgh, Milwaukee or Cincinnati where you may have to go a generation without a playoff berth?

    I really like going to playoff games in 4 of the 14 years Moores has been the owner here. How many other NL franchises can say they did that? Only the Braves, Diamondbacks, Dodgers, Giants, Astros and Cardinals can. Certainly not ONE of the low revenue teams like the Padres.

    And 2 playoffs and 4 winning seasons in the last 6. How many NL franchises can boast of that type of success? Braves, Cubs, Astros and Dodgers. High revenue, high payroll clubs.

    So quit the whiney negative BS, because that is all it is.
  • FreakSammy
    The only problem is that the Padres continue to say they're building for the future, but as soon as the young players that are the future get good, THOSE players are then traded for the next "future". The very idea that they were willing to trade Adrian Gonzalez, who IS the future, to the first place Dodgers (along with the only other real major leaguer on the club, Heath Bell) proves the team has NO intent on ever being good.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post: 619 Sports: The World Is Taking Notice

Next post: Tomlinson Climbing 30 Rock