Stupid Padre Fans

Title Track

I recently read the following on a Padres Web Forum:

So, to sum up that deal with Oakland in 2004 when the Padres got Hernandez and Terrence Long: The padres get a high draft pick and Paul Quantrill for Mark Kotsay (who had a bad back at the time). Did the Padres give up something other than Kotsay for both Long and Hernandez? Kotsay was having a good year in Oakland until his back starting hurting again.

What kind of idiot logic is that? It's similar to suggesting that a draft pick was wasted because the player played for the team, but when he retired we were left with nothing. This sort of logic, in which all positives related to a transaction are ignored in order to suggest that the aforementioned transaction is a failure, is rampant among Padre fans and it annoys me to no end.

Another gem:

However, other then homeruns, his numbers are very similar. He is still batting in the .290-.300 range, an on-base pct. well over .400, and alot of doubles and triples. Even has a good glove and stolen base pct. (10 last year). Cannot ask for much more.

And RBI's? Oh thats right, Klesko is driving in all those runs before Giles gets up.

The bold text was a response to the regular text above it. Rather than get into that again, I think I'll just quote from the BP Basics:

So, highly context-dependent counting stats like RBI and runs scored can be inflated or deflated by a panoply of factors that have nothing to do with that hitter's true abilities. One of the prevailing missions of sabermetrics is to evaluate the player in a vacuum: What's he doing independently of his teammates and environment? Using only RBI or runs scored to judge a player or to frame an argument at the tavern is a fool's errand.

Why is that so damned difficult to understand?

This one is even better

I have no idea why the Padres traded Nevin when they likely did not get any salary relief and certainly didnt improve the team this year and beyond.

I know Nevin is producing a little less then normal, but when the team isnt scoring and you dont have a replacement who is likely to do better, then why do you trade him if you are not going to improve offensively?

Nevin also wants to be in San Diego and has a passion for the game that brings his teammates together. I dont care if he bitches about the park being too big and gets in Towers face. I think that fire is something the Padres are lacking and too much complacency contributes to serious losing streaks like the one the Padres are on now.

If you are trading him to fill a need or to get better or to dump a salary, then I wouldnt complain as much, but we traded him for Chan Ho Park, who is a dog with a contract as big as Nevins. While our pitching isnt very good, I dont think Park is the answer. Trading Nevin did not dump a salary, it just exchanged one and we are not better because of it.

I am at a loss over this trade and it just does not make sense in any way I look at it. The only explanation I can think of is that maybe they did it because management has come to the realization that Tim Stauffer absolutely sucks.

Stauffer and Matt Bush have to be the worst back to back top 5 draft picks by a team in the history of baseball.

The bolded sentences are that way because they are my favorites. To suggest that the Padres had no replacements for Nevin that were any better is so preposterous that you can't even be annoyed by it. It's just too damn funny. The Tim Stauffer comments, on the other hand, are impossibly stupid and really do get to me.