Padres Are Quiet After Clubhouse Talk With Smith

San Diego: Behind Closed Doors.

At 3:21 Friday afternoon, men with badges booted all visitors out of the Padres’ clubhouse. Ballard Smith, the Padres’ president, snuck in a back entrance and had every door bolted. For 70 minutes, he and his players either: (a) shouted, (b) pouted or (c) kissed and made up.

No one knows.

When the meeting ended, the Padres realized they were late for batting practice. Out to the field they ran, and even Tony Gwynn--a reporter’s best friend--had nary a word to say.

The only real comment came from Tim Flannery, the team’s player representative. Asked if the atmosphere in the clubhouse got ugly, he said: “I think it was more of a confused atmosphere. We talked about a lot of things, that’s all I can say. Sorry, gang. I never wanted this job (player representative) to begin with. I just want to play ball.”

Meanwhile, Smith escaped to his office before meeting the press an hour later. Then, he related the following:

--Players were upset that he had “ripped” the team--and specifically outfielder Kevin McReynolds--in the newspapers, and he vowed not to do it again.

--He said he still will not sign players to more than one-year contracts--unless there is a drug-testing agreement with the players’ association. He said Padre players disagreed with that.

--He said that, despite what was reported earlier, he might be interested in Montreal’s Tim Raines (who could become a free agent after the season), but only if there is a drug-testing agreement. Earlier, he had said players with a history of drug use (such as Raines, who was treated for cocaine dependency in 1982) would not be signed by the Padres. But now Smith said: “If he’s had problems in the past, we’ll take a look at him. I won’t automatically say we won’t.”

--He said just because the Padres may not sign players who have had a problem with drugs doesn’t mean the Padres are going to be terrible. He said he still wants a good team, though he said some players were doubting that.

“I think you can have a winning team that is drug-free,” he said. “I think there’s been a tendency to try to say to us: ‘You’re not serious about winning.’ Well, I’m not serious about winning if it means going out and breaking some rule (by obtaining players with a history of drug use). So if that’s not being serious about winning, then I’m not serious about winning. But we’ve shown we’re serious about winning. We’ve shown that consistently over the years, and we’ll continue to do everything within the rules to win.”

--He said he hopes other teams will adopt his position on one-year contracts. He said that several teams could force the Major League Players Assn. to come up with a drug-testing plan. Already, Kansas City, which once granted lifetime contracts, has joined the Padres. Royal co-owner Avron Fogelman said Friday his team will not offer long-term contracts in the future.

--Smith explained why he is taking such a hard-line position on drug testing:

“I have four daughters I’m worried about, first of all,” he said. “It scares me to death when I go down to the beach in La Jolla and my kids want to go to a beach in La Jolla and I hear there are drug dealers there . . . One of my daughters asked me: ‘How could (former Padre) Alan Wiggins be out talking about how drugs are bad and then go back to using them.’ Well, how do you answer that?”

--He said that when the Triple-A Las Vegas Stars complete the Pacific Coast League playoffs, several players will be called up and given immediate playing time. When that happens, Las Vegas catcher Benito Santiago would likely replace Terry Kennedy.

--He said the futures of some Padres hinge on their performance in the final 40 games.

The players wouldn’t comment Friday, but a bunch of them talked to Donald Fehr, the director of the players’ association. Fehr, reached in New York Friday, said: “I’ve talked to enough of these players, and all it (the one-year contract issue) has done so far is infuriate all the players, and I mean infuriate them. They’re reaction is sort of a cross between anger and contempt. And I think properly so.

“Suppose all the players tomorrow say that unless they have three-year contracts, they’re not going to sign with San Diego again; they’ll all retire or go somewhere else or demand to be traded. What would Ballard say: ‘That’s not fair, you can’t do that. That’s not appropriate, we don’t want to do that’? But when he does it, it’s a policy and has quotes around it.”

Fehr also said the Padres are implementing the one-year contracts to “squeeze the players from certain economic rights.” He said if more teams follow suit and continue to take steps that hurt free agency, it’s just another example of collusion. And he said it doesn’t seem the Padres are interested in winning.

“What does this mean?” Fehr said. “I think what this means is that they’re not very much interested in putting the best possible team on the field in San Diego. That’s what it suggests to me. But clubs overall are doing it. They’re no longer interested in winning. They’re interested in squeezing players (financially).

“And to do this to Tim Raines? . . . .Look at it this way. I guess what they (the Padres) mean is that they would rather he went to the Dodgers or the Astros or the Braves--that that makes San Diego better off, that it’s better that Tim Raines has a better chance to go to one of those teams, or to San Fancisco or--who did I leave out in that division--or to Cincinnati. Cincinnati? Put him on the same team as Eric Davis. That would be a disaster for the Reds. That’s what he (Smith) means, right?

“I also think it’s unfortunate to keep bringing up someone’s past history, which is long past and done with and everybody knows it. Tim Raines’ drug situation came up, it was handled under the existing procedures. . . . They (the Padres) don’t need to bring this up again. It’s not very nice to do that, plain and simply.”

Later, it was relayed to Gene Orza, general counsel of the players’ association, that the Padres might take Raines if he agreed to some kind of drug-testing agreement. Orza said: “She (owner Joan Kroc) shouldn’t hold her breath. . . . Tim Raines is better than the San Diego front office. Joan Kroc is eating too many hamburgers. I guess if Raines wanted to stoop that low, he could sign with the Padres (with a drug agreement). But Tim is an honorable fellow and wouldn’t do it.”