OT.....Pirates and Nutting

[Pittbaseball11]

You're still trying to defend 5 drafts where they picked top 8, that have produced 8 MLB players (3 of them having less than 30 days experience) ?

If they drafted as well as the Cardinals, Mets, Giants, Nationals, etc, then they wouldn't have had to trot out crap like Jeff Locke, Juan Nicasio, and Jon Niese as part of an actual MLB starting rotation for half the season.

Then again, they'd still probably be holding those guys down in the minor leagues if they had drafted better, so it's a moot point.

Keep on defending and excusing, and then wonder why their ceiling is playing in the Clint Hurdle Invitational in early October.

You kind of pulled a Del there where you were asked to do something and then just regressed back to your argument 4 points ago. Well done.

Perhaps drafting better would have saved them from their rotation this year. Then again, perhaps doing the exact same thing and not having Taillon and Kingham pop their elbows in the year they were due up would have saved them, too.

Which is more or less my point. Everything is entirely premature when you're pointing to teams with a college heavy draft approach and now-depleted farm systems, and comparing them to a team with a high school heavy approach and a strong farm system. The timing is totally different.

And that's to say nothing of the fact that I have no idea why the Nationals are included in there.

I'm not really sure where the 8 players in 5 years is cherry picked out of, nor am I really defending anything. I said with just about all of the ones after 2009 that the jury is still out.

I don't know how I'm supposed to logically conclude that things are a total disaster, nor do I know how my inability to do that means I'm defending anything.

 

[mvk112]

It's not cherry picked, those 5 drafts produced 8 MLB players, if you include Glasnow, who made 1 start and then was sent back, and Bell, who hasn't made a start, and is likely to get sent back down if reports are accurate. Five drafts, 4+ years ago, and only 8 MLB players to show for it, 3 of them having less than 30 days experience. Yeah, the process is working, lol.

Any way you cut it, that is a piss poor job over a five year span this far into the future of those drafts.

Why the Nationals are included there? Look at what they've done those five years, so far ahead of the Pirates that it's silly to even compare.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

It's not cherry picked, those 5 drafts produced 8 MLB players, if you include Glasnow, who made 1 start and then was sent back, and Bell, who hasn't made a start, and is likely to get sent back down if reports are accurate. Five drafts, 4+ years ago, and only 8 MLB players to show for it, 3 of them having less than 30 days experience. Yeah, the process is working, lol.

Any way you cut it, that is a piss poor job over a five year span this far into the future of those drafts.

Why the Nationals are included there? Look at what they've done those five years, so far ahead of the Pirates that it's silly to even compare.

Who are the 8? I'm curious what the criteria is. I can get quite a bit more than that, and I can get quite a bit less than that, but I can't get to 8. Like, you're adding in some guys who have very little service time, but then it doesn't seem like it's limited to current Pirates because they don't have 8 current guys on the team drafted since 2008.

Like, in 2008 alone I'm seeing Alvarez, Mercer, Wilson, d'Arnaud, and Grossman as guys who could qualify to varying extents. 2009, Tony Sanchez, Brock Holt, Brooks Pounders, Phil Irwin and Vic Black. 2010, Taillon, Cumpton, Sadler. 2011, Cole, Bell, Dickerson, Glasnow. 2012, Adrian Sampson and Jacob Stallings. Then 2013 (which you may or may not have included) you have Kuhl and Frazier already.

And on the Nationals -- they did great with Strasburg, great with Harper, Rendon is fine when healthy, Espinosa is okay -- but then you have a bunch of relievers/swing men and a prospect. I'm not saying that's bad, just, how is that different?

I mean, Espinosa is 29 and has a career wRC+ of 90. Rendon has a career wRC+ of 111, but has only had 1 season where he's been above 100 (league average). Those are, to me, guys who would qualify as "regulars".

 

[mvk112]

I mean it f you're going to count garbage like Sadler, Irwin, Pounders, Sampson, Stallings, Sanchez that barely had a cup of coffee and will be hard pressed to ever return, then every team I listed could have 25 or more added to their total.

Pedro, Mercer, Wilson, Holt, Cole, Bell, Glasnow, Taillon. I guess Grossman makes 9. 8 players in 5 consecutive drafts when you're in the top 8 is pathetic.

Do you really believe the Nationals drafts are only on par with the Pirates over that timeframe? Really? That might be the most amazing thing I've ever read.

 

[mvk112]

Rendon has had two seasons including this year with a 100 wRC+ as well as a 130 season and a 97 season. You're also neglecting to mention his well above average defense at 3B. He's worlds better than any position player the Pirates have drafted.

Espinosa is better than Jordy Mercer, their wRC+ are similar, but Espinosa is a much better defensive player, and that is reflected in his WAR. Mercer WAR/600 plate appearances is 1.77 while Espinosa is at 2.69 over his career.

Then of course there is Strasburg, who is at the very least the equal of Cole, and Bryce Harper, the reigning NL MVP.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

I mean it f you're going to count garbage like Sadler, Irwin, Pounders, Sampson, Stallings, Sanchez that barely had a cup of coffee and will be hard pressed to ever return, then every team I listed could have 25 or more added to their total.

Pedro, Mercer, Wilson, Holt, Cole, Bell, Glasnow, Taillon. I guess Grossman makes 9. 8 players in 5 consecutive drafts when you're in the top 8 is pathetic.

Do you really believe the Nationals drafts are only on par with the Pirates over that timeframe? Really? That might be the most amazing thing I've ever read.

I mean, I had no idea what the constraints were in terms of playing time. d'Arnaud, Grossman, and Dickerson are far more established than guys like Bell and Glasnow, who are much closer to the Pounders/Sadler/Irwin mold in terms of service time. Sampson had about as much service time as them too, but then went down with an arm injury. He was a 45 FV prospect on Fangraphs last year, same grade that Michael Fulmer from the Mets received.

I don't know on the Nationals yet. All I'm saying is they haven't set a particularly high bar as things currently stand. I feel like you want me to take these stands, or paint me in this light where I'm taking these stands, but I'm not doing that at this point. The Nationals have very little left in the minors from their 2008-2012 classes -- the Pirates still have quite a bit that isn't yet established.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Rendon has had two seasons including this year with a 100 wRC+ as well as a 130 season and a 97 season. You're also neglecting to mention his well above average defense at 3B. He's worlds better than any position player the Pirates have drafted.

Espinosa is better than Jordy Mercer, their wRC+ are similar, but Espinosa is a much better defensive player, and that is reflected in his WAR. Mercer WAR/600 plate appearances is 1.77 while Espinosa is at 2.69 over his career.

Then of course there is Strasburg, who is at the very least the equal of Cole, and Bryce Harper, the reigning NL MVP.

I already mentioned Rendon's wRC+. I also said he's good when healthy.

Espinosa is a career 2B. It's not really apples-to-apples to compare his career dWAR to Mercer, they have different replacement-level defensive standards. A replacement player isn't just a replacement player, it's positionally adjusted. 2B is pretty much where you stick the guys who can't hit well enough to play a corner spot but can't field well enough to play SS or CF. It has the most forgiving positional WAR adjustment.

Like I said, they're fine. They got 2 stars, 2 regulars, and some fringy depth guys. My views on relievers are pretty well established, I don't consider any of them a scouting/drafting victory. Ultimately, I think the Pirates can/will surpass that pretty soon -- when comparing the Nats' draft production to what the Giants and Cardinals have done I think that they don't necessarily belong in that level. The Mets are probably a level below the Giants/Cards and then the Nats a level below them with the Dodgers bringing up the rear.

 

[mvk112]

Espinosa is the starting SS for the Nationals this year, you know that, right? He's at +5 DRS and 6.7 UZR/150 this year, and +7 DRS & 8.0 UZR/150 for his career at SS.

Mercer is at -5 DRS and -16.6 UZR/150 this year and +3 with -3.8 UZR/150 for his career at SS.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Espinosa is the starting SS for the Nationals this year, you know that, right? He's at +5 DRS and 6.7 UZR/150 this year, and +7 DRS & 8.0 UZR/150 for his career at SS.

Mercer is at -5 DRS and -16.6 UZR/150 this year and +3 with -3.8 UZR/150 for his career at SS.

Yeah I know that, it's just not really ever advised to use single-season samples or abbreviated season samples for defense, particularly with the shifting that's taken off. I would definitely consider Mercer to be fringy as a defender.

 

[mvk112]

Espinosa has played over 1200 innings at SS over his career, he's not just some flash in the pan defensively. He's a legitimate plus defender at SS who was pushed to 2B when Washington acquired another plus defensive SS in Asdrubal Cabrera.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Espinosa has played over 1200 innings at SS over his career, he's not just some flash in the pan defensively. He's a legitimate plus defender at SS who was pushed to 2B when Washington acquired another plus defensive SS in Asdrubal Cabrera.

You're going to have to let me know what metrics you're using to say Asdrubal Cabrera -- or Ian Desmond -- is a plus defender at SS. Both rate horrifically using the metrics you're using to pump up Espinosa.

 

[mvk112]

Seems I was mistaken about Cabrera as he played 2B mostly for Washington. But Desmond had a pretty good UZR/150 from 2011 through 2014, but fell off a bit last year. He's a career -1 UZR/150 even with a disastrous -9 in 2010.

 

[Pittguy1980]

I mean it f you're going to count garbage like Sadler, Irwin, Pounders, Sampson, Stallings, Sanchez that barely had a cup of coffee and will be hard pressed to ever return, then every team I listed could have 25 or more added to their total.

Pedro, Mercer, Wilson, Holt, Cole, Bell, Glasnow, Taillon. I guess Grossman makes 9. 8 players in 5 consecutive drafts when you're in the top 8 is pathetic.

Do you really believe the Nationals drafts are only on par with the Pirates over that timeframe? Really? That might be the most amazing thing I've ever read.

You're being 100% intellectually dishonest. I mean, you are using Tim cooney and Brett Wallace to prop up the cardinals, but yet at the same time blasting jordy mercer?

 

[QuitCallingMeWanny]

Cubs: Rizzo traded for
Russell traded for
Baez international signing
Arrieta traded for
Contreras international signing

Do you still want to play this game mvk112?

 

[mvk112]

Cubs: Rizzo traded for
Russell traded for
Baez international signing
Arrieta traded for
Contreras international signing

Do you still want to play this game mvk112?

Rizzo traded for draft pick Cashner
Russell traded for draft pick Samardzija
Baez was drafted actually
Bryant drafted
Schwarber drafted
Hendricks drafted

It pays to be good at drafting, NH really isn't.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Rizzo traded for draft pick Cashner
Russell traded for draft pick Samardzija
Baez was drafted actually
Bryant drafted
Schwarber drafted
Hendricks drafted

It pays to be good at drafting, NH really isn't.

You're making all of these proclamations so, so early given the timelines of players.

Samardzija was a 2006 draft pick who was traded at the trade deadline with a year and a half of control left -- that would be similar to the Pirates getting credit for getting a good haul from trading McCutchen at next year's deadline (which I'm not even sure they'll get, given his current production and future contract status).

Hendricks was drafted by the Rangers.

The Rizzo-Cashner trade is actually really interesting, especially since I tend to like following these kinds of deals. It's kind of the opposite of the Jesus Montero-Michael Pineda "challenge trade" in literally every sense. Rizzo and Cashner both had some pretty severe early struggles, with Rizzo batting 149/281/242 (with a 30% K rate) over 49 games with the Padres and Cashner being nothing but a reliever and accumulating -0.6 fWAR during his time in Chicago. So, basically, the 2 teams traded 2 guys who failed to live up to the hype but still had some theoretical upside, and both guys actually wound up being pretty good-to-great. Montero and Pineda both had tons of hype, and both guys wound up being pretty bad.

I guess the best recent Pittsburgh related example of a challenge trade would be Brad Lincoln for Travis Snider. You had a highly drafted starting pitcher who flamed out and became a bullpen arm being traded for the corner-only player who showed a lot of promise with the bat but struggled against major league pitching. Obviously neither guy wound up being much of anything, although Snider at least had a big 2nd half one year that enabled them to flip him for some desperately needed lefthanded pitching prospects.

 

[Delpanther]

It's 100% playing the results, because it's ignoring the fact that they used the same process that's netted them some pretty outstanding returns.

Also interesting that a kid with superstar potential was ranked #22 and a quick-moving college hitter who could play a premium position was ranked #23. I follow the draft pretty closely and those rankings are WAY off for that type of player. Methinks we're using quite a bit of revisionist history, as none of the scouting reports -- or rankings -- available on the internet are anywhere close to that glowing.

Here's a snippet from Baseball America's profile on Pollock, for instance: "While there's debate as to whether he's a true first-round talent, with a shortage of quality college hitters he should get selected in the bottom third of the round."

Even in Trout's write-up, he got the dreaded "grinder" label, while drawing a comparison to Aaron Rowand: "Trout's bat is not a sure thing, but he has a chance to be a solid-average hitter with average or better power. Like Rowand, Trout is a grinder who always plays the game hard."

Sanchez's write-up, for reference: "He's slimmed down by 35 pounds in three years at Boston College and made himself into one of the nation's premier college catchers. Sanchez is a slightly above-average major league defender with soft hands, quick feet and a solid-average to plus arm. He excels at framing pitches and blocking balls in the dirt. Offensively, Sanchez has solid-average power, but his bat is not a sure thing. He punishes fastballs but struggles mightily against breaking balls, though he's an intelligent enough hitter to lay off breaking stuff that he cannot hit. He has a mature approach at the plate and excellent makeup on the field and off."

Really, really weak trying to defend that stupid Sanchez pick. You lose total credibility defending that pick.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Really, really weak trying to defend that stupid Sanchez pick. You lose total credibility defending that pick.

I don't think there's any real use in defending or criticizing any individual pick. If you do that, you wind up calling somebody an idiot who can't draft for taking a guy ranked 32nd over a guy ranked 23rd and pretending like that means there's a huge difference between those players. There's no logic in that, only hindsight.

I said I'm fine with their process and that the 2009 draft didn't deviate from it. That's it. They wound up with 3 Top 50 talents in a draft that wasn't viewed as having much, if any separation, between prospects after the 1st and 2nd ranked guys. I mean, they took a catcher who was regarded as being defense-first and a strong pitch framer. Then they took a college righthander with a big fastball. Then they took a prep righthanded pitcher who was viewed as projectable. That's their wheelhouse, more or less. It didn't work, but they didn't do something wild and crazy compared to usual.

You hear GM's talking about draft classes as being portfolios. And that's because, while every individual pick in the Draft is more or less a crapshoot, if you get a good mix of talent you'll be able to overcome that more often than not. You diversify the talent base and play the law of averages. Sometimes it goes as planned (you get 1-2 regulars and maybe some depth), sometimes it goes terribly (2009), sometimes it goes really well (2011).

I mean, if Sanchez has the career that Brock Holt has and Brock Holt has the career that Tony Sanchez has, does that make the 2009 Draft better? Logically, of course not. But, because of some sort of mental block, people would think that it was.

When a first round pick busts, it's the GM's fault. When a late round guy becomes something, it's a GM getting lucky.

People act like the 1st round of the MLB Draft is similar to the 1st round of the other sports, but it's really not in terms of success rate.

I mean, just last year you had Baseball Prospectus say they thought the Pirates were the best drafting team in the NL.

Pittsburgh hates the Pirates so much more than these nationally respected sites who have scouts and writers that actually get hired into baseball front offices because they provide valuable insight and information. It's amazing, really. Usually you think of the hometown fanbase as having the homers but Pittsburgh is so behind the times and so casual in how it follows sports in general that there's this massive disconnect currently. The local media doesn't help, they're utterly useless.

 

[QuitCallingMeWanny]

Rizzo traded for draft pick Cashner
Russell traded for draft pick Samardzija
Baez was drafted actually
Bryant drafted
Schwarber drafted
Hendricks drafted

It pays to be good at drafting, NH really isn't.

No no no don't change the argument dipsh!t, Baez was a mistake on my lpart and Hendricks wasn't drafted by the Cubs and frankly the only draft picks that have done anything so far are Bryant and Schwarber, who doesn't even have a deep resume yet.........but carry on with this ridiculousness

 

[mvk112]

No no no don't change the argument dipsh!t, Baez was a mistake on my lpart and Hendricks wasn't drafted by the Cubs and frankly the only draft picks that have done anything so far are Bryant and Schwarber, who doesn't even have a deep resume yet.........but carry on with this ridiculousness

The Cubs spend money in free agency to finish off their team, just what I want the Pirates to do. Think this team would look better with Lester and Lackey in the rotation?

The Cubs, with just Bryant, Baez, and Schwarber drafted, are right there with the Pirates in that department. Of course, they make much better trades than the Pirates, and actually spend money in free agency unlike the Pirates, so yeah, what was your point again?

 

[QuitCallingMeWanny]

The Cubs spend money in free agency to finish off their team, just what I want the Pirates to do. Think this team would look better with Lester and Lackey in the rotation?

The Cubs, with just Bryant, Baez, and Schwarber drafted, are right there with the Pirates in that department. Of course, they make much better trades than the Pirates, and actually spend money in free agency unlike the Pirates, so yeah, what was your point again?

You are all over the place first it was the Cubs draft better, then they spend more money in freeagency..... not too mention the Cubs made those trades to tear down the organization to start over esp. the Samardjia trade.....Let me guess what did you think of the Arrieta trade when it first happened?

 

[Pittguy1980]

The Cubs spend money in free agency to finish off their team, just what I want the Pirates to do. Think this team would look better with Lester and Lackey in the rotation?

The Cubs, with just Bryant, Baez, and Schwarber drafted, are right there with the Pirates in that department. Of course, they make much better trades than the Pirates, and actually spend money in free agency unlike the Pirates, so yeah, what was your point again?

Awesome. Comparing the Cubs spending ability to the Pirates. Pure awesomeness there!

 

[TD_istheman]

When is the trade deadline ?

 

[TD_istheman]

Kill me, you all give a billionaire a pass, the 6th richest owner.

HE LAUGHS AT YOU ALL

 

[mvk112]

Kill me, you all give a billionaire a pass, the 6th richest owner.

HE LAUGHS AT YOU ALL

Not to mention he pulls in $50m+ in national TV, $40m+ in revenue sharing, $20m+ in local TV, etc.

Seriously, they pull in $35m+ in profit every year but we're gonna cry poor for a billionaire.

This franchise has some really gullible fans.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Not to mention he pulls in $50m+ in national TV, $40m+ in revenue sharing, $20m+ in local TV, etc.

Seriously, they pull in $35m+ in profit every year but we're gonna cry poor for a billionaire.

This franchise has some really gullible fans.

$35MM EBITDA.

 

[mvk112]

$35MM EBITDA.

They're in the top three most profitable teams in baseball no matter how you cut it. You'd think the financial docs release back in 2010 showing they made $29m in 2007 & 2008 (net, not EBITDA), when they were already 15+ years into a losing streak, would wake people up. Nope, as gullible as ever.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

They're in the top three most profitable teams in baseball no matter how you cut it. You'd think the financial docs release back in 2010 showing they made $29m in 2007 & 2008 (net, not EBITDA), when they were already 15+ years into a losing streak, would wake people up. Nope, as gullible as ever.

They were paying like $40 and $50MM respectively on payroll those years. They're more than doubling those figures now.

People feel like they shouldn't be making a profit while simultaneously having 0 concept of what maxing out payroll too early means.

That's fine, but it's shortsighted and it's an ultimately futile thing to complain about.

People who get the most mad are people so seem to believe 1 of 2 things: that the Pirates were a 98 win team on paper last year in terms of true talent or that the Pirates are nearing the end of some window that the media has been panicking about for years.

 

[mvk112]

They were paying like $40 and $50MM respectively on payroll those years. They're more than doubling those figures now.

People feel like they shouldn't be making a profit while simultaneously having 0 concept of what maxing out payroll too early means.

That's fine, but it's shortsighted and it's an ultimately futile thing to complain about.

People who get the most mad are people so seem to believe 1 of 2 things: that the Pirates were a 98 win team on paper last year in terms of true talent or that the Pirates are nearing the end of some window that the media has been panicking about for years.

They were also getting much less money from national and local tv, and had much less attendance on lower prices.

Their revenue is roughly $110M more now, yet payroll only up $50m.

Gullible.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

They were also getting much less money from national and local tv, and had much less attendance on lower prices.

Their revenue is roughly $110M more now, yet payroll only up $50m.

Gullible.

LOL.

So EBITDA is more or less equivalent to their net income back then, despite all of that supposedly amazing inflow of cash? And that's supposed to be some sort of referendum on current spending?

Paranoid. Or naive.

 

[mvk112]

LOL.

So EBITDA is more or less equivalent to their net income back then, despite all of that supposedly amazing inflow of cash? And that's supposed to be some sort of referendum on current spending?

Paranoid. Or naive.

If you want to call a 17% difference equivalent, then sure. Just don't expect everyone else to follow along with your defend-at-all-cost gullibility.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

If you want to call a 17% difference equivalent, then sure. Just don't expect everyone else to follow along with your defend-at-all-cost gullibility.

I'm going to call about a $5MM difference equivalent when we are talking baseball expenses and using a $110MM inflow of cash as our basis of criticism.

And, again, that's EBITDA vs net income. So EBITDA is about $5MM more than their Net Income was back in 2007 and 2008 despite a $110MM increase in revenues. Sorry, not seeing where the issue is.

I won't, and don't, expect everyone else to follow along, because Pittsburgh is full of mouth breathers who think payroll matters and is an efficient way to add wins and success and is reflective of trying.

 

[mvk112]

Adding payroll does work though. Had they added Jon Lester last year, they likely would've won the division and had a really good shot at winning the World Series. Now here's where you tell me that Lester might not be worth his contract in year four. Oh the horror! That great shot at a WS ring is more than worth it.

But hey, they played in the Clint Hurdle Invitational for the third straight year, and got whooped on by a great pitcher for the second straight time, so it's all good. Maybe try to win the division and not relegate yourself to the Wild Card, huh?

 

[mvk112]

It doesn't matter, they wasted a half year at least, after winning 98 games, and all you're ever going to do is defend the crap moves like trading Walker for Niese, weakening two positions in the process. Or tendering Jeff Like a contract. Or going with Invasion as a starter.

Total crap but no, can't hold them accountable because "process". Same "process" that has led you to defend picking Tony Sanchez and having crap drafts for a five year period when they were picking top ten.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

It doesn't matter, they wasted a half year at least, after winning 98 games, and all you're ever going to do is defend the crap moves like trading Walker for Niese, weakening two positions in the process. Or tendering Jeff Like a contract. Or going with Invasion as a starter.

Total crap but no, can't hold them accountable because "process". Same "process" that has led you to defend picking Tony Sanchez and having crap drafts for a five year period when they were picking top ten.

What were they supposed to do with Walker? Not try to recoup any potential value from him? In hindsight, as Huntington said, maybe you take back some fringe prospects instead, but you don't just let players walk away for nothing as a small market team.

What were they supposed to do with pitching? Block prospects with a bunch of overpriced back end starters and guys with a ton of mileage?

That's horrible process.

Last year's team wasn't a 98 win team on paper. 98 win teams on paper rarely exist anymore. It was a team that, on paper, would have been projected to win maybe a game or 2 more than this year's team. Approximately 86 games compared to this year's projected 84 games.

I'm willing to sacrifice that for the upside of getting my prospects up and figuring out where my ACTUAL long-term holes are.

Spending money and blocking a potential long-term solution is beyond dumb. What happens when you have an actual hole, no internal solution, and have maxed out your payroll? Nothing. You're stuck with it.

People keep bitching about apologists, but then, you're looking at a ton of respected national sites and writers who are lumped in there. That seems silly.

Perhaps it's more a matter of "informed" and "uninformed".

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

Moving on. Again, we can rehash and rehash and rehash the past. I am no ball licker or bobblehead licker or Nutting apologist but in my opinion the 3 biggest moves the Pirates can make are:

1) Acquire a top notch rotation stopper.
2) Acquire a second top of the rotation pitcher.
3) Acquire an MVP type of bat to anchor the middle of the lineup.

How can they do this?

1) Garritt Cole pitch like he is supposed to.
2) Frankie Liriano return to form
3) Andrew McCutcheon return to form.


All of those are more likely than the Pirates trying to acquire those assets. So......I think the most prudent move is to stand pat.

 

[mvk112]

What were they supposed to do with Walker? Not try to recoup any potential value from him? In hindsight, as Huntington said, maybe you take back some fringe prospects instead, but you don't just let players walk away for nothing as a small market team.

What were they supposed to do with pitching? Block prospects with a bunch of overpriced back end starters and guys with a ton of mileage?

That's horrible process.

Last year's team wasn't a 98 win team on paper. 98 win teams on paper rarely exist anymore. It was a team that, on paper, would have been projected to win maybe a game or 2 more than this year's team. Approximately 86 games compared to this year's projected 84 games.

I'm willing to sacrifice that for the upside of getting my prospects up and figuring out where my ACTUAL long-term holes are.

Spending money and blocking a potential long-term solution is beyond dumb. What happens when you have an actual hole, no internal solution, and have maxed out your payroll? Nothing. You're stuck with it.

People keep bitching about apologists, but then, you're looking at a ton of respected national sites and writers who are lumped in there. That seems silly.

Perhaps it's more a matter of "informed" and "uninformed".

God forbid you keep Walker and have a strength at another position. Trading him for Jon Niese was about on par with the Jason Bay trade, but I'm sure you'll defend that one too.

And there will always be a way to unblock prospects. Remember when McCutchen was "blocked" by a guy who made the All Star game the previous year and was having another fine season? Here's something - there's actual trade interest in Liriano, more than you can say about Niese and Locke. If you had to find a spot, (and really they have multiple spots due to the ineptitude of the front office and their genius plan of going with Niese/Locke/Nicasio), then you can deal from a position of strength.

Keep on defending ineptitude, and making excuses for a multi-billionaire who owns a team with a valuation of close to a billion dollars and was given a stadium free of charge.

But but but they had to trade Walker! Or you know, you can try to win.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

God forbid you keep Walker and have a strength at another position. Trading him for Jon Niese was about on par with the Jason Bay trade, but I'm sure you'll defend that one too.

And there will always be a way to unblock prospects. Remember when McCutchen was "blocked" by a guy who made the All Star game the previous year and was having another fine season? Here's something - there's actual trade interest in Liriano, more than you can say about Niese and Locke. If you had to find a spot, (and really they have multiple spots due to the ineptitude of the front office and their genius plan of going with Niese/Locke/Nicasio), then you can deal from a position of strength.

Keep on defending ineptitude, and making excuses for a multi-billionaire who owns a team with a valuation of close to a billion dollars and was given a stadium free of charge.

But but but they had to trade Walker! Or you know, you can try to win.

Wait....Nate McLouth is considered blocking somebody?

 

[mvk112]

Moving on. Again, we can rehash and rehash and rehash the past. I am no ball licker or bobblehead licker or Nutting apologist but in my opinion the 3 biggest moves the Pirates can make are:

1) Acquire a top notch rotation stopper.
2) Acquire a second top of the rotation pitcher.
3) Acquire an MVP type of bat to anchor the middle of the lineup.

How can they do this?

1) Garritt Cole pitch like he is supposed to.
2) Frankie Liriano return to form
3) Andrew McCutcheon return to form.


All of those are more likely than the Pirates trying to acquire those assets. So......I think the most prudent move is to stand pat.

Gerrit Cole was pitching like he's supposed to. He had a 148 ERA+ or roundabout when he went on the DL.

They still need another frontline SP if they want to actually compete for a title and not just be satisfied with a WC appearance. Too bad that isn't happening because the time to do it was the off season, and God forbid NH parts with anything of value from the minor leagues.

 

[mvk112]

Wait....Nate McLouth is considered blocking somebody?

He was an All Star that just signed a multi year contract. Exactly what you are fretting may happen now.