MLB Trade Rumors on 2011 Pirate Rotation

[epoc]

The Pirates will obtain one of their 2011 starters through a trade this off-season.  I would bet large amounts of U.S. currency on it.
 
Even this tone-deaf front office has to feel some embarassment about this season.  I legitimately believe that Coonley is upset.

Why a trade rather than FA? Or do you think they'll do both?

I don't think FA is an efficient way to allocate resources on pitching.  It may be for hitting, but it is terrible for pitching. 
Often, you're paying for past glories and you have to lock yourself into multiple decline years for a pitcher.

It's very rare that I would advocate for signing a pitcher to many years past his 1st or 2nd natural free agency years.  There is just too much variability with most pitchers.

What about risk/reward types like Harden, Webb, Francis, etc.? There are enough of those guys available this offseason that someone is likely to be signable for a modest one-year deal. Personally, I'd rather do that than give up prospects.

[Dale Berras Stash]

The Pirates will obtain one of their 2011 starters through a trade this off-season.  I would bet large amounts of U.S. currency on it.
 
Even this tone-deaf front office has to feel some embarassment about this season.  I legitimately believe that Coonley is upset.

Why a trade rather than FA? Or do you think they'll do both?

I don't think FA is an efficient way to allocate resources on pitching.  It may be for hitting, but it is terrible for pitching. 
Often, you're paying for past glories and you have to lock yourself into multiple decline years for a pitcher.

It's very rare that I would advocate for signing a pitcher to many years past his 1st or 2nd natural free agency years.  There is just too much variability with most pitchers.

What about risk/reward types like Harden, Webb, Francis, etc.? There are enough of those guys available this offseason that someone is likely to be signable for a modest one-year deal. Personally, I'd rather do that than give up prospects.

Ben Sheets and Rich Harden were 2 such risk/reward signings and they were (I'm lazy to look it up), $10M and $7.5M respectively.  That's a lot of cashish.  On his best days, Jeff Francis was an ever-so-slightly better Paul Maholm.  And I don't want anything to do with Webb.

Prospects are for providing cost-controlled talent to the majors and using as trade chips.  The Pirates have enough to do both.

[epoc]

If they can get Shields for Owens, Holt, and Miller, I will tentatively support it.

[WTM]

As a way of agreeing with DBS . . .

The almost exclusive focus by fans on the free agent market as the answer for all of a team's ills (and I'm not just talking about the Pirates) has left me more and more dumbfounded over the years.  There's a reason Marvin Miller was terrified the owners would listen to Charlie Finley and make all the players FAs every year.  That would have depressed salaries and kept them in line with performance.  Miller wanted a system that inflated salaries and divorced them from performance, so a player could get paid a princely salary for sucking for years.

Just look at the market in virtually any year.  There are typically about two to five players who can truly make a difference.  Usually, the Yankees and one or two out of the Angels, Mets, Red Sox and one or two other teams get all of them.  That leaves 80% of the teams fighting over a relative handful of second-tier players, each of whom has maybe a one in ten to twenty chance of making a real difference for the team that signs him.  A market like that AS A RULE drastically overvalues those players.  Once in a blue moon a team hits the jackpot, but in the long run looking to that market to fill your needs CAN'T succeed.  It's the exact equivalent of stuffing quarters into slot machines.  The house has stacked the odds so that only the lucky one out of many thousands can win.

And it's not only the low supply forcing prices way over the players' values.  There's also the problem of timing.  The average player hits free agency for the first time just when his performance is starting to decline.  He's going to be in the 28-31 age range, so if he's not already headed downhill, he will be typically within one to two years.  Since even the second tier players get 3-4 years (although the economy is changing that some), again the signing team almost as a rule is getting a 2-3 year albatross.

Unless you're the Yankees or a couple other teams, you CAN'T win at this game.  It's not possible.

[Tintin]

Truthfully I don't care as long as we get some guys who won't have you down 6-0 after three or give up 6 runs in the 5th after looking awesome for the first 4 innings.
I really don't mind going 66-96 if the team is interesting, and we're in games (OK, maybe not 66-96).

[GoBucs21]

As a way of agreeing with DBS . . .

The almost exclusive focus by fans on the free agent market as the answer for all of a team's ills (and I'm not just talking about the Pirates) has left me more and more dumbfounded over the years.  There's a reason Marvin Miller was terrified the owners would listen to Charlie Finley and make all the players FAs every year.  That would have depressed salaries and kept them in line with performance.  Miller wanted a system that inflated salaries and divorced them from performance, so a player could get paid a princely salary for sucking for years.

Just look at the market in virtually any year.  There are typically about two to five players who can truly make a difference.  Usually, the Yankees and one or two out of the Angels, Mets, Red Sox and one or two other teams get all of them.  That leaves 80% of the teams fighting over a relative handful of second-tier players, each of whom has maybe a one in ten to twenty chance of making a real difference for the team that signs him.  A market like that AS A RULE drastically overvalues those players.  Once in a blue moon a team hits the jackpot, but in the long run looking to that market to fill your needs CAN'T succeed.  It's the exact equivalent of stuffing quarters into slot machines.  The house has stacked the odds so that only the lucky one out of many thousands can win.

And it's not only the low supply forcing prices way over the players' values.  There's also the problem of timing.  The average player hits free agency for the first time just when his performance is starting to decline.  He's going to be in the 28-31 age range, so if he's not already headed downhill, he will be typically within one to two years.  Since even the second tier players get 3-4 years (although the economy is changing that some), again the signing team almost as a rule is getting a 2-3 year albatross.

Unless you're the Yankees or a couple other teams, you CAN'T win at this game.  It's not possible.

One of the many reasons that I believe the Pirates should go with cheap, probably crappy young pitchers.  They are better than expensive, probably crappy free agent pitchers.

You're right.  The way this stuff sorts itself out every year, is that the high end guys go first and set the top end limit.  The rest have their salaries based on a downward sliding scale based on the top end.  The result is that teams almost always end up over paying for a mediocre to crap pitcher or two.

If the Pirates must get starting pitching, trade for it.  At least the pitcher's salary wasn't inflated this year.

[mouse]

I think you overpay for talent when you trade for it also. The arbitration rules certainly favor the established player. The only way to get reasonably priced talent is to draft it, and hold on long enough to see what is good and what is not -- and that's almost a random thing.

[CentralCABucsFan]

I think one way to get a "deal" on a free agent pitcher is to target a reliever that would rather be a starter.  McDonald was in that position even though he was aquired via trade, as was Ohlendorf.  Each year I target a few guys in that situation, and I have come up with guys like Juan Cruz, Jeremy Affeldt, and Aaron Heilman.  Heilman and Affeldt are free agents, and I'd say the Cubs' Sean Marshall fits that mold.

[GoBucs21]

I think one way to get a "deal" on a free agent pitcher is to target a reliever that would rather be a starter.  McDonald was in that position even though he was aquired via trade, as was Ohlendorf.  Each year I target a few guys in that situation, and I have come up with guys like Juan Cruz, Jeremy Affeldt, and Aaron Heilman.  Heilman and Affeldt are free agents, and I'd say the Cubs' Sean Marshall fits that mold.

I believe Lowe was in that category too.  I think the Cards did that with Braden Looper.

[wvbucco]

I think one way to get a "deal" on a free agent pitcher is to target a reliever that would rather be a starter.  McDonald was in that position even though he was aquired via trade, as was Ohlendorf.  Each year I target a few guys in that situation, and I have come up with guys like Juan Cruz, Jeremy Affeldt, and Aaron Heilman.  Heilman and Affeldt are free agents, and I'd say the Cubs' Sean Marshall fits that mold.

An excellent idea. 

[slider]

I think one way to get a "deal" on a free agent pitcher is to target a reliever that would rather be a starter.  McDonald was in that position even though he was aquired via trade, as was Ohlendorf.  Each year I target a few guys in that situation, and I have come up with guys like Juan Cruz, Jeremy Affeldt, and Aaron Heilman.  Heilman and Affeldt are free agents, and I'd say the Cubs' Sean Marshall fits that mold.

I agree it's a good way to get potential starters at a discount price. 

BTW, there is at least one guy out there this year who I think fits the mold-  Chris Resop, wonder if we could somehow get him?

[bradlej31]

I also believe we are at a time in baseball in which prospects are highly valued... probably overvalued.   

I heard Billy Beane make a comment in an interview after they traded for Holiday that he believed the player for prospects trades' pendulum had swung so far in the prospects direction that you could obtain some pretty good players without giving up as much as you thought.    The most recent Dan Haren trade could be an example supporting his thought.

[Dogknot3]

I don't think FA is an efficient way to allocate resources on pitching.  It may be for hitting, but it is terrible for pitching. 
Often, you're paying for past glories and you have to lock yourself into multiple decline years for a pitcher.

It's very rare that I would advocate for signing a pitcher to many years past his 1st or 2nd natural free agency years.  There is just too much variability with most pitchers.

So, you think it is easier to develop pitching than hitting?

[markson33]

I'm all for trying a reliever as a starter.  Resop and Hanrahan are two guys on our team that have experience starting.  

What about any of these guys as trade targets?  They probably won't be easy to get, but they would be easier than ... say Shields.

Matt Belisle
Joaquin Benoit
Clay Hensley
Tyler Clippard

[GoBucs21]

I'm all for trying a reliever as a starter.  Resop and Hanrahan are two guys on our team that have experience starting.  

What about any of these guys as trade targets?  They probably won't be easy to get, but they would be easier than ... say Shields.

Matt Belisle
Joaquin Benoit
Clay Hensley
Tyler Clippard

I would swap out Clippard for Craig Stammen.  Clippard has never been a starter and don't think he wants to be. 

Stammen doesn't want to be a reliever and has started.  Sabermetrically, Stammen's numbers aren't bad.  He does have a high ERA and has given ups some hits.  He is only in his second full year and has jumped his K/9IPs up over 6, while keeping his walks below 3/9IPs.

He has some stuff but has struggled more than almost any pitcher I've seen after two outs.  Because Stammen came up late last year and spent about a month in the minors this year, he may not be arb eligible next year.  If you want a cheap reliever, who wants to start from the Nationals, go with Stammen, not Clippard.