7473656D6374333F46616B676F6A2865696B060 wrote: I think it's safe to say there is not one person on this board that even considered the possibility, 2 years ago this time, that the Pirates would be the mess they are right now. But here we are. They did everything wrong when the team was right on the edge of greatness and they're doing the same thing now - nothing.
THIS!!! And this is what is so upsetting about any plan to rebuild by the same people who got close and then thoroughly tanked the effort the last time by adding Jaso, Niese and Vogelsong instead of real players. Are we to believe that IF they can rebuild to where they were in 2015 that they will take a completely different approach the next year in order to enhance the team even tho it will likely cost more? Should we believe that IF they ever get that good again they would be willing to do what they have never been willing to do and move the payroll up toward the average range in order to add key pieces to a good team rather than filling holes with cheaper, less talented options? This is what concerns me because the excuse that "they did it before, they can do it again" suggests that they would "again" only go so far before reining in the effort rather than increasing payroll to even an average level. What "they did before" was make a limited effort that failed and then gave up. And now we're supposed to be excited that the same people are going to give it another go? Gosh. I can't wait. ::)
Right. A couple people want to give the FO a pass now because they are "sort of" acting the way a normal FO would act on any team that is rebuilding. Rather than this being a case where the Pirates are following industry stds, this is more like a broken clock that just happens to be "right" twice a day. The Pirates have done literally nothing to suggest they have or are or will function like any other competitive organization. To give them a pass for doing nothing now (because rebuilding teams don't invest in payroll) without acknowledging they did nothing in 2016 is simply wrong.
And this doesn't take into account that despite assurances by a few on this board that Neal is simply playing the "ol GM game" and doesn't really believe this team can compete, their assurances don't mean a lot when the FO is not managing the team like its a rebuild. Why is Marte, Polanco, Harrison, et al still on this roster if they're rebuilding. They're neither rebuilding not competing, they're treading water and that's the worse plan of all.
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming. The fall of McCutchen. The failures of Cole. The injuries plague and poor performance of Cervelli and Polanco. Suspensions to Marte and the infractions of Kang. The FO is receiving and deserving of ridicule. But the performance of these players has just as much to do with where they find themselves now.
Players Assoc. Question Marlins and Bucs Revenue Money
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
Players Assoc. Question Marlins and Bucs Revenue Money
Here's my question - the Pirates have a payroll that bounces around 95MM. We all think they could stretch that to at least 125MM without suffering real pain, but elect not to. That's about 30MM. Why does that bother the players assoc? The Yankees have revenues of over 500MM with a budget under $200MM. That's ten times the difference. If the players union wants to investigate, that's where their attention should be. The Yankees, Dodgers, etc., are electing not to spend substantially more than the Pirates.
Players Assoc. Question Marlins and Bucs Revenue Money
302D090B05600 wrote: I think it's safe to say there is not one person on this board that even considered the possibility, 2 years ago this time, that the Pirates would be the mess they are right now. But here we are. They did everything wrong when the team was right on the edge of greatness and they're doing the same thing now - nothing.
THIS!!! And this is what is so upsetting about any plan to rebuild by the same people who got close and then thoroughly tanked the effort the last time by adding Jaso, Niese and Vogelsong instead of real players. Are we to believe that IF they can rebuild to where they were in 2015 that they will take a completely different approach the next year in order to enhance the team even tho it will likely cost more? Should we believe that IF they ever get that good again they would be willing to do what they have never been willing to do and move the payroll up toward the average range in order to add key pieces to a good team rather than filling holes with cheaper, less talented options? This is what concerns me because the excuse that "they did it before, they can do it again" suggests that they would "again" only go so far before reining in the effort rather than increasing payroll to even an average level. What "they did before" was make a limited effort that failed and then gave up. And now we're supposed to be excited that the same people are going to give it another go? Gosh. I can't wait. ::)
Right. A couple people want to give the FO a pass now because they are "sort of" acting the way a normal FO would act on any team that is rebuilding. Rather than this being a case where the Pirates are following industry stds, this is more like a broken clock that just happens to be "right" twice a day. The Pirates have done literally nothing to suggest they have or are or will function like any other competitive organization. To give them a pass for doing nothing now (because rebuilding teams don't invest in payroll) without acknowledging they did nothing in 2016 is simply wrong.
And this doesn't take into account that despite assurances by a few on this board that Neal is simply playing the "ol GM game" and doesn't really believe this team can compete, their assurances don't mean a lot when the FO is not managing the team like its a rebuild. Why is Marte, Polanco, Harrison, et al still on this roster if they're rebuilding. They're neither rebuilding not competing, they're treading water and that's the worse plan of all.
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming. The fall of McCutchen. The failures of Cole. The injuries plague and poor performance of Cervelli and Polanco. Suspensions to Marte and the infractions of Kang. The FO is receiving and deserving of ridicule. But the performance of these players has just as much to do with where they find themselves now.
How much of it is failure of players vs. failure of development? Certainly most falls on players after they get to the big leagues.
Cervelli had injuries and a suspension before acquired.
Has Polanco failed? or was his potential hyped?
I agree that players deserve some part in the failure of team the past two years, However, I think far more blame goes on management.
One of their jobs (and one that they should be able to do well) is to evaluate their own players.
Apparently the Pirates use predictive models as NH has said that both trades don't move the needle on what the team expects for 2018.
I don't think blame is close to 50-50 between management and players. In addition to some players disappointing others performed better than expected (I would put Kuhl, Nicasio and Rivero in that category.
THIS!!! And this is what is so upsetting about any plan to rebuild by the same people who got close and then thoroughly tanked the effort the last time by adding Jaso, Niese and Vogelsong instead of real players. Are we to believe that IF they can rebuild to where they were in 2015 that they will take a completely different approach the next year in order to enhance the team even tho it will likely cost more? Should we believe that IF they ever get that good again they would be willing to do what they have never been willing to do and move the payroll up toward the average range in order to add key pieces to a good team rather than filling holes with cheaper, less talented options? This is what concerns me because the excuse that "they did it before, they can do it again" suggests that they would "again" only go so far before reining in the effort rather than increasing payroll to even an average level. What "they did before" was make a limited effort that failed and then gave up. And now we're supposed to be excited that the same people are going to give it another go? Gosh. I can't wait. ::)
Right. A couple people want to give the FO a pass now because they are "sort of" acting the way a normal FO would act on any team that is rebuilding. Rather than this being a case where the Pirates are following industry stds, this is more like a broken clock that just happens to be "right" twice a day. The Pirates have done literally nothing to suggest they have or are or will function like any other competitive organization. To give them a pass for doing nothing now (because rebuilding teams don't invest in payroll) without acknowledging they did nothing in 2016 is simply wrong.
And this doesn't take into account that despite assurances by a few on this board that Neal is simply playing the "ol GM game" and doesn't really believe this team can compete, their assurances don't mean a lot when the FO is not managing the team like its a rebuild. Why is Marte, Polanco, Harrison, et al still on this roster if they're rebuilding. They're neither rebuilding not competing, they're treading water and that's the worse plan of all.
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming. The fall of McCutchen. The failures of Cole. The injuries plague and poor performance of Cervelli and Polanco. Suspensions to Marte and the infractions of Kang. The FO is receiving and deserving of ridicule. But the performance of these players has just as much to do with where they find themselves now.
How much of it is failure of players vs. failure of development? Certainly most falls on players after they get to the big leagues.
Cervelli had injuries and a suspension before acquired.
Has Polanco failed? or was his potential hyped?
I agree that players deserve some part in the failure of team the past two years, However, I think far more blame goes on management.
One of their jobs (and one that they should be able to do well) is to evaluate their own players.
Apparently the Pirates use predictive models as NH has said that both trades don't move the needle on what the team expects for 2018.
I don't think blame is close to 50-50 between management and players. In addition to some players disappointing others performed better than expected (I would put Kuhl, Nicasio and Rivero in that category.
Players Assoc. Question Marlins and Bucs Revenue Money
46445E584E2B0 wrote: Here's my question - the Pirates have a payroll that bounces around 95MM. We all think they could stretch that to at least 125MM without suffering real pain, but elect not to. That's about 30MM. Why does that bother the players assoc? The Yankees have revenues of over 500MM with a budget under $200MM. That's ten times the difference. If the players union wants to investigate, that's where their attention should be. The Yankees, Dodgers, etc., are electing not to spend substantially more than the Pirates.
Are you being serious?
Are you being serious?
Players Assoc. Question Marlins and Bucs Revenue Money
644243544252210 wrote:
How much of it is failure of players vs. failure of development? Certainly most falls on players after they get to the big leagues.
No. No, it doesn't. You're confusing two different things here.
The organization is responsible for the number of wins and losses that the teams accumulates each season. That number of wins is determined by the collection of players that are placed on the roster by the front office.
An organization should decide whether a player lived up to their expectations or was worth the value of the contract they paid him, and use that information to help them determine their personnel decisions and strategies for the future.
But holding the players responsible for how many games the team wins makes no sense. Each player can only perform to their capabilities. It's up to the front office to determine those capabilities and which of those players are likely to reach them.
So when I read comments like this:
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming.
it makes me laugh. Myopic? The irony that the person using the word myopic doesn't realize how myopic his comment is.
Here's what PMike is saying:
-The front office builds the team.
-If the results are good, like from 2013-2015, then the front office did a great job.
-If the results are bad, like every other year, then the front office still did a great job and the players failed.
Anybody else see how this makes no sense on any level?
Myopic.
How much of it is failure of players vs. failure of development? Certainly most falls on players after they get to the big leagues.
No. No, it doesn't. You're confusing two different things here.
The organization is responsible for the number of wins and losses that the teams accumulates each season. That number of wins is determined by the collection of players that are placed on the roster by the front office.
An organization should decide whether a player lived up to their expectations or was worth the value of the contract they paid him, and use that information to help them determine their personnel decisions and strategies for the future.
But holding the players responsible for how many games the team wins makes no sense. Each player can only perform to their capabilities. It's up to the front office to determine those capabilities and which of those players are likely to reach them.
So when I read comments like this:
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming.
it makes me laugh. Myopic? The irony that the person using the word myopic doesn't realize how myopic his comment is.
Here's what PMike is saying:
-The front office builds the team.
-If the results are good, like from 2013-2015, then the front office did a great job.
-If the results are bad, like every other year, then the front office still did a great job and the players failed.
Anybody else see how this makes no sense on any level?
Myopic.
-
rucker59@gmail.com
Players Assoc. Question Marlins and Bucs Revenue Money
08283B2627490 wrote:
How much of it is failure of players vs. failure of development? Certainly most falls on players after they get to the big leagues.
No. No, it doesn't. You're confusing two different things here.
The organization is responsible for the number of wins and losses that the teams accumulates each season. That number of wins is determined by the collection of players that are placed on the roster by the front office.
An organization should decide whether a player lived up to their expectations or was worth the value of the contract they paid him, and use that information to help them determine their personnel decisions and strategies for the future.
But holding the players responsible for how many games the team wins makes no sense. Each player can only perform to their capabilities. It's up to the front office to determine those capabilities and which of those players are likely to reach them.
So when I read comments like this:
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming.
it makes me laugh. Myopic? The irony that the person using the word myopic doesn't realize how myopic his comment is.
Here's what PMike is saying:
-The front office builds the team.
-If the results are good, like from 2013-2015, then the front office did a great job.
-If the results are bad, like every other year, then the front office still did a great job and the players failed.
Anybody else see how this makes no sense on any level?
Myopic.
I think you and EC are both correct. I think player preformance plays a part, but it is much smaller than PMike is assigning. Nevertheless, you can catalog FO and player performance separately I think.. The attempts to blur the line is wrong in MHO. So players can seriously over preform as we experienced 2013-2015. They can under preform as we MAYBE witnessed last year.
Is the GM exonerated if players under preform? Does he get the credit if the players over-preform? If Neal was unlucky in 2017 then he was very lucky in 2013-2015, and luck should not be used to judge him, good or bad.
Personally, I think he was lucky in 2013-2015, but there are other ways to judge him then whether certain players over preformed. He was lucky that AJ was willing to play for nothing. Neal gets no credit for signing AJ. But I personally give him credit for signing Happ, from all appearances Neal’s team had been tracking Happ and thought they could get something from him. But Neal failed though his stupid “internal valuation” to extend Happ.
In 2017, Neal choose to not bring in a 3rd and even 4th outfielder. This has to be one of the biggest blunders in MLB history and it certainly highlights the teams first objective - profits. He made the decision to not add to the rotation. He made the decision to trust 3rd base to US immigration. And on and on.
And maybe the biggest failure I see from Neal - he seems to not recognize that a significant part of 2013-2015 was due to good luck, and he wants to keep riding that horse in this rodeo. Terrible decision. That’s like someone winning a $100,000 lottery and deciding to never work again because when the money starts to run low he’ll just go out and win another $100,000 lottery. No body would advise a friend to do that. Yet some want to not only congratulate Neal for 2013-2015, but to support him trying to do the same thing again.
In the end I think Neal did a very good job putting a good team together. He’s credited for also destroying that team at its height. And so far he is failing badly trying to work the same manic he did in 2013.
The players may well bear some fault. Their performance does not exonerate Neil’s performance.
How much of it is failure of players vs. failure of development? Certainly most falls on players after they get to the big leagues.
No. No, it doesn't. You're confusing two different things here.
The organization is responsible for the number of wins and losses that the teams accumulates each season. That number of wins is determined by the collection of players that are placed on the roster by the front office.
An organization should decide whether a player lived up to their expectations or was worth the value of the contract they paid him, and use that information to help them determine their personnel decisions and strategies for the future.
But holding the players responsible for how many games the team wins makes no sense. Each player can only perform to their capabilities. It's up to the front office to determine those capabilities and which of those players are likely to reach them.
So when I read comments like this:
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming.
it makes me laugh. Myopic? The irony that the person using the word myopic doesn't realize how myopic his comment is.
Here's what PMike is saying:
-The front office builds the team.
-If the results are good, like from 2013-2015, then the front office did a great job.
-If the results are bad, like every other year, then the front office still did a great job and the players failed.
Anybody else see how this makes no sense on any level?
Myopic.
I think you and EC are both correct. I think player preformance plays a part, but it is much smaller than PMike is assigning. Nevertheless, you can catalog FO and player performance separately I think.. The attempts to blur the line is wrong in MHO. So players can seriously over preform as we experienced 2013-2015. They can under preform as we MAYBE witnessed last year.
Is the GM exonerated if players under preform? Does he get the credit if the players over-preform? If Neal was unlucky in 2017 then he was very lucky in 2013-2015, and luck should not be used to judge him, good or bad.
Personally, I think he was lucky in 2013-2015, but there are other ways to judge him then whether certain players over preformed. He was lucky that AJ was willing to play for nothing. Neal gets no credit for signing AJ. But I personally give him credit for signing Happ, from all appearances Neal’s team had been tracking Happ and thought they could get something from him. But Neal failed though his stupid “internal valuation” to extend Happ.
In 2017, Neal choose to not bring in a 3rd and even 4th outfielder. This has to be one of the biggest blunders in MLB history and it certainly highlights the teams first objective - profits. He made the decision to not add to the rotation. He made the decision to trust 3rd base to US immigration. And on and on.
And maybe the biggest failure I see from Neal - he seems to not recognize that a significant part of 2013-2015 was due to good luck, and he wants to keep riding that horse in this rodeo. Terrible decision. That’s like someone winning a $100,000 lottery and deciding to never work again because when the money starts to run low he’ll just go out and win another $100,000 lottery. No body would advise a friend to do that. Yet some want to not only congratulate Neal for 2013-2015, but to support him trying to do the same thing again.
In the end I think Neal did a very good job putting a good team together. He’s credited for also destroying that team at its height. And so far he is failing badly trying to work the same manic he did in 2013.
The players may well bear some fault. Their performance does not exonerate Neil’s performance.
-
Bobster21
Players Assoc. Question Marlins and Bucs Revenue Money
05183C3E30550 wrote:
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming. The fall of McCutchen. The failures of Cole. The injuries plague and poor performance of Cervelli and Polanco. Suspensions to Marte and the infractions of Kang. The FO is receiving and deserving of ridicule. But the performance of these players has just as much to do with where they find themselves now.
Yes, players heavily counted on like Cutch, Cole, Marte and Kang all became problematic. The 2016 team would have won more than 78 games with better production and fewer injuries. On the other hand, no one had a right to expect S-Rod and Joyce to combine for 31 HRs and 98 RBIs, which offset some of the lost production. And even if they had received greater production from some, how well would they have done when the FO chose a rotation that included Locke and Niese as well as Nicasio because the designated 5th starter-Vogelsong-turned put just as bad as all of us amateur GMs predicted? Ditto for Jaso who provided as little as expected when the journeyman catcher with little power was converted to fill the much needed 1B role. Not to mention that the FO opted not to pay Russell Martin, a true leader on the team and great catcher, and replace him with the injury prone Cervelli who--surprise!--keeps getting injured. Then there were games lost last season because the FO wrongly gambled that Watson could be a closer and Hudson could be a late inning reliever. So even if the star players had done more, the FO's strategy to gamble that cheaper, underproductive players can morph into something much better puts the team at a disadvantage.
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming. The fall of McCutchen. The failures of Cole. The injuries plague and poor performance of Cervelli and Polanco. Suspensions to Marte and the infractions of Kang. The FO is receiving and deserving of ridicule. But the performance of these players has just as much to do with where they find themselves now.
Yes, players heavily counted on like Cutch, Cole, Marte and Kang all became problematic. The 2016 team would have won more than 78 games with better production and fewer injuries. On the other hand, no one had a right to expect S-Rod and Joyce to combine for 31 HRs and 98 RBIs, which offset some of the lost production. And even if they had received greater production from some, how well would they have done when the FO chose a rotation that included Locke and Niese as well as Nicasio because the designated 5th starter-Vogelsong-turned put just as bad as all of us amateur GMs predicted? Ditto for Jaso who provided as little as expected when the journeyman catcher with little power was converted to fill the much needed 1B role. Not to mention that the FO opted not to pay Russell Martin, a true leader on the team and great catcher, and replace him with the injury prone Cervelli who--surprise!--keeps getting injured. Then there were games lost last season because the FO wrongly gambled that Watson could be a closer and Hudson could be a late inning reliever. So even if the star players had done more, the FO's strategy to gamble that cheaper, underproductive players can morph into something much better puts the team at a disadvantage.
Players Assoc. Question Marlins and Bucs Revenue Money
Underperforming players, suspensions, injuries, legal problems, personal problems. These are things that are faced by all MLB organizations. It's called adversity. No one ever said running a MLB franchise would be easy. One difference between well run organizations and poorly run organizations is how they handle adversity.
As an example of recent adversity for the Pirates let's look at the suspension last season of Starling Marte. How did TBMTIB handle that? Did they attempt to acquire a suitable replacement for Marte? No. They did nothing. They allowed the Pittsburgh Pirates to field an outfield consisting of only 2 bonafide major league outfielders for half a season. Is that on the players? Of course not. To further indict management there is also the fact that they weren't hamstrung by salary either. Marte wasn't being paid so they wouldn't have had to bust their budget to compensate for his loss.
Ultimately, as Aaron alluded to, every aspect of the on the field MLB product is the responsibility of management. If they're good at their job they'll take on the adversities that inevitably occur and overcome them.
As an example of recent adversity for the Pirates let's look at the suspension last season of Starling Marte. How did TBMTIB handle that? Did they attempt to acquire a suitable replacement for Marte? No. They did nothing. They allowed the Pittsburgh Pirates to field an outfield consisting of only 2 bonafide major league outfielders for half a season. Is that on the players? Of course not. To further indict management there is also the fact that they weren't hamstrung by salary either. Marte wasn't being paid so they wouldn't have had to bust their budget to compensate for his loss.
Ultimately, as Aaron alluded to, every aspect of the on the field MLB product is the responsibility of management. If they're good at their job they'll take on the adversities that inevitably occur and overcome them.
Players Assoc. Question Marlins and Bucs Revenue Money
I will admit I forgot to give the front office credit for dealing for Phil Gosselin when Kang was suspended.
Players Assoc. Question Marlins and Bucs Revenue Money
5676657879170 wrote:
How much of it is failure of players vs. failure of development? Certainly most falls on players after they get to the big leagues.
No. No, it doesn't. You're confusing two different things here.
The organization is responsible for the number of wins and losses that the teams accumulates each season. That number of wins is determined by the collection of players that are placed on the roster by the front office.
An organization should decide whether a player lived up to their expectations or was worth the value of the contract they paid him, and use that information to help them determine their personnel decisions and strategies for the future.
But holding the players responsible for how many games the team wins makes no sense. Each player can only perform to their capabilities. It's up to the front office to determine those capabilities and which of those players are likely to reach them.
So when I read comments like this:
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming.
it makes me laugh. Myopic? The irony that the person using the word myopic doesn't realize how myopic his comment is.
Here's what PMike is saying:
-The front office builds the team.
-If the results are good, like from 2013-2015, then the front office did a great job.
-If the results are bad, like every other year, then the front office still did a great job and the players failed.
Anybody else see how this makes no sense on any level?
Myopic.
Thanks for telling me what I meant to say. Quite a gift you have.
Let me get this straight. I made an argument suggesting that every ounce of blame doesn't lie simply on management. I suggested that perhaps the significant decrease in performance from a few key contributors was also part of the problem. To be clear, I did not say that it was the entire problem. In fact, I said "the FO is receiving and deserving of ridicule."
Or course, in your analysis of my words, you naturally made a series of conclusions that I in no way, shape, or form said or suggested. Then you continue (this time in a mocking way) to put all blame on the FO discrediting my point with no real data.
Well done. You totally got it.
Myopic - lacking imagination, foresight, or intellectual insight.
How much of it is failure of players vs. failure of development? Certainly most falls on players after they get to the big leagues.
No. No, it doesn't. You're confusing two different things here.
The organization is responsible for the number of wins and losses that the teams accumulates each season. That number of wins is determined by the collection of players that are placed on the roster by the front office.
An organization should decide whether a player lived up to their expectations or was worth the value of the contract they paid him, and use that information to help them determine their personnel decisions and strategies for the future.
But holding the players responsible for how many games the team wins makes no sense. Each player can only perform to their capabilities. It's up to the front office to determine those capabilities and which of those players are likely to reach them.
So when I read comments like this:
To make the current situation the Pirates find themselves in right now only the FO's fault is too myopic and dualistic. The issue lies as much on the hands of the players on the field radically underperforming.
it makes me laugh. Myopic? The irony that the person using the word myopic doesn't realize how myopic his comment is.
Here's what PMike is saying:
-The front office builds the team.
-If the results are good, like from 2013-2015, then the front office did a great job.
-If the results are bad, like every other year, then the front office still did a great job and the players failed.
Anybody else see how this makes no sense on any level?
Myopic.
Thanks for telling me what I meant to say. Quite a gift you have.
Let me get this straight. I made an argument suggesting that every ounce of blame doesn't lie simply on management. I suggested that perhaps the significant decrease in performance from a few key contributors was also part of the problem. To be clear, I did not say that it was the entire problem. In fact, I said "the FO is receiving and deserving of ridicule."
Or course, in your analysis of my words, you naturally made a series of conclusions that I in no way, shape, or form said or suggested. Then you continue (this time in a mocking way) to put all blame on the FO discrediting my point with no real data.
Well done. You totally got it.
Myopic - lacking imagination, foresight, or intellectual insight.