5344526573737F100 wrote: TB was probably hopeful they could correct him and would have a very high quality pitcher if they did. But trading for a problematic pitcher you hope to correct is far different from trading for an established pitcher or just a top prospect who has not experienced problems.
Replace TB above with PIT. That's the problem with this trade. If it was a one-for-one, it makes a lot of sense. A top prospect who hasn't established traded for a guy that has shown potential but not delivered for a couple of years. You could argue that Archer has established his floor, so you pay more. OK. Meadows was the more. And a lot to give as the odds he turns into a nice ML regular are probably as high as Archer's odds of recovering his prior form. Add Baz on top of it and you have a massive overpay for a #3/4 pitcher with the potential to return to high-end #2 or low-end #1 form, but no evidence that it will happen. Just as there is little evidence that Glasnow will become a TOR starter.
"Massive overpay" .. perfect...that's the point I've been trying to make in this thread. Seems like many were suckered into belie ing this was a good move by the Pirates This will be the 4th time I've said this but here goes again.
This was way too much for Archer and it was done to get fannies back in seats . The Pirate brass is hoping the fan base will be sucked into thinking this will make a difference and help in the next couple of years. By reading this board . there are plenty that bought into this not being highway robbery. Well it was .. sorry but that's the truth. The trade for Kela was fine , this one will prove to be a disaster.
Oh ... I see Meadows hit 3 HR's tonight. His 10th for Durham in less than 100 AB's. Hmmm
Glasnow VS Archer
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
Glasnow VS Archer
383F2E3D2E7F724B0 wrote: TB was probably hopeful they could correct him and would have a very high quality pitcher if they did. But trading for a problematic pitcher you hope to correct is far different from trading for an established pitcher or just a top prospect who has not experienced problems.
Replace TB above with PIT. That's the problem with this trade. If it was a one-for-one, it makes a lot of sense. A top prospect who hasn't established traded for a guy that has shown potential but not delivered for a couple of years. You could argue that Archer has established his floor, so you pay more. OK. Meadows was the more. And a lot to give as the odds he turns into a nice ML regular are probably as high as Archer's odds of recovering his prior form. Add Baz on top of it and you have a massive overpay for a #3/4 pitcher with the potential to return to high-end #2 or low-end #1 form, but no evidence that it will happen. Just as there is little evidence that Glasnow will become a TOR starter.
"Massive overpay" .. perfect...that's the point I've been trying to make in this thread. Seems like many were suckered into belie ing this was a good move by the Pirates This will be the 4th time I've said this but here goes again.
This was way too much for Archer and it was done to get fannies back in seats . The Pirate brass is hoping the fan base will be sucked into thinking this will make a difference and help in the next couple of years. By reading this board . there are plenty that bought into this not being highway robbery. Well it was .. sorry but that's the truth. The trade for Kela was fine , this one will prove to be a disaster.
Oh ... I see Meadows hit 3 HR's tonight. His 10th for Durham in less than 100 AB's. Hmmm if this trade is a disaster then NH needs to go (along with the entire front office).
Replace TB above with PIT. That's the problem with this trade. If it was a one-for-one, it makes a lot of sense. A top prospect who hasn't established traded for a guy that has shown potential but not delivered for a couple of years. You could argue that Archer has established his floor, so you pay more. OK. Meadows was the more. And a lot to give as the odds he turns into a nice ML regular are probably as high as Archer's odds of recovering his prior form. Add Baz on top of it and you have a massive overpay for a #3/4 pitcher with the potential to return to high-end #2 or low-end #1 form, but no evidence that it will happen. Just as there is little evidence that Glasnow will become a TOR starter.
"Massive overpay" .. perfect...that's the point I've been trying to make in this thread. Seems like many were suckered into belie ing this was a good move by the Pirates This will be the 4th time I've said this but here goes again.
This was way too much for Archer and it was done to get fannies back in seats . The Pirate brass is hoping the fan base will be sucked into thinking this will make a difference and help in the next couple of years. By reading this board . there are plenty that bought into this not being highway robbery. Well it was .. sorry but that's the truth. The trade for Kela was fine , this one will prove to be a disaster.
Oh ... I see Meadows hit 3 HR's tonight. His 10th for Durham in less than 100 AB's. Hmmm if this trade is a disaster then NH needs to go (along with the entire front office).
Glasnow VS Archer
Glasnow keeping it real. His pitching line from tonight's game against the Jays:
IP: 0.2
H: 5
ER: 7
BB: 2
SO: 2
Beware small sample sizes.
IP: 0.2
H: 5
ER: 7
BB: 2
SO: 2
Beware small sample sizes.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3642
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Glasnow VS Archer
4A6E7A72771B0 wrote: Glasnow keeping it real. His pitching line from tonight's game against the Jays:
IP: 0.2
H: 5
ER: 7
BB: 2
SO: 2
Beware small sample sizes.
To be fair .2 IP is a pretty small sample size too.
I don't know what the future holds for him, but to my eyes he's had two bad starts, a few awesomem and a few OK since being traded.
IP: 0.2
H: 5
ER: 7
BB: 2
SO: 2
Beware small sample sizes.
To be fair .2 IP is a pretty small sample size too.
I don't know what the future holds for him, but to my eyes he's had two bad starts, a few awesomem and a few OK since being traded.
Glasnow VS Archer
42455447540508310 wrote: TB was probably hopeful they could correct him and would have a very high quality pitcher if they did. But trading for a problematic pitcher you hope to correct is far different from trading for an established pitcher or just a top prospect who has not experienced problems.
Replace TB above with PIT. That's the problem with this trade. If it was a one-for-one, it makes a lot of sense. A top prospect who hasn't established traded for a guy that has shown potential but not delivered for a couple of years. You could argue that Archer has established his floor, so you pay more. OK. Meadows was the more. And a lot to give as the odds he turns into a nice ML regular are probably as high as Archer's odds of recovering his prior form. Add Baz on top of it and you have a massive overpay for a #3/4 pitcher with the potential to return to high-end #2 or low-end #1 form, but no evidence that it will happen. Just as there is little evidence that Glasnow will become a TOR starter.
"Massive overpay" .. perfect...that's the point I've been trying to make in this thread. Seems like many were suckered into belie ing this was a good move by the Pirates This will be the 4th time I've said this but here goes again.
This was way too much for Archer and it was done to get fannies back in seats . The Pirate brass is hoping the fan base will be sucked into thinking this will make a difference and help in the next couple of years. By reading this board . there are plenty that bought into this not being highway robbery. Well it was .. sorry but that's the truth. The trade for Kela was fine , this one will prove to be a disaster.
Oh ... I see Meadows hit 3 HR's tonight. His 10th for Durham in less than 100 AB's. Hmmm
Pittsburgh traded potential for Archer, not givens. Cool, Meadows his three homers for the Durham Bulls, not the Tampa Bay Rays. Its a disaster if all three make impact for Tampa. I have little faith Glasnow does; not sure Baz does. And if Archer returns to form three years ago, is this a disaster?
Replace TB above with PIT. That's the problem with this trade. If it was a one-for-one, it makes a lot of sense. A top prospect who hasn't established traded for a guy that has shown potential but not delivered for a couple of years. You could argue that Archer has established his floor, so you pay more. OK. Meadows was the more. And a lot to give as the odds he turns into a nice ML regular are probably as high as Archer's odds of recovering his prior form. Add Baz on top of it and you have a massive overpay for a #3/4 pitcher with the potential to return to high-end #2 or low-end #1 form, but no evidence that it will happen. Just as there is little evidence that Glasnow will become a TOR starter.
"Massive overpay" .. perfect...that's the point I've been trying to make in this thread. Seems like many were suckered into belie ing this was a good move by the Pirates This will be the 4th time I've said this but here goes again.
This was way too much for Archer and it was done to get fannies back in seats . The Pirate brass is hoping the fan base will be sucked into thinking this will make a difference and help in the next couple of years. By reading this board . there are plenty that bought into this not being highway robbery. Well it was .. sorry but that's the truth. The trade for Kela was fine , this one will prove to be a disaster.
Oh ... I see Meadows hit 3 HR's tonight. His 10th for Durham in less than 100 AB's. Hmmm
Pittsburgh traded potential for Archer, not givens. Cool, Meadows his three homers for the Durham Bulls, not the Tampa Bay Rays. Its a disaster if all three make impact for Tampa. I have little faith Glasnow does; not sure Baz does. And if Archer returns to form three years ago, is this a disaster?
Glasnow VS Archer
51636F6F7B496A636E6B6463020 wrote: Glasnow keeping it real. His pitching line from tonight's game against the Jays:
IP: 0.2
H: 5
ER: 7
BB: 2
SO: 2
Beware small sample sizes.
To be fair .2 IP is a pretty small sample size too.
I don't know what the future holds for him, but to my eyes he's had two bad starts, a few awesomem and a few OK since being traded.
Yeah, obviously this is just one game. I'm simply pointing out that for those who recently have been in anguish over the Archer deal that making an evaluation at this point is premature by perhaps a factor of several seasons.
IP: 0.2
H: 5
ER: 7
BB: 2
SO: 2
Beware small sample sizes.
To be fair .2 IP is a pretty small sample size too.
I don't know what the future holds for him, but to my eyes he's had two bad starts, a few awesomem and a few OK since being traded.
Yeah, obviously this is just one game. I'm simply pointing out that for those who recently have been in anguish over the Archer deal that making an evaluation at this point is premature by perhaps a factor of several seasons.
Glasnow VS Archer
0D293D35305C0 wrote: Glasnow keeping it real. His pitching line from tonight's game against the Jays:
IP: 0.2
H: 5
ER: 7
BB: 2
SO: 2
Beware small sample sizes.
To be fair .2 IP is a pretty small sample size too.
I don't know what the future holds for him, but to my eyes he's had two bad starts, a few awesomem and a few OK since being traded.
Yeah, obviously this is just one game. I'm simply pointing out that for those who recently have been in anguish over the Archer deal that making an evaluation at this point is premature by perhaps a factor of several seasons.
Yep along with the Pirates making some changes too Archer. He looked pretty darn good his last start. I would be willing to bet Archer is better than Glasnow over the long haul.
IP: 0.2
H: 5
ER: 7
BB: 2
SO: 2
Beware small sample sizes.
To be fair .2 IP is a pretty small sample size too.
I don't know what the future holds for him, but to my eyes he's had two bad starts, a few awesomem and a few OK since being traded.
Yeah, obviously this is just one game. I'm simply pointing out that for those who recently have been in anguish over the Archer deal that making an evaluation at this point is premature by perhaps a factor of several seasons.
Yep along with the Pirates making some changes too Archer. He looked pretty darn good his last start. I would be willing to bet Archer is better than Glasnow over the long haul.
-
Bobster21
Glasnow VS Archer
I'm interested to see how Glasnow does in his next start. He seemed to have confidence problems with the Pirates but his confidence got a big boost when TB traded for him. He's had some good games for them and now we'll see if his most recent disastrous start will effect his confidence with TB.
-
ScottinMass
- Posts: 304
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:26 am
Glasnow VS Archer
0C212C3D3A2B3C7C7F4E0 wrote: I'm interested to see how Glasnow does in his next start. He seemed to have confidence problems with the Pirates but his confidence got a big boost when TB traded for him. He's had some good games for them and now we'll see if his most recent disastrous start will effect his confidence with TB.
9/11 against Cleveland: 7 IP 6 H 2 ER 0 BB 3 K
Glasnow VS Archer
33030F1414090E2D011313600 wrote:
I'm interested to see how Glasnow does in his next start. He seemed to have confidence problems with the Pirates but his confidence got a big boost when TB traded for him. He's had some good games for them and now we'll see if his most recent disastrous start will effect his confidence with TB.
9/11 against Cleveland: 7 IP 6 H 2 ER 0 BB 3 K
his best start in the majors I believe.
I'm interested to see how Glasnow does in his next start. He seemed to have confidence problems with the Pirates but his confidence got a big boost when TB traded for him. He's had some good games for them and now we'll see if his most recent disastrous start will effect his confidence with TB.
9/11 against Cleveland: 7 IP 6 H 2 ER 0 BB 3 K
his best start in the majors I believe.