406667706676050 wrote: Josh Donaldson would be a great pick up, but what would it take to get him?
Well, given that it took two of our top ten AND Liriano to "get" Drew Hutchison, my guess would be...a lot.
Do you think Toronto fans are on their GM for that trade? You are over ranking the prospects. Liriano is even worse now. Pirates are "winning" that trade right now.
Donaldson would be great. He has been hurt a lot this year, so maybe that would lower his price tag.
Nice to know the Pirates are "winning" that trade. By that I guess you mean they got money off the books and shed a problematic pitcher. It's hard to see the acquisition of a pitcher who failed in the majors with over 400 innings and is back in AAA this year as a win. Hutchison was doing well for awhile but 2 of his last 3 starts have been bad and his ERA is an unimpressive 3.70. For the past 5 years, Toronto has maintained a payroll in the top 10 so they probably aren't fretting Liriano's salary as much as they are his poor pitching. But Ramirez and McGuire are both 22. McGuire still isn't hitting but is a good defensive catcher and could at least be a capable backup. Chris Stewart made a career of that. Ramirez, after hitting .306 in AA last year, got off to a terrible start but hit .262 in May, .261 in June and is currently hitting .313 for July. So he's starting to look more like the guy who batted .306 for Altoona last year. Liriano's contract is up after this year and if Toronto ends up with a backup catcher and a 4th outfielder in a couple years and all they gave up was Hutchison, they come out ahead. If you want to say the Pirates are "winning" that trade because the only guy out of it currently in the majors is the ineffective Liriano, that seems rather short-sighed. Looking ahead, I'd rather have Ramirez and McGuire in the system than Hutchison.
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
you'll take three years of Nova now but what if he turns into a Liriano?
It may have been well thought out but it was risky. Nova didn't sign with Pirates until Christmas time. He was on open market for over 6 weeks. If he would have signed elsewhere who knows where the Bucs would have spent that money? Daniel Hudson signed with Bucs before Nova.
Yep....
Nova fell in our lap. Period. The Pirates didn't plan anything around the trade.
If Nova turns south next year, now many prospects are we giving away to unload his salary?
We won't trade prospects for major league talent, but we justify trading prospects for basically "cash considerations".
Yep....
Trade Deadline Thread
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
Bobster21
Trade Deadline Thread
14292E34292E400 wrote:
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
Trade Deadline Thread
6F424F5E59485F1F1C2D0 wrote:
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
He got rid of 20 million dollars and gave nothing away but a huge headache. These dudes are non prospects, but we refuse to see that because they we ranked high once, which is why our FO is smarter than us. They do this for a living and we're on on the scouting.
Go back a year ago and read this boards reaction to the Melancon trade. It was absolutely panned, but that turned out OK, didn't it. WHile I don't think NH knew exactly what he was getting, I'm fairly certain Rivero wasn't a throw in.
As for financial flexibility, all of us need to realize that 1). We can't compete financially against other teams if we want a player, 2). We can't afford to pay market value for players. 3). This ownership is not going to pay market value for these players. So we have to be smarter, find diamonds in the rough, pay long term under market value for younger players and yes, if we have to, give non prospects away to have other teams absorb our mistakes.
This is simply the way it is and their would be a whole less stress in some of your lives if you realized that the Nuttings are NOT going to fork over big money for major leaguers and enjoy the good work that NH is doing with an arm tied behind his back.
He's not perfect, but he misses a whole lot less than most GM's
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
He got rid of 20 million dollars and gave nothing away but a huge headache. These dudes are non prospects, but we refuse to see that because they we ranked high once, which is why our FO is smarter than us. They do this for a living and we're on on the scouting.
Go back a year ago and read this boards reaction to the Melancon trade. It was absolutely panned, but that turned out OK, didn't it. WHile I don't think NH knew exactly what he was getting, I'm fairly certain Rivero wasn't a throw in.
As for financial flexibility, all of us need to realize that 1). We can't compete financially against other teams if we want a player, 2). We can't afford to pay market value for players. 3). This ownership is not going to pay market value for these players. So we have to be smarter, find diamonds in the rough, pay long term under market value for younger players and yes, if we have to, give non prospects away to have other teams absorb our mistakes.
This is simply the way it is and their would be a whole less stress in some of your lives if you realized that the Nuttings are NOT going to fork over big money for major leaguers and enjoy the good work that NH is doing with an arm tied behind his back.
He's not perfect, but he misses a whole lot less than most GM's
Trade Deadline Thread
023F38223F38560 wrote:
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
He got rid of 20 million dollars and gave nothing away but a huge headache. These dudes are non prospects, but we refuse to see that because they we ranked high once, which is why our FO is smarter than us. They do this for a living and we're on on the scouting.
Go back a year ago and read this boards reaction to the Melancon trade. It was absolutely panned, but that turned out OK, didn't it. WHile I don't think NH knew exactly what he was getting, I'm fairly certain Rivero wasn't a throw in.
As for financial flexibility, all of us need to realize that 1). We can't compete financially against other teams if we want a player, 2). We can't afford to pay market value for players. 3). This ownership is not going to pay market value for these players. So we have to be smarter, find diamonds in the rough, pay long term under market value for younger players and yes, if we have to, give non prospects away to have other teams absorb our mistakes.
This is simply the way it is and their would be a whole less stress in some of your lives if you realized that the Nuttings are NOT going to fork over big money for major leaguers and enjoy the good work that NH is doing with an arm tied behind his back.
He's not perfect, but he misses a whole lot less than most GM's
#GONUTTINGSWALLET!
If you and those like you want to sit around and talk about how great this organization has been in acquiring talent and turning trades, so be it.
HOWEVER, don't expect others to be so stupid as to ACCEPT the BS self imposed ~90 million dollar payroll cap that guys like you want everyone to just forget about and move on
This organization is an absolute disgrace. A DISGRACE. It's been 23 years since a division championship and 38 years since a pennant.
Somehow your group of "fans" are advocating kicking the can down the road further. You want to trade Cole and Cutch and rebuild again. What a freakin' surprise! That way, there's no objective way to measure the "plan" whatever that is now. Because "we have to wait 3 years or 5 year before we evaluate" There's always going to be an excuse.
so you can take the "just shutup and enjoy it" nonsense and take a long walk with the rest of your like minded bretheren. If it weren't for a fair VOCAL segment of what's left of this fanbase having the sports version of Stockholm Syndrome and praising the very organization that continues over and over to take a giant dump on your head, maybe this owner COULD have been chased out of the city?
Maybe the team with him, and a new team and owner come in to take his place. You never know what could happen. 98 wins two seasons ago. sub .500 last year, and .500 right now after going on an absolute TEAR.
Nothing wrong here. ho hum ho hum
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
He got rid of 20 million dollars and gave nothing away but a huge headache. These dudes are non prospects, but we refuse to see that because they we ranked high once, which is why our FO is smarter than us. They do this for a living and we're on on the scouting.
Go back a year ago and read this boards reaction to the Melancon trade. It was absolutely panned, but that turned out OK, didn't it. WHile I don't think NH knew exactly what he was getting, I'm fairly certain Rivero wasn't a throw in.
As for financial flexibility, all of us need to realize that 1). We can't compete financially against other teams if we want a player, 2). We can't afford to pay market value for players. 3). This ownership is not going to pay market value for these players. So we have to be smarter, find diamonds in the rough, pay long term under market value for younger players and yes, if we have to, give non prospects away to have other teams absorb our mistakes.
This is simply the way it is and their would be a whole less stress in some of your lives if you realized that the Nuttings are NOT going to fork over big money for major leaguers and enjoy the good work that NH is doing with an arm tied behind his back.
He's not perfect, but he misses a whole lot less than most GM's
#GONUTTINGSWALLET!
If you and those like you want to sit around and talk about how great this organization has been in acquiring talent and turning trades, so be it.
HOWEVER, don't expect others to be so stupid as to ACCEPT the BS self imposed ~90 million dollar payroll cap that guys like you want everyone to just forget about and move on
This organization is an absolute disgrace. A DISGRACE. It's been 23 years since a division championship and 38 years since a pennant.
Somehow your group of "fans" are advocating kicking the can down the road further. You want to trade Cole and Cutch and rebuild again. What a freakin' surprise! That way, there's no objective way to measure the "plan" whatever that is now. Because "we have to wait 3 years or 5 year before we evaluate" There's always going to be an excuse.
so you can take the "just shutup and enjoy it" nonsense and take a long walk with the rest of your like minded bretheren. If it weren't for a fair VOCAL segment of what's left of this fanbase having the sports version of Stockholm Syndrome and praising the very organization that continues over and over to take a giant dump on your head, maybe this owner COULD have been chased out of the city?
Maybe the team with him, and a new team and owner come in to take his place. You never know what could happen. 98 wins two seasons ago. sub .500 last year, and .500 right now after going on an absolute TEAR.
Nothing wrong here. ho hum ho hum
-
JollyRoger
- Posts: 1469
- Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 8:31 pm
Trade Deadline Thread
4875726875721C0 wrote:
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
He got rid of 20 million dollars and gave nothing away but a huge headache. These dudes are non prospects, but we refuse to see that because they we ranked high once, which is why our FO is smarter than us. They do this for a living and we're on on the scouting.
Go back a year ago and read this boards reaction to the Melancon trade. It was absolutely panned, but that turned out OK, didn't it. WHile I don't think NH knew exactly what he was getting, I'm fairly certain Rivero wasn't a throw in.
As for financial flexibility, all of us need to realize that 1). We can't compete financially against other teams if we want a player, 2). We can't afford to pay market value for players. 3). This ownership is not going to pay market value for these players. So we have to be smarter, find diamonds in the rough, pay long term under market value for younger players and yes, if we have to, give non prospects away to have other teams absorb our mistakes.
This is simply the way it is and their would be a whole less stress in some of your lives if you realized that the Nuttings are NOT going to fork over big money for major leaguers and enjoy the good work that NH is doing with an arm tied behind his back.
He's not perfect, but he misses a whole lot less than most GM's
Your number 2 statement is incorrect. Your number 3 statement is correct
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
He got rid of 20 million dollars and gave nothing away but a huge headache. These dudes are non prospects, but we refuse to see that because they we ranked high once, which is why our FO is smarter than us. They do this for a living and we're on on the scouting.
Go back a year ago and read this boards reaction to the Melancon trade. It was absolutely panned, but that turned out OK, didn't it. WHile I don't think NH knew exactly what he was getting, I'm fairly certain Rivero wasn't a throw in.
As for financial flexibility, all of us need to realize that 1). We can't compete financially against other teams if we want a player, 2). We can't afford to pay market value for players. 3). This ownership is not going to pay market value for these players. So we have to be smarter, find diamonds in the rough, pay long term under market value for younger players and yes, if we have to, give non prospects away to have other teams absorb our mistakes.
This is simply the way it is and their would be a whole less stress in some of your lives if you realized that the Nuttings are NOT going to fork over big money for major leaguers and enjoy the good work that NH is doing with an arm tied behind his back.
He's not perfect, but he misses a whole lot less than most GM's
Your number 2 statement is incorrect. Your number 3 statement is correct
Trade Deadline Thread
0B36312B36315F0 wrote: Josh Donaldson would be a great pick up, but what would it take to get him?
Well, given that it took two of our top ten AND Liriano to "get" Drew Hutchison, my guess would be...a lot.
Do you think Toronto fans are on their GM for that trade? You are over ranking the prospects. Liriano is even worse now. Pirates are "winning" that trade right now.
Donaldson would be great. He has been hurt a lot this year, so maybe that would lower his price tag.
Nice to know the Pirates are "winning" that trade. By that I guess you mean they got money off the books and shed a problematic pitcher. It's hard to see the acquisition of a pitcher who failed in the majors with over 400 innings and is back in AAA this year as a win. Hutchison was doing well for awhile but 2 of his last 3 starts have been bad and his ERA is an unimpressive 3.70. For the past 5 years, Toronto has maintained a payroll in the top 10 so they probably aren't fretting Liriano's salary as much as they are his poor pitching. But Ramirez and McGuire are both 22. McGuire still isn't hitting but is a good defensive catcher and could at least be a capable backup. Chris Stewart made a career of that. Ramirez, after hitting .306 in AA last year, got off to a terrible start but hit .262 in May, .261 in June and is currently hitting .313 for July. So he's starting to look more like the guy who batted .306 for Altoona last year. Liriano's contract is up after this year and if Toronto ends up with a backup catcher and a 4th outfielder in a couple years and all they gave up was Hutchison, they come out ahead. If you want to say the Pirates are "winning" that trade because the only guy out of it currently in the majors is the ineffective Liriano, that seems rather short-sighed. Looking ahead, I'd rather have Ramirez and McGuire in the system than Hutchison.
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
3 years of Nova? Nova wasn't even involved in that trade. He was a FA after the season. He was a rental.
Give us a break with this ;D
Well, given that it took two of our top ten AND Liriano to "get" Drew Hutchison, my guess would be...a lot.
Do you think Toronto fans are on their GM for that trade? You are over ranking the prospects. Liriano is even worse now. Pirates are "winning" that trade right now.
Donaldson would be great. He has been hurt a lot this year, so maybe that would lower his price tag.
Nice to know the Pirates are "winning" that trade. By that I guess you mean they got money off the books and shed a problematic pitcher. It's hard to see the acquisition of a pitcher who failed in the majors with over 400 innings and is back in AAA this year as a win. Hutchison was doing well for awhile but 2 of his last 3 starts have been bad and his ERA is an unimpressive 3.70. For the past 5 years, Toronto has maintained a payroll in the top 10 so they probably aren't fretting Liriano's salary as much as they are his poor pitching. But Ramirez and McGuire are both 22. McGuire still isn't hitting but is a good defensive catcher and could at least be a capable backup. Chris Stewart made a career of that. Ramirez, after hitting .306 in AA last year, got off to a terrible start but hit .262 in May, .261 in June and is currently hitting .313 for July. So he's starting to look more like the guy who batted .306 for Altoona last year. Liriano's contract is up after this year and if Toronto ends up with a backup catcher and a 4th outfielder in a couple years and all they gave up was Hutchison, they come out ahead. If you want to say the Pirates are "winning" that trade because the only guy out of it currently in the majors is the ineffective Liriano, that seems rather short-sighed. Looking ahead, I'd rather have Ramirez and McGuire in the system than Hutchison.
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
3 years of Nova? Nova wasn't even involved in that trade. He was a FA after the season. He was a rental.
Give us a break with this ;D
Trade Deadline Thread
I don't think there's a 3Bman worth targeting that will be on the market. It's a spot I'd like to add to on the roster though. It could also be improved by adding a solid 2Bman so Harrison could move over more to rest Freese.
Depending on injuries, a 4th OFer could add to the team.
Kendrick or Nava from Phils as 4th OFer - though I'm not sure either adds a lot over Frazier/Jaso.
I would add to the bullpen. Brad Brach from the O's would be a great addition to the late inning guys in the pen. Controlled through '18 as well, so he'd cost more but would be around to help next year with Nicasio and Watson leaving.
Neshek from the Phils has been discussed. He'll be in high demand. Kela from Texas could be a Rivero-like get, but Texas will want prospects. Maybe Blake Parker from the Angels? His success is new this year. If scouting found a change that could explain the success, he'd be worth going after. Ditto for Kirby Yates of SD.
Depending on injuries, a 4th OFer could add to the team.
Kendrick or Nava from Phils as 4th OFer - though I'm not sure either adds a lot over Frazier/Jaso.
I would add to the bullpen. Brad Brach from the O's would be a great addition to the late inning guys in the pen. Controlled through '18 as well, so he'd cost more but would be around to help next year with Nicasio and Watson leaving.
Neshek from the Phils has been discussed. He'll be in high demand. Kela from Texas could be a Rivero-like get, but Texas will want prospects. Maybe Blake Parker from the Angels? His success is new this year. If scouting found a change that could explain the success, he'd be worth going after. Ditto for Kirby Yates of SD.
Trade Deadline Thread
6C494A4A5F7449414354260 wrote:
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
He got rid of 20 million dollars and gave nothing away but a huge headache. These dudes are non prospects, but we refuse to see that because they we ranked high once, which is why our FO is smarter than us. They do this for a living and we're on on the scouting.
Go back a year ago and read this boards reaction to the Melancon trade. It was absolutely panned, but that turned out OK, didn't it. WHile I don't think NH knew exactly what he was getting, I'm fairly certain Rivero wasn't a throw in.
As for financial flexibility, all of us need to realize that 1). We can't compete financially against other teams if we want a player, 2). We can't afford to pay market value for players. 3). This ownership is not going to pay market value for these players. So we have to be smarter, find diamonds in the rough, pay long term under market value for younger players and yes, if we have to, give non prospects away to have other teams absorb our mistakes.
This is simply the way it is and their would be a whole less stress in some of your lives if you realized that the Nuttings are NOT going to fork over big money for major leaguers and enjoy the good work that NH is doing with an arm tied behind his back.
He's not perfect, but he misses a whole lot less than most GM's
Your number 2 statement is incorrect. Your number 3 statement is correct
No, it is correct. In our best years, we average 30,000 a game, we have cheap tickets and a low $$$ tv deal. We cannot compete with a team that has better attendance, expensive tickets and a great tv deal. We just can't.
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
He got rid of 20 million dollars and gave nothing away but a huge headache. These dudes are non prospects, but we refuse to see that because they we ranked high once, which is why our FO is smarter than us. They do this for a living and we're on on the scouting.
Go back a year ago and read this boards reaction to the Melancon trade. It was absolutely panned, but that turned out OK, didn't it. WHile I don't think NH knew exactly what he was getting, I'm fairly certain Rivero wasn't a throw in.
As for financial flexibility, all of us need to realize that 1). We can't compete financially against other teams if we want a player, 2). We can't afford to pay market value for players. 3). This ownership is not going to pay market value for these players. So we have to be smarter, find diamonds in the rough, pay long term under market value for younger players and yes, if we have to, give non prospects away to have other teams absorb our mistakes.
This is simply the way it is and their would be a whole less stress in some of your lives if you realized that the Nuttings are NOT going to fork over big money for major leaguers and enjoy the good work that NH is doing with an arm tied behind his back.
He's not perfect, but he misses a whole lot less than most GM's
Your number 2 statement is incorrect. Your number 3 statement is correct
No, it is correct. In our best years, we average 30,000 a game, we have cheap tickets and a low $$$ tv deal. We cannot compete with a team that has better attendance, expensive tickets and a great tv deal. We just can't.
Trade Deadline Thread
6A636B7A740E0 wrote: Josh Donaldson would be a great pick up, but what would it take to get him?
Well, given that it took two of our top ten AND Liriano to "get" Drew Hutchison, my guess would be...a lot.
Do you think Toronto fans are on their GM for that trade? You are over ranking the prospects. Liriano is even worse now. Pirates are "winning" that trade right now.
Donaldson would be great. He has been hurt a lot this year, so maybe that would lower his price tag.
Nice to know the Pirates are "winning" that trade. By that I guess you mean they got money off the books and shed a problematic pitcher. It's hard to see the acquisition of a pitcher who failed in the majors with over 400 innings and is back in AAA this year as a win. Hutchison was doing well for awhile but 2 of his last 3 starts have been bad and his ERA is an unimpressive 3.70. For the past 5 years, Toronto has maintained a payroll in the top 10 so they probably aren't fretting Liriano's salary as much as they are his poor pitching. But Ramirez and McGuire are both 22. McGuire still isn't hitting but is a good defensive catcher and could at least be a capable backup. Chris Stewart made a career of that. Ramirez, after hitting .306 in AA last year, got off to a terrible start but hit .262 in May, .261 in June and is currently hitting .313 for July. So he's starting to look more like the guy who batted .306 for Altoona last year. Liriano's contract is up after this year and if Toronto ends up with a backup catcher and a 4th outfielder in a couple years and all they gave up was Hutchison, they come out ahead. If you want to say the Pirates are "winning" that trade because the only guy out of it currently in the majors is the ineffective Liriano, that seems rather short-sighed. Looking ahead, I'd rather have Ramirez and McGuire in the system than Hutchison.
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
3 years of Nova? Nova wasn't even involved in that trade. He was a FA after the season. He was a rental.
Give us a break with this ;D
You're right. Nutting would have cleared Nova's contract with Liriano (and 20 million) on the roster, cause that's the way he does business.
Well, given that it took two of our top ten AND Liriano to "get" Drew Hutchison, my guess would be...a lot.
Do you think Toronto fans are on their GM for that trade? You are over ranking the prospects. Liriano is even worse now. Pirates are "winning" that trade right now.
Donaldson would be great. He has been hurt a lot this year, so maybe that would lower his price tag.
Nice to know the Pirates are "winning" that trade. By that I guess you mean they got money off the books and shed a problematic pitcher. It's hard to see the acquisition of a pitcher who failed in the majors with over 400 innings and is back in AAA this year as a win. Hutchison was doing well for awhile but 2 of his last 3 starts have been bad and his ERA is an unimpressive 3.70. For the past 5 years, Toronto has maintained a payroll in the top 10 so they probably aren't fretting Liriano's salary as much as they are his poor pitching. But Ramirez and McGuire are both 22. McGuire still isn't hitting but is a good defensive catcher and could at least be a capable backup. Chris Stewart made a career of that. Ramirez, after hitting .306 in AA last year, got off to a terrible start but hit .262 in May, .261 in June and is currently hitting .313 for July. So he's starting to look more like the guy who batted .306 for Altoona last year. Liriano's contract is up after this year and if Toronto ends up with a backup catcher and a 4th outfielder in a couple years and all they gave up was Hutchison, they come out ahead. If you want to say the Pirates are "winning" that trade because the only guy out of it currently in the majors is the ineffective Liriano, that seems rather short-sighed. Looking ahead, I'd rather have Ramirez and McGuire in the system than Hutchison.
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
3 years of Nova? Nova wasn't even involved in that trade. He was a FA after the season. He was a rental.
Give us a break with this ;D
You're right. Nutting would have cleared Nova's contract with Liriano (and 20 million) on the roster, cause that's the way he does business.
-
JollyRoger
- Posts: 1469
- Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 8:31 pm
Trade Deadline Thread
4875726875721C0 wrote:
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
He got rid of 20 million dollars and gave nothing away but a huge headache. These dudes are non prospects, but we refuse to see that because they we ranked high once, which is why our FO is smarter than us. They do this for a living and we're on on the scouting.
Go back a year ago and read this boards reaction to the Melancon trade. It was absolutely panned, but that turned out OK, didn't it. WHile I don't think NH knew exactly what he was getting, I'm fairly certain Rivero wasn't a throw in.
As for financial flexibility, all of us need to realize that 1). We can't compete financially against other teams if we want a player, 2). We can't afford to pay market value for players. 3). This ownership is not going to pay market value for these players. So we have to be smarter, find diamonds in the rough, pay long term under market value for younger players and yes, if we have to, give non prospects away to have other teams absorb our mistakes.
This is simply the way it is and their would be a whole less stress in some of your lives if you realized that the Nuttings are NOT going to fork over big money for major leaguers and enjoy the good work that NH is doing with an arm tied behind his back.
He's not perfect, but he misses a whole lot less than most GM's
Your number 2 statement is incorrect. Your number 3 statement is correct
No, it is correct. In our best years, we average 30,000 a game, we have cheap tickets and a low $$$ tv deal. We cannot compete with a team that has better attendance, expensive tickets and a great tv deal. We just can't.
Strongly disagree. We may not compete with LA, NY, or Chicago, but we certainly have the financial where with all to support an average ML Payroll which is roughly 150M now. Our revenue is middle of the pack yet our payroll is in the bottom 5. In addition you fail to recognize the huge increase in value of the franchise. Nutting has netted a 1 Billion increase in value since he became majority owner. That's right 1 BILLION with a B. He gains 80 million a year on franchise value alone. He could borrow on his equity and put 80 million towards payroll and see that be replaced the following year. We can certainly afford 2 or 3 market value contracts. He just won't do it!!
It's 20 million dollars to spend elsewhere. To not see the benefit of that to me is very shortsighted. Of course the 20 million off the books got us 80% of Nova, but that comes out of some sort of different account, right.
This trade is a huge win and was well thought out. McGuire might one day be Stewart, and Ramirez might be one day be Xavier Paul.
I'll take three years of Nova of the five players we gave away in a heartbeat.
Actually, it was 17 million. Shortly after the trade, they announced a 16.5 million extension for Freese. They had no idea at that time if Nova would re-sign.
In any event, yes, it was money that could be better spent than watching Liriano struggle for another year. My problem with accepting it though is that it rationalizes Nutting's penny-pinching ways. A team consistently in the bottom 5 or 6 in all of MLB in payroll has to trade prospects just to get enough money off the books to keep David Freese? Or part of Freese's contract and part of Nova's, however you want to look at it? For years, all we hear is "financial flexibility." Where's that flexibility when they can't even keep Freese or sign Nova without adding prospects to a salary dump? Getting Nutting to spend money is like pulling teeth. They had to go to the extreme of giving away prospects just to free up money to keep David Freese??? If Toronto thought those prospects were worth paying all of Liriano's contract then maybe a team would have given up a real player for them (as opposed to the failing Hutchison). So I see the benefit of the money they saved. I just strongly disapprove of the lengths they showed they were willing to go to save it.
He got rid of 20 million dollars and gave nothing away but a huge headache. These dudes are non prospects, but we refuse to see that because they we ranked high once, which is why our FO is smarter than us. They do this for a living and we're on on the scouting.
Go back a year ago and read this boards reaction to the Melancon trade. It was absolutely panned, but that turned out OK, didn't it. WHile I don't think NH knew exactly what he was getting, I'm fairly certain Rivero wasn't a throw in.
As for financial flexibility, all of us need to realize that 1). We can't compete financially against other teams if we want a player, 2). We can't afford to pay market value for players. 3). This ownership is not going to pay market value for these players. So we have to be smarter, find diamonds in the rough, pay long term under market value for younger players and yes, if we have to, give non prospects away to have other teams absorb our mistakes.
This is simply the way it is and their would be a whole less stress in some of your lives if you realized that the Nuttings are NOT going to fork over big money for major leaguers and enjoy the good work that NH is doing with an arm tied behind his back.
He's not perfect, but he misses a whole lot less than most GM's
Your number 2 statement is incorrect. Your number 3 statement is correct
No, it is correct. In our best years, we average 30,000 a game, we have cheap tickets and a low $$$ tv deal. We cannot compete with a team that has better attendance, expensive tickets and a great tv deal. We just can't.
Strongly disagree. We may not compete with LA, NY, or Chicago, but we certainly have the financial where with all to support an average ML Payroll which is roughly 150M now. Our revenue is middle of the pack yet our payroll is in the bottom 5. In addition you fail to recognize the huge increase in value of the franchise. Nutting has netted a 1 Billion increase in value since he became majority owner. That's right 1 BILLION with a B. He gains 80 million a year on franchise value alone. He could borrow on his equity and put 80 million towards payroll and see that be replaced the following year. We can certainly afford 2 or 3 market value contracts. He just won't do it!!