D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
JollyRoger
- Posts: 1469
- Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 8:31 pm
D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
Another thing to think about regarding the draft is the real possibility that a #1 pick may not want to sign with the Pirates due to the history of not giving significant raises in the pre-arbitration years. We all know that Cole was pissed off at the FO for being cheap.
D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
290C0F0F1A310C040611630 wrote: Another thing to think about regarding the draft is the real possibility that a #1 pick may not want to sign with the Pirates due to the history of not giving significant raises in the pre-arbitration years. We all know that Cole was pissed off at the FO for being cheap.
Sorry, dont really buy this. Everyone knows the arbitration rules going into this. Kris Bryant argued about his call up delay and just proved he cant win against it. #1 picks gonna get how much this year, $8m?? Crazy not to sign.
Sorry, dont really buy this. Everyone knows the arbitration rules going into this. Kris Bryant argued about his call up delay and just proved he cant win against it. #1 picks gonna get how much this year, $8m?? Crazy not to sign.
-
Bobster21
D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
Obviously, the hiring of BC has not changed how the Pirates operate. It only changes the people in charge in the hope that the strategy can succeed if the people running it do a better job.
I was looking at an article about thew hiring of BC and saw these quotes:
“This is an important step forward for our organization,” Pirates owner Bob Nutting said in a statement. “Ben has an incredible track record of success having been a part of three world championship teams in Boston, one as general manager, and setting the table for a fourth.
“His passion and ability to identify, infuse and develop talent at every level, including at the Major League level, is exactly what we need to be successful in Pittsburgh.”
“Pittsburgh is the ideal opportunity for me, and the only one I was interested in exploring,” Cherington said. “The four pillars that will drive our success are elite talent identification, acquisition, development and deployment. My entire career has been spent focusing on developing great systems to be elite in these four critical areas, which will fuel our future success in Pittsburgh."
“Ben is exactly what we need,” Pirates President Travis Williams said in a statement. “He knows how to develop a winning culture. He also has a track record of attracting and developing talent, both on the field and in the front office. Ben is constantly challenging himself, his people and the processes that are in place. He knows that our ability to drive innovation and stay ahead of the game will be important to our long-term success.”
https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/pir ... 1911180089
I think Nutting is not going to change his ways. The only talent they will have is what they develop thru the system either thru drafting or trading for 19 year olds. This is supposed to be a strength of BC so I expect him to be better at that than NH was. But I don't think it's possible to build an elite team without paying to keep your better players and paying to add good players when the need arises. Consistently turning over the roster to avoid higher contracts while the next wave of prospects arrives until it's time for them to earn more money is a recipe for failure regardless of who is in charge.
I was looking at an article about thew hiring of BC and saw these quotes:
“This is an important step forward for our organization,” Pirates owner Bob Nutting said in a statement. “Ben has an incredible track record of success having been a part of three world championship teams in Boston, one as general manager, and setting the table for a fourth.
“His passion and ability to identify, infuse and develop talent at every level, including at the Major League level, is exactly what we need to be successful in Pittsburgh.”
“Pittsburgh is the ideal opportunity for me, and the only one I was interested in exploring,” Cherington said. “The four pillars that will drive our success are elite talent identification, acquisition, development and deployment. My entire career has been spent focusing on developing great systems to be elite in these four critical areas, which will fuel our future success in Pittsburgh."
“Ben is exactly what we need,” Pirates President Travis Williams said in a statement. “He knows how to develop a winning culture. He also has a track record of attracting and developing talent, both on the field and in the front office. Ben is constantly challenging himself, his people and the processes that are in place. He knows that our ability to drive innovation and stay ahead of the game will be important to our long-term success.”
https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/pir ... 1911180089
I think Nutting is not going to change his ways. The only talent they will have is what they develop thru the system either thru drafting or trading for 19 year olds. This is supposed to be a strength of BC so I expect him to be better at that than NH was. But I don't think it's possible to build an elite team without paying to keep your better players and paying to add good players when the need arises. Consistently turning over the roster to avoid higher contracts while the next wave of prospects arrives until it's time for them to earn more money is a recipe for failure regardless of who is in charge.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3630
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
Details On Mets’ Pursuit Of Starling Marte
According to a report from Andy Martino of SNY.tv, the Mets declined to pursue any of three possible trade structures proposed by the Bucs. That included separate “package” scenarios “centered around” either J.D. Davis or Brandon Nimmo as well as one based around multiple top prospects.
According to a report from Andy Martino of SNY.tv, the Mets declined to pursue any of three possible trade structures proposed by the Bucs. That included separate “package” scenarios “centered around” either J.D. Davis or Brandon Nimmo as well as one based around multiple top prospects.
-
fjk090852-7
- Posts: 3481
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 2:52 pm
D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
1D3B3A2D3B2B580 wrote:
Yeah, I think going for high ceiling guys is the right approach, it just pisses me off that NH was able to go with the strategy of lets put together a team that can win 80 and every few years everything will go well and we'll win 90. that is a terrible approach.
It has extended the time between a good 2015 team to the next good team by several years.
IIRC, NH flatly stated their strategy was to put together a team capable of winning 80-82 games and hope to occasionally overachieve. I think he felt that was the best strategy for a team whose owner would not spend to keep or acquire talent. BC is starting fresh but he will eventually face the dilemma of seeing his top players leave for financial reasons and not be able to replace them with anything more than AAAA players or dumpster dives. Even Houston, which built a strong team essentially from within, still had to eventually write the checks. They began to turn things around with 86 wins in 2015 and 84 wins in 2016 while their payroll was similar to the Pirates. But the next 3 years they won 101 (and won the WS), 103 (and lost the ALCS) and 107 (and lost the WS) games while their payroll grew to 17th in MLB (about average) in 2017, 9th (24 million above the average) in 2018 and 8th (30 million above the average) in 2019. And they are currently heading into 2020 with the 3rd highest payroll in MLB. So even a team that deftly assembles a strong core from within eventually has to pay those players to keep them and fill remaining needs with more expensive players as Houston did with Brantley, Reddick, Cole and Verlander. The Royals were another team that had a small payroll during their rebuild but when they eventually won the WS in 2015 their payroll was essentially the MLB average.
So the problem facing BC is bigger than just finding the right prospects to create a competitive team from within. That's where it starts but if Nutting simply refuses to even approach an average payroll to keep his top players or acquire other top players to fill needs, BC will be watching his top players that he developed move on to other teams and leaving holes filled by dumpster diving until he too is fired for not finding a way to win without ever spending money.
And the Bucs will have to pay more in the future to even put together an 80 win team. Players in arbitration are getting over $20 million a year.
If the Pirates had a Mookie Betts, George Springer, J. T. Reamulto, how long would they keep them?
It would be great for the Pirates to have players that talented but unless payroll changes those players are going to be gone by their second year in arbitration.
Those are also going to be players that are harder to replace.
They also have to consider that in the next CBA, it's very likely that they'll do away with the Super-2 status. Most teams will try to "steal" a seventh year before FA hits. If they do that and guys become FAs sooner, that means the Pirates will trade them sooner. Bottom line...ultimately, if the Pirates want to be competitive, Bottom Line Bob has to be willing to sustain a competitive payroll.
yes, I'm concerned that next collective bargaining agreement will make it harder for the Bucs to be a winner than it is now unless Nutting increases amount spent on payroll (at least some of the time) to $115 or $120 million in today's market.
This is just my opinion,but the next bargaining agreement may contain a salary floor. The Players Union cannot be very happy when a team like the Pirates only spends 60 to 65 million a year. It is less than two years away, but I will not be surprised if it is a part of the next labor agreement.
Yeah, I think going for high ceiling guys is the right approach, it just pisses me off that NH was able to go with the strategy of lets put together a team that can win 80 and every few years everything will go well and we'll win 90. that is a terrible approach.
It has extended the time between a good 2015 team to the next good team by several years.
IIRC, NH flatly stated their strategy was to put together a team capable of winning 80-82 games and hope to occasionally overachieve. I think he felt that was the best strategy for a team whose owner would not spend to keep or acquire talent. BC is starting fresh but he will eventually face the dilemma of seeing his top players leave for financial reasons and not be able to replace them with anything more than AAAA players or dumpster dives. Even Houston, which built a strong team essentially from within, still had to eventually write the checks. They began to turn things around with 86 wins in 2015 and 84 wins in 2016 while their payroll was similar to the Pirates. But the next 3 years they won 101 (and won the WS), 103 (and lost the ALCS) and 107 (and lost the WS) games while their payroll grew to 17th in MLB (about average) in 2017, 9th (24 million above the average) in 2018 and 8th (30 million above the average) in 2019. And they are currently heading into 2020 with the 3rd highest payroll in MLB. So even a team that deftly assembles a strong core from within eventually has to pay those players to keep them and fill remaining needs with more expensive players as Houston did with Brantley, Reddick, Cole and Verlander. The Royals were another team that had a small payroll during their rebuild but when they eventually won the WS in 2015 their payroll was essentially the MLB average.
So the problem facing BC is bigger than just finding the right prospects to create a competitive team from within. That's where it starts but if Nutting simply refuses to even approach an average payroll to keep his top players or acquire other top players to fill needs, BC will be watching his top players that he developed move on to other teams and leaving holes filled by dumpster diving until he too is fired for not finding a way to win without ever spending money.
And the Bucs will have to pay more in the future to even put together an 80 win team. Players in arbitration are getting over $20 million a year.
If the Pirates had a Mookie Betts, George Springer, J. T. Reamulto, how long would they keep them?
It would be great for the Pirates to have players that talented but unless payroll changes those players are going to be gone by their second year in arbitration.
Those are also going to be players that are harder to replace.
They also have to consider that in the next CBA, it's very likely that they'll do away with the Super-2 status. Most teams will try to "steal" a seventh year before FA hits. If they do that and guys become FAs sooner, that means the Pirates will trade them sooner. Bottom line...ultimately, if the Pirates want to be competitive, Bottom Line Bob has to be willing to sustain a competitive payroll.
yes, I'm concerned that next collective bargaining agreement will make it harder for the Bucs to be a winner than it is now unless Nutting increases amount spent on payroll (at least some of the time) to $115 or $120 million in today's market.
This is just my opinion,but the next bargaining agreement may contain a salary floor. The Players Union cannot be very happy when a team like the Pirates only spends 60 to 65 million a year. It is less than two years away, but I will not be surprised if it is a part of the next labor agreement.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3630
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
606C6D363F363E33342B31060 wrote:
This is just my opinion,but the next bargaining agreement may contain a salary floor. The Players Union cannot be very happy when a team like the Pirates only spends 60 to 65 million a year. It is less than two years away, but I will not be surprised if it is a part of the next labor agreement.
IMO that would be terrible for baseball without other changes. That would hurt small market teams only.
This is just my opinion,but the next bargaining agreement may contain a salary floor. The Players Union cannot be very happy when a team like the Pirates only spends 60 to 65 million a year. It is less than two years away, but I will not be surprised if it is a part of the next labor agreement.
IMO that would be terrible for baseball without other changes. That would hurt small market teams only.
-
fjk090852-7
- Posts: 3481
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 2:52 pm
D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
7E4C40405466454C41444B4C2D0 wrote:
This is just my opinion,but the next bargaining agreement may contain a salary floor. The Players Union cannot be very happy when a team like the Pirates only spends 60 to 65 million a year. It is less than two years away, but I will not be surprised if it is a part of the next labor agreement.
IMO that would be terrible for baseball without other changes. That would hurt small market teams only.
I don’t see how it could hurt small market teams. If there was a floor the Pirates might sign a player like Josh Bell long term. Each season the floor would adjust. Possibly the initial year teams would have a minimum payroll of 95 million dollars. The last thing I want small market teams to do is sign a player in order to meet the threshold. If there was a floor the Pirates could sign a mid range starting pitcher, and not one from the bargain basement. Also if the investors in the teams were receiving revenue from MLB, television contracts etc. they would not receive as much, and it would go towards putting winning teams on the field, and not tanking a season.
This is just my opinion,but the next bargaining agreement may contain a salary floor. The Players Union cannot be very happy when a team like the Pirates only spends 60 to 65 million a year. It is less than two years away, but I will not be surprised if it is a part of the next labor agreement.
IMO that would be terrible for baseball without other changes. That would hurt small market teams only.
I don’t see how it could hurt small market teams. If there was a floor the Pirates might sign a player like Josh Bell long term. Each season the floor would adjust. Possibly the initial year teams would have a minimum payroll of 95 million dollars. The last thing I want small market teams to do is sign a player in order to meet the threshold. If there was a floor the Pirates could sign a mid range starting pitcher, and not one from the bargain basement. Also if the investors in the teams were receiving revenue from MLB, television contracts etc. they would not receive as much, and it would go towards putting winning teams on the field, and not tanking a season.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3630
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
Take a look at the nice salary bell curve for the KC Royals over the past decade.
The Red Sox or Yanks don't have to do that. If a 95 floor were implemented the Royals would likely have been forced to just have a middling average team all of those seasons.
For a higher floor there will need to be better revenue sharing
The Red Sox or Yanks don't have to do that. If a 95 floor were implemented the Royals would likely have been forced to just have a middling average team all of those seasons.
For a higher floor there will need to be better revenue sharing
-
maher.timothy20@gm
D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
Salary cap plus floor plus some more aggressive form of revenue sharing, maybe. Although I also question how much financial assistance a guy like Bob would really need to maintain a payroll of $110 or whatever the floor would be.
Plus I'm sure they'd work in a two-year rebuilding exemption.
Plus I'm sure they'd work in a two-year rebuilding exemption.
-
maher.timothy20@gm
D-backs closing in on Marte trade (report)
65575B5B4F7D5E575A5F5057360 wrote: Take a look at the nice salary bell curve for the KC Royals over the past decade.
The Red Sox or Yanks don't have to do that.
For a higher floor there will need to be better revenue sharing
Yes, exactly. To me that's the real inequity in baseball, worse even than the Astros scandal. If you're LA or NYY or Boston or the Cubs or the Dodgers you get to compete every year. Even under those circumstances you'll probably only win the WS once a decade or less. But at least you get a chance at the ring every year. If you're the Pirates, you only get an opportunity to compete a few times a decade, and only then if you're a little lucky.
The Red Sox or Yanks don't have to do that.
For a higher floor there will need to be better revenue sharing
Yes, exactly. To me that's the real inequity in baseball, worse even than the Astros scandal. If you're LA or NYY or Boston or the Cubs or the Dodgers you get to compete every year. Even under those circumstances you'll probably only win the WS once a decade or less. But at least you get a chance at the ring every year. If you're the Pirates, you only get an opportunity to compete a few times a decade, and only then if you're a little lucky.