Here is a comparison of Nielsen TV market sizes as of fall 2018:
https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/nba-ma ... n-ratings/
Cubs have a huge advantage with Chicago ranking #3 of 67 pro sports cities with a market size of 3.25 million Nielsen homes. But....
St. Louis ranks #21 with 1.16 million homes.
Pittsburgh ranks #24 with 1.11 million homes.
Cincinnati ranks #35 with 850,000 homes.
Milwaukee ranks #36 with 848,000 homes.
It would seem the Pirates could get a TV deal as good or better than 3 of their 4 division opponents.
New TV Agreement
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
New TV Agreement
No doubt, the big markets have an advantage, but this year alone “small market” teams in Minnesota, Tampa Bay, Milwaukee, and Oakland all made the postseason. St. Louis isn’t a “big” market, but the Cards own that city, especially after the Rams left. It’s possible. But...Bob Nutting still owns the team. I have no confidence that we'll see postseason baseball again any time in the near future, if ever, as long as he owns the team.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
New TV Agreement
Yes, yes, I agree with all this and I want the Pirates to increase payroll.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
New TV Agreement
11232F2F3B092A232E2B2423420 wrote: Yes, yes, I agree with all this and I want the Pirates to increase payroll.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
Great post. This perfectly describes the current landscape in baseball. One of my best friends is a huge KC fan. We bemoan this fact all of the time. Their GM had the fortitude to risk big and go all in to win and they lucked out and did it. Their window closed and they had to start from scratch building the minor league system. The Marlins demonstrated this in 1997 and then 6 years later when they won the WS again.
However, there are tons of teams that try this, make the playoffs and never win it all. There can be only one winner.
Regarding the Pirates, I think two things are true in hindsight.
1. They didn't actually go all in like the Royals. The FO argued all along that they didn't like windows. They wanted to build a continual winner.
2. Small market teams can't compete with that "continual winner" approach. They have to sell out for a window.
I was with the FO in this approach for a long time. I was with them when they made the playoffs and even at first when they didn't make the playoffs. But 4 years later, with very little hope in sight, one has to look realistically at the experiment and say that it isn't possible. With the Pirates financial constraints, they have to shoot for windows. And it is abundantly clear that they are not in a window at the moment. There is not the pitching in this organization to win playoff games.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
Great post. This perfectly describes the current landscape in baseball. One of my best friends is a huge KC fan. We bemoan this fact all of the time. Their GM had the fortitude to risk big and go all in to win and they lucked out and did it. Their window closed and they had to start from scratch building the minor league system. The Marlins demonstrated this in 1997 and then 6 years later when they won the WS again.
However, there are tons of teams that try this, make the playoffs and never win it all. There can be only one winner.
Regarding the Pirates, I think two things are true in hindsight.
1. They didn't actually go all in like the Royals. The FO argued all along that they didn't like windows. They wanted to build a continual winner.
2. Small market teams can't compete with that "continual winner" approach. They have to sell out for a window.
I was with the FO in this approach for a long time. I was with them when they made the playoffs and even at first when they didn't make the playoffs. But 4 years later, with very little hope in sight, one has to look realistically at the experiment and say that it isn't possible. With the Pirates financial constraints, they have to shoot for windows. And it is abundantly clear that they are not in a window at the moment. There is not the pitching in this organization to win playoff games.
New TV Agreement
524F6B6967020 wrote: Yes, yes, I agree with all this and I want the Pirates to increase payroll.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
Great post. This perfectly describes the current landscape in baseball. One of my best friends is a huge KC fan. We bemoan this fact all of the time. Their GM had the fortitude to risk big and go all in to win and they lucked out and did it. Their window closed and they had to start from scratch building the minor league system. The Marlins demonstrated this in 1997 and then 6 years later when they won the WS again.
However, there are tons of teams that try this, make the playoffs and never win it all. There can be only one winner.
Regarding the Pirates, I think two things are true in hindsight.
1. They didn't actually go all in like the Royals. The FO argued all along that they didn't like windows. They wanted to build a continual winner.
2. Small market teams can't compete with that "continual winner" approach. They have to sell out for a window.
I was with the FO in this approach for a long time. I was with them when they made the playoffs and even at first when they didn't make the playoffs. But 4 years later, with very little hope in sight, one has to look realistically at the experiment and say that it isn't possible. With the Pirates financial constraints, they have to shoot for windows. And it is abundantly clear that they are not in a window at the moment. There is not the pitching in this organization to win playoff games.
I must say that I was hoping that NH was correct in that a window wasn't needed and the team could always be competitive. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he thought that could be done. Really the 2016 and 2017 seasons put the kibosh on that for me. Missing the playoffs 4 years in a row convinces me that NH is not the right GM. He didn't see this gap coming (at least publicly).
It looks like NH is now looking for the next window but he hasn't produced an organization that looks like the next window is right around the corner. You can sort of understand that it took awhile for new GM to get talent needed for playoff run (although I thought it was too long but thought 2013 showed I was wrong about that). But there is no way he should get 6 or 7 years to rebuild from one playoff team (2015) to the next window of opportunity.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
Great post. This perfectly describes the current landscape in baseball. One of my best friends is a huge KC fan. We bemoan this fact all of the time. Their GM had the fortitude to risk big and go all in to win and they lucked out and did it. Their window closed and they had to start from scratch building the minor league system. The Marlins demonstrated this in 1997 and then 6 years later when they won the WS again.
However, there are tons of teams that try this, make the playoffs and never win it all. There can be only one winner.
Regarding the Pirates, I think two things are true in hindsight.
1. They didn't actually go all in like the Royals. The FO argued all along that they didn't like windows. They wanted to build a continual winner.
2. Small market teams can't compete with that "continual winner" approach. They have to sell out for a window.
I was with the FO in this approach for a long time. I was with them when they made the playoffs and even at first when they didn't make the playoffs. But 4 years later, with very little hope in sight, one has to look realistically at the experiment and say that it isn't possible. With the Pirates financial constraints, they have to shoot for windows. And it is abundantly clear that they are not in a window at the moment. There is not the pitching in this organization to win playoff games.
I must say that I was hoping that NH was correct in that a window wasn't needed and the team could always be competitive. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he thought that could be done. Really the 2016 and 2017 seasons put the kibosh on that for me. Missing the playoffs 4 years in a row convinces me that NH is not the right GM. He didn't see this gap coming (at least publicly).
It looks like NH is now looking for the next window but he hasn't produced an organization that looks like the next window is right around the corner. You can sort of understand that it took awhile for new GM to get talent needed for playoff run (although I thought it was too long but thought 2013 showed I was wrong about that). But there is no way he should get 6 or 7 years to rebuild from one playoff team (2015) to the next window of opportunity.
New TV Agreement
4B6D6C7B6D7D0E0 wrote: Yes, yes, I agree with all this and I want the Pirates to increase payroll.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
Great post. This perfectly describes the current landscape in baseball. One of my best friends is a huge KC fan. We bemoan this fact all of the time. Their GM had the fortitude to risk big and go all in to win and they lucked out and did it. Their window closed and they had to start from scratch building the minor league system. The Marlins demonstrated this in 1997 and then 6 years later when they won the WS again.
However, there are tons of teams that try this, make the playoffs and never win it all. There can be only one winner.
Regarding the Pirates, I think two things are true in hindsight.
1. They didn't actually go all in like the Royals. The FO argued all along that they didn't like windows. They wanted to build a continual winner.
2. Small market teams can't compete with that "continual winner" approach. They have to sell out for a window.
I was with the FO in this approach for a long time. I was with them when they made the playoffs and even at first when they didn't make the playoffs. But 4 years later, with very little hope in sight, one has to look realistically at the experiment and say that it isn't possible. With the Pirates financial constraints, they have to shoot for windows. And it is abundantly clear that they are not in a window at the moment. There is not the pitching in this organization to win playoff games.
I must say that I was hoping that NH was correct in that a window wasn't needed and the team could always be competitive. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he thought that could be done. Really the 2016 and 2017 seasons put the kibosh on that for me. Missing the playoffs 4 years in a row convinces me that NH is not the right GM. He didn't see this gap coming (at least publicly).
It looks like NH is now looking for the next window but he hasn't produced an organization that looks like the next window is right around the corner. You can sort of understand that it took awhile for new GM to get talent needed for playoff run (although I thought it was too long but thought 2013 showed I was wrong about that). But there is no way he should get 6 or 7 years to rebuild from one playoff team (2015) to the next window of opportunity.
I would give NH 6-7 years like the Marlins had 20 years ago. I'd give him another 3-4 years from now if he blew everything up this winter. That would demonstrate a progression in his thinking and approach to running the organization. He has demonstrated that he can build a winner from scratch. When he first took over, he traded everything that had any value (Jack Wilson, McLouth, Freddie Sanchez, etc.). Not all of those trades brought back quality, but enough did.
If NH starting forming a team around Keller, Hayes, Craig, Newman, Reynolds, that would be a start. Trade Marte, Bell, Musgrove, and anyone else you can get value for. Get low level prospects with upside. I would add Tucker to the right trade to increase the return. They have too many middle infielders and I think Tucker could get yo a higher rated pitching prospect which they desperately need. They need to be looking to trade for people like O'Neil Cruz when we acquired him.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
Great post. This perfectly describes the current landscape in baseball. One of my best friends is a huge KC fan. We bemoan this fact all of the time. Their GM had the fortitude to risk big and go all in to win and they lucked out and did it. Their window closed and they had to start from scratch building the minor league system. The Marlins demonstrated this in 1997 and then 6 years later when they won the WS again.
However, there are tons of teams that try this, make the playoffs and never win it all. There can be only one winner.
Regarding the Pirates, I think two things are true in hindsight.
1. They didn't actually go all in like the Royals. The FO argued all along that they didn't like windows. They wanted to build a continual winner.
2. Small market teams can't compete with that "continual winner" approach. They have to sell out for a window.
I was with the FO in this approach for a long time. I was with them when they made the playoffs and even at first when they didn't make the playoffs. But 4 years later, with very little hope in sight, one has to look realistically at the experiment and say that it isn't possible. With the Pirates financial constraints, they have to shoot for windows. And it is abundantly clear that they are not in a window at the moment. There is not the pitching in this organization to win playoff games.
I must say that I was hoping that NH was correct in that a window wasn't needed and the team could always be competitive. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he thought that could be done. Really the 2016 and 2017 seasons put the kibosh on that for me. Missing the playoffs 4 years in a row convinces me that NH is not the right GM. He didn't see this gap coming (at least publicly).
It looks like NH is now looking for the next window but he hasn't produced an organization that looks like the next window is right around the corner. You can sort of understand that it took awhile for new GM to get talent needed for playoff run (although I thought it was too long but thought 2013 showed I was wrong about that). But there is no way he should get 6 or 7 years to rebuild from one playoff team (2015) to the next window of opportunity.
I would give NH 6-7 years like the Marlins had 20 years ago. I'd give him another 3-4 years from now if he blew everything up this winter. That would demonstrate a progression in his thinking and approach to running the organization. He has demonstrated that he can build a winner from scratch. When he first took over, he traded everything that had any value (Jack Wilson, McLouth, Freddie Sanchez, etc.). Not all of those trades brought back quality, but enough did.
If NH starting forming a team around Keller, Hayes, Craig, Newman, Reynolds, that would be a start. Trade Marte, Bell, Musgrove, and anyone else you can get value for. Get low level prospects with upside. I would add Tucker to the right trade to increase the return. They have too many middle infielders and I think Tucker could get yo a higher rated pitching prospect which they desperately need. They need to be looking to trade for people like O'Neil Cruz when we acquired him.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
New TV Agreement
Yeah, not with the pitching we have right now . . .
New TV Agreement
0C113537395C0 wrote: Yes, yes, I agree with all this and I want the Pirates to increase payroll.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
Great post. This perfectly describes the current landscape in baseball. One of my best friends is a huge KC fan. We bemoan this fact all of the time. Their GM had the fortitude to risk big and go all in to win and they lucked out and did it. Their window closed and they had to start from scratch building the minor league system. The Marlins demonstrated this in 1997 and then 6 years later when they won the WS again.
However, there are tons of teams that try this, make the playoffs and never win it all. There can be only one winner.
Regarding the Pirates, I think two things are true in hindsight.
1. They didn't actually go all in like the Royals. The FO argued all along that they didn't like windows. They wanted to build a continual winner.
2. Small market teams can't compete with that "continual winner" approach. They have to sell out for a window.
I was with the FO in this approach for a long time. I was with them when they made the playoffs and even at first when they didn't make the playoffs. But 4 years later, with very little hope in sight, one has to look realistically at the experiment and say that it isn't possible. With the Pirates financial constraints, they have to shoot for windows. And it is abundantly clear that they are not in a window at the moment. There is not the pitching in this organization to win playoff games.
I must say that I was hoping that NH was correct in that a window wasn't needed and the team could always be competitive. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he thought that could be done. Really the 2016 and 2017 seasons put the kibosh on that for me. Missing the playoffs 4 years in a row convinces me that NH is not the right GM. He didn't see this gap coming (at least publicly).
It looks like NH is now looking for the next window but he hasn't produced an organization that looks like the next window is right around the corner. You can sort of understand that it took awhile for new GM to get talent needed for playoff run (although I thought it was too long but thought 2013 showed I was wrong about that). But there is no way he should get 6 or 7 years to rebuild from one playoff team (2015) to the next window of opportunity.
I would give NH 6-7 years like the Marlins had 20 years ago. I'd give him another 3-4 years from now if he blew everything up this winter. That would demonstrate a progression in his thinking and approach to running the organization. He has demonstrated that he can build a winner from scratch. When he first took over, he traded everything that had any value (Jack Wilson, McLouth, Freddie Sanchez, etc.). Not all of those trades brought back quality, but enough did.
If NH starting forming a team around Keller, Hayes, Craig, Newman, Reynolds, that would be a start. Trade Marte, Bell, Musgrove, and anyone else you can get value for. Get low level prospects with upside. I would add Tucker to the right trade to increase the return. They have too many middle infielders and I think Tucker could get yo a higher rated pitching prospect which they desperately need. They need to be looking to trade for people like O'Neil Cruz when we acquired him.
the reason I don't give him more time is that he just completed year 4.
Hearn, Vasquez, Cruz and Reynolds have turned out to be the best prospects acquired in trade since end of 2015 season. I want someone else making deals to bring back prospects with higher potential than what NH usually brings in. Not getting back a high ceiling prospect in the Cole deal was a mistake and in my opinion more of a drive for 75 move than trying to build a good team.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
Great post. This perfectly describes the current landscape in baseball. One of my best friends is a huge KC fan. We bemoan this fact all of the time. Their GM had the fortitude to risk big and go all in to win and they lucked out and did it. Their window closed and they had to start from scratch building the minor league system. The Marlins demonstrated this in 1997 and then 6 years later when they won the WS again.
However, there are tons of teams that try this, make the playoffs and never win it all. There can be only one winner.
Regarding the Pirates, I think two things are true in hindsight.
1. They didn't actually go all in like the Royals. The FO argued all along that they didn't like windows. They wanted to build a continual winner.
2. Small market teams can't compete with that "continual winner" approach. They have to sell out for a window.
I was with the FO in this approach for a long time. I was with them when they made the playoffs and even at first when they didn't make the playoffs. But 4 years later, with very little hope in sight, one has to look realistically at the experiment and say that it isn't possible. With the Pirates financial constraints, they have to shoot for windows. And it is abundantly clear that they are not in a window at the moment. There is not the pitching in this organization to win playoff games.
I must say that I was hoping that NH was correct in that a window wasn't needed and the team could always be competitive. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he thought that could be done. Really the 2016 and 2017 seasons put the kibosh on that for me. Missing the playoffs 4 years in a row convinces me that NH is not the right GM. He didn't see this gap coming (at least publicly).
It looks like NH is now looking for the next window but he hasn't produced an organization that looks like the next window is right around the corner. You can sort of understand that it took awhile for new GM to get talent needed for playoff run (although I thought it was too long but thought 2013 showed I was wrong about that). But there is no way he should get 6 or 7 years to rebuild from one playoff team (2015) to the next window of opportunity.
I would give NH 6-7 years like the Marlins had 20 years ago. I'd give him another 3-4 years from now if he blew everything up this winter. That would demonstrate a progression in his thinking and approach to running the organization. He has demonstrated that he can build a winner from scratch. When he first took over, he traded everything that had any value (Jack Wilson, McLouth, Freddie Sanchez, etc.). Not all of those trades brought back quality, but enough did.
If NH starting forming a team around Keller, Hayes, Craig, Newman, Reynolds, that would be a start. Trade Marte, Bell, Musgrove, and anyone else you can get value for. Get low level prospects with upside. I would add Tucker to the right trade to increase the return. They have too many middle infielders and I think Tucker could get yo a higher rated pitching prospect which they desperately need. They need to be looking to trade for people like O'Neil Cruz when we acquired him.
the reason I don't give him more time is that he just completed year 4.
Hearn, Vasquez, Cruz and Reynolds have turned out to be the best prospects acquired in trade since end of 2015 season. I want someone else making deals to bring back prospects with higher potential than what NH usually brings in. Not getting back a high ceiling prospect in the Cole deal was a mistake and in my opinion more of a drive for 75 move than trying to build a good team.
-
Bobster21
New TV Agreement
674140574151220 wrote: Yes, yes, I agree with all this and I want the Pirates to increase payroll.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
Great post. This perfectly describes the current landscape in baseball. One of my best friends is a huge KC fan. We bemoan this fact all of the time. Their GM had the fortitude to risk big and go all in to win and they lucked out and did it. Their window closed and they had to start from scratch building the minor league system. The Marlins demonstrated this in 1997 and then 6 years later when they won the WS again.
However, there are tons of teams that try this, make the playoffs and never win it all. There can be only one winner.
Regarding the Pirates, I think two things are true in hindsight.
1. They didn't actually go all in like the Royals. The FO argued all along that they didn't like windows. They wanted to build a continual winner.
2. Small market teams can't compete with that "continual winner" approach. They have to sell out for a window.
I was with the FO in this approach for a long time. I was with them when they made the playoffs and even at first when they didn't make the playoffs. But 4 years later, with very little hope in sight, one has to look realistically at the experiment and say that it isn't possible. With the Pirates financial constraints, they have to shoot for windows. And it is abundantly clear that they are not in a window at the moment. There is not the pitching in this organization to win playoff games.
I must say that I was hoping that NH was correct in that a window wasn't needed and the team could always be competitive. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he thought that could be done. Really the 2016 and 2017 seasons put the kibosh on that for me. Missing the playoffs 4 years in a row convinces me that NH is not the right GM. He didn't see this gap coming (at least publicly).
It looks like NH is now looking for the next window but he hasn't produced an organization that looks like the next window is right around the corner. You can sort of understand that it took awhile for new GM to get talent needed for playoff run (although I thought it was too long but thought 2013 showed I was wrong about that). But there is no way he should get 6 or 7 years to rebuild from one playoff team (2015) to the next window of opportunity.
Going back to "We'll spend when the time is right," the Pirates top brass has been less than honest with their fans. So it's hard to know when they are sincere and when they aren't. Exhibit A is the 2016 season. We were told NH's goal was to maintain a competitive team rather than looking for selective windows in which to compete. So 2016 was the perfect time to increase payroll to shore up the weaker spots after winning 98 games in 2015 with a payroll of just 77% of the MLB average and setting the franchise record for attendance. The logical move was to be as strong or stronger in 2016. Instead, they reduced the talent on the roster and went from 98 to 78 wins. And since then, the time to increase spending has never been right.
Exhibit B is NH's comment that they want to put together a team that can hover near .500 and occasionally outperform their own expectations. This seems to be his idea of being consistently competitive. Because of the 2 WC format, most teams are still in the hunt into August each year, even those below .500 who keep saying all they need is a hot streak to close the gap. So in that sense, a team consistently hovering just above or just below .500 can claim to be competitive.
So I don't know if NH was insincere in saying they would be consistently competitive rather than looking for a window because he seems to set the bar very low in his idea of being competitive. And the team shows no interest at all in even getting in the same zipcode as an average payroll so the idea of putting forth a real effort in a particular window, as Miami and KC have done, seems unrealistic. I think what we are left with is NH's minimalist view of what being competitive means. Which is to try to be around .500 each year in the hope of being in striking distance of the 2nd WC most of the season. That would explain why Hurdle was fired: his team couldn't even meet that very modest goal. But even if NH truly believes that he can fulfill a promise of being competitive merely by putting together a .500 team and hoping for overachievement, the reality that most fans recognize is that only NH would consider that a competitive team.
BUT. We must not forget that the playoffs have 5-6 spots reserved for the big guys (unless someone screws up, in which case they'll be back in a year or two anyhow) with the rest of the bracket filled by a few of the season's Feel Good Stories comprising of the rest of the league. They're convenient stories for people to point to and proclaim that there's nothing wrong.
Again, this doesn't exonerate the Pirates. It's just bigger than the Pirates.
But what about a team like the Royals? They did EVERYTHING right, won the WS, and then had to sell everything and suck again. Do you think there will ever be a Royals dynasty no matter how smart they management and their moves are. The Red Sox or Dodgers or Yankees would never have to sell out in order to be good maybe once a decade. If they're bad it's because of bad management and will soon be back.
Great post. This perfectly describes the current landscape in baseball. One of my best friends is a huge KC fan. We bemoan this fact all of the time. Their GM had the fortitude to risk big and go all in to win and they lucked out and did it. Their window closed and they had to start from scratch building the minor league system. The Marlins demonstrated this in 1997 and then 6 years later when they won the WS again.
However, there are tons of teams that try this, make the playoffs and never win it all. There can be only one winner.
Regarding the Pirates, I think two things are true in hindsight.
1. They didn't actually go all in like the Royals. The FO argued all along that they didn't like windows. They wanted to build a continual winner.
2. Small market teams can't compete with that "continual winner" approach. They have to sell out for a window.
I was with the FO in this approach for a long time. I was with them when they made the playoffs and even at first when they didn't make the playoffs. But 4 years later, with very little hope in sight, one has to look realistically at the experiment and say that it isn't possible. With the Pirates financial constraints, they have to shoot for windows. And it is abundantly clear that they are not in a window at the moment. There is not the pitching in this organization to win playoff games.
I must say that I was hoping that NH was correct in that a window wasn't needed and the team could always be competitive. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he thought that could be done. Really the 2016 and 2017 seasons put the kibosh on that for me. Missing the playoffs 4 years in a row convinces me that NH is not the right GM. He didn't see this gap coming (at least publicly).
It looks like NH is now looking for the next window but he hasn't produced an organization that looks like the next window is right around the corner. You can sort of understand that it took awhile for new GM to get talent needed for playoff run (although I thought it was too long but thought 2013 showed I was wrong about that). But there is no way he should get 6 or 7 years to rebuild from one playoff team (2015) to the next window of opportunity.
Going back to "We'll spend when the time is right," the Pirates top brass has been less than honest with their fans. So it's hard to know when they are sincere and when they aren't. Exhibit A is the 2016 season. We were told NH's goal was to maintain a competitive team rather than looking for selective windows in which to compete. So 2016 was the perfect time to increase payroll to shore up the weaker spots after winning 98 games in 2015 with a payroll of just 77% of the MLB average and setting the franchise record for attendance. The logical move was to be as strong or stronger in 2016. Instead, they reduced the talent on the roster and went from 98 to 78 wins. And since then, the time to increase spending has never been right.
Exhibit B is NH's comment that they want to put together a team that can hover near .500 and occasionally outperform their own expectations. This seems to be his idea of being consistently competitive. Because of the 2 WC format, most teams are still in the hunt into August each year, even those below .500 who keep saying all they need is a hot streak to close the gap. So in that sense, a team consistently hovering just above or just below .500 can claim to be competitive.
So I don't know if NH was insincere in saying they would be consistently competitive rather than looking for a window because he seems to set the bar very low in his idea of being competitive. And the team shows no interest at all in even getting in the same zipcode as an average payroll so the idea of putting forth a real effort in a particular window, as Miami and KC have done, seems unrealistic. I think what we are left with is NH's minimalist view of what being competitive means. Which is to try to be around .500 each year in the hope of being in striking distance of the 2nd WC most of the season. That would explain why Hurdle was fired: his team couldn't even meet that very modest goal. But even if NH truly believes that he can fulfill a promise of being competitive merely by putting together a .500 team and hoping for overachievement, the reality that most fans recognize is that only NH would consider that a competitive team.
-
Roberto218
- Posts: 257
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 5:55 pm
New TV Agreement
The Pirates biggest problem after 2013-2015 wildcard run is that their analytics did not keep up with the latest trends. Bucs picked up Russell Martin with great pitch-framing ability; Ray Searage did a fine job retooling established starters who went off track. But Cole, Morton and Glasgow blossomed when they dumped two dealers for high four seamers. The Pirates missed Austin Meadows potential. Why did this happen? How many employees do the Pirates have in their analytics department? The Yankees have 33. The Mets have 3. Basically, the Pirates missed the launch angle revolution; they missed the 4 seam fastball revolution; they missed the curveball revolution; and they missed the spin rate revolution. Reynolds and Newman and Bell raise the hope that they now know how to develop some hitters. Perhaps a new pitching coach approach can help, but the Pirates need to focus on analytics. They have fallen behind. That is why I propose Jay Bell as the Buc's next manager. He managed the Yankees AAA team and knows the latest trends in analytics. If not Bell, obtain somebody from the Astros system.