Nova deal completed

Bobster21 · Post by **Bobster21** » Wed Aug 31, 2016 12:15 am

Tarpley had arm problems this year. I don't know the specifics. He started the season in extended ST and hasn't pitched too well for Bradenton this year (4.32 ERA).

Steve19981 · Post by **Steve19981** » Wed Aug 31, 2016 12:58 am

I can live with the return given what the market had been yielding.

fjk090852-7 · Post by **fjk090852-7** » Wed Aug 31, 2016 2:11 am

I have no problem with the players the Bucs sent to the Yanks. I think there are several pitchers who rank ahead of Tarpley and the Pirates have some outfield depth ahead of Polo. In my opinion Duncan and Osuna are two players who will help the Bucs before Polo and Tarpley will.

Ecbucs · Post by **Ecbucs** » Wed Aug 31, 2016 2:32 am

5B7C6D7E6D3931313039080 wrote: I can live with the return given what the market had been yielding.

I am trying to decide if I agree with this. I think in general I do but on the other hand I look at the 3 main Pirate deals (Nova, Liriano and Melancon) and in all of those it looks like the Pirates gave up more. Maybe the Pirates will make a killing in the Caminero deal.

UtahPirate · Post by **UtahPirate** » Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:52 am

6B4D4C5B4D5D2E0 wrote: I can live with the return given what the market had been yielding.

I am trying to decide if I agree with this. I think in general I do but on the other hand I look at the 3 main Pirate deals (Nova, Liriano and Melancon) and in all of those it looks like the Pirates gave up more. Maybe the Pirates will make a killing in the Caminero deal.

In a way Hearn replaces Tarpley in the system -- with a little higher ceiling I would think. I've watched enough of Rivero to think he possible could be the closer in 2017 and after if he can stay healthy. I was very much in favor of the Melancon trade, in fact I was a bit panicked that we wouldn't trade him as I felt we had to get something for him.

It would be nice if we could get more than two months from Nova. But he has helped put us back in the WC chase. Not sure we gave up that much in the end. Tito Polo had a cool name though.

I'll admit Liriano was a strange deal. I'm anxious to see Hutchison pitch. It is pretty clear they are messing with him in AAA trying to get him to either take a different approach, or change his mechanics. There has been success with that in the past. We'll see as it's obvious that trade rests on what he does for us, not so much this year, but next.

After a hot start Caminero has fallen to his Bucco norm for the M's. I wouldn't assume similar value that we gave up to get Nova for the players we get from Seattle.

One other consideration that doesn't get mentioned is how we sit with Rule V players for next year. I believe there are a lot of potential prospects that either need to be protected or will be lost. That had to be a factor with Rameriz and I wonder how it factors into other decisions. Our better prospects seem to be getting more mature.

dogknot17@yahoo.co · Post by **dogknot17@yahoo.co** » Wed Aug 31, 2016 8:24 am

5760766653747B7C7B5254150 wrote: Why is Huntington so sure they can not sign Nova? I mean, he seems to pitch well in the Burgh. If they pinch pennies again this offseason, folks are going to boo boo Neal just walking down the street. I realize Nova may want some $$, but darn this dumpster diving mentality and financial responsibility stuff is begin to sound so politically correct for not wanting to pay $$.

Tell me something good about this deal in the long term...Beat'em Bucs

Did he say they weren't going to try to sign Nova?

SammyKhalifa · Post by **SammyKhalifa** » Wed Aug 31, 2016 12:28 pm

Aww man . . . not Tito Polo!

Bobster21 · Post by **Bobster21** » Wed Aug 31, 2016 12:57 pm

4C7E72726654777E7376797E1F0 wrote: Aww man . . . not Tito Polo!
Reminds me of the old wrestling tag team of Dino Bravo and Gino Brito. ;D