OnlyBucs

I feel you would always be rebuilding. As soon as a player gets good and has great market value, you would want to trade them.



When does this stop? When do you ride out a contract and go for it instead of just having the best value team in the league?



There is a reason why players are free agents every year. Teams actually rode out their contracts instead of always looking to flip them.



Has a losing team ever bought at the deadline to get a team in place for the following year (no guys at end of their contract)? The Pirates could be buyers and make a run this year and be set up for next year. That would be my plan. The Marte factor plays a big part in that strategy.

605D5A405D5A340 wrote: I don't advocate firing NH. He's in the difficult position of working for an owner who's repeatedly proven himself to be unbelievably cheap. I fear a different GM would do even worse under those same constraints. There just isn't an answer for this problem. 


A different GM could certainly do worse.  But then somebody else might do better too.  NH, unless he really thinks he can win a championship with the Pirates, should be a good candidate to move to another GM position with a higher salary and a better chance of winning.



I wonder if he would risk leaving what could be a steady job with the Pirates for a chance at winning?  Has it been announced yet that he has signed an extension?




Who?  Who would do better?   I want names. 

NH does great with the cards he's been dealt.


You need names of baseball people who are already GMs?   What on Earth are you talking about, you need names?



How would you know they would be better or worse?   


And that's what I'm saying.   Everyone says NH should be fired.  I want to know who he will be replaced with.  Who is this new GM who will build a team that can win a World Series, keep together a top 8 farm system, make shrewed trades and mine the world for talent, all while having a budget that is 75% or more less than his competition is doing.  If people want NH gone, I want to know who they plan to replace him with.



It's the same thing with "we need to spend more".  Fantastic idea.  Who do we spend it on?  I want names.....not just "pitching". 


I don't think NH should be fired. But I don't understand the line of thinking that says if a fan feels the team is underperforming, they shouldn't suggest a change unless they specifically know who the replacement should be. How many fans were aware of NH when Littlefield was ineffective and needed to be replaced? Even among NH's staunchest supporters, I don't recall them saying in 2007 that Littlefield should be fired and replaced by Cleveland Indians Special Assistant to the General Manager Neal Huntington. So for all the fans who complained about Littlefield, should they have accepted him and not asked for someone better merely because they didn't know who Cleveland's Special Assistant to the General Manager was? It's up to the team president and owner to select a GM from all potential candidates. Those candidates include other GMs, assistants to GMs, personnel directors, minor league directors, etc. To deflect fan criticism of a GM merely because the fans do not have access to the universe of potential replacements seems a bit silly to me.

4875726875721C0 wrote: I don't advocate firing NH. He's in the difficult position of working for an owner who's repeatedly proven himself to be unbelievably cheap. I fear a different GM would do even worse under those same constraints. There just isn't an answer for this problem. 


A different GM could certainly do worse.  But then somebody else might do better too.  NH, unless he really thinks he can win a championship with the Pirates, should be a good candidate to move to another GM position with a higher salary and a better chance of winning.



I wonder if he would risk leaving what could be a steady job with the Pirates for a chance at winning?  Has it been announced yet that he has signed an extension?




Who?  Who would do better?   I want names. 

NH does great with the cards he's been dealt.


You need names of baseball people who are already GMs?   What on Earth are you talking about, you need names?



How would you know they would be better or worse?   


And that's what I'm saying.   Everyone says NH should be fired.  I want to know who he will be replaced with.  Who is this new GM who will build a team that can win a World Series, keep together a top 8 farm system, make shrewed trades and mine the world for talent, all while having a budget that is 75% or more less than his competition is doing.  If people want NH gone, I want to know who they plan to replace him with.



It's the same thing with "we need to spend more".  Fantastic idea.  Who do we spend it on?  I want names.....not just "pitching". 




I don't know about last offseason, but this coming year there is a whole boatload of good SP



Names? IDK--Jeremy Hellickson. Michael Pineda.



http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-stro ... f-2017-18/

15282F35282F410 wrote: I don't advocate firing NH. He's in the difficult position of working for an owner who's repeatedly proven himself to be unbelievably cheap. I fear a different GM would do even worse under those same constraints. There just isn't an answer for this problem. 


A different GM could certainly do worse.  But then somebody else might do better too.  NH, unless he really thinks he can win a championship with the Pirates, should be a good candidate to move to another GM position with a higher salary and a better chance of winning.



I wonder if he would risk leaving what could be a steady job with the Pirates for a chance at winning?  Has it been announced yet that he has signed an extension?




Who?  Who would do better?   I want names. 

NH does great with the cards he's been dealt.


maybe TinTin and Skinnyhorse could do better.




You wouldn't want me as GM.

I would trade Cutch now for the best hi end prospect package or young controllable players I could get (not sure the market for Cutch or who needs a OF).

I would go to the Yankees and try to get Torres (sell low) and Frazier plus more for Cole.

I'd go back to the Nats and try to get Robles, Glover and Joe Ross for Rivero.



I would be a bad GM because I love the team more than the players.  If a player can bring a surplus of talent for his contract, I look to deal. 

My exception is Rivero.  I feel that a closer with his his upside would bring a king's ransom.  It's a luxury that could be used to acquire necessities.  I would have never traded Simmons like the Braves did as I feel that a cost controlled defensive SS is almost irreplaceable.

I think the draft was handled well.  I wish they would try to splash the Latin American market, but I don't hate the wide net strategy either.  I would also scout Korea for the next Kang. 




who knows, your moves might bring a championship.

7378707C7978632620576E767F7878397478170 wrote: I feel you would always be rebuilding.  As soon as a player gets good and has great market value, you would want to trade them.



When does this stop?  When do you ride out a contract and go for it instead of just having the best value team in the league?



There is a reason why players are free agents every year.  Teams actually rode out their contracts instead of always looking to flip them. 



Has a losing team ever bought at the deadline to get a team in place for the following year (no guys at end of their contract)?  The Pirates could be buyers and make a run this year and be set up for next year.  That would be my plan.  The Marte factor plays a big part in that strategy.


I agree that deals are to win next year not in 2021.

616A626E6B6A713432457C646D6A6A2B666A050 wrote: I feel you would always be rebuilding.  As soon as a player gets good and has great market value, you would want to trade them.



When does this stop?  When do you ride out a contract and go for it instead of just having the best value team in the league?



There is a reason why players are free agents every year.  Teams actually rode out their contracts instead of always looking to flip them. 



Has a losing team ever bought at the deadline to get a team in place for the following year (no guys at end of their contract)?  The Pirates could be buyers and make a run this year and be set up for next year.  That would be my plan.  The Marte factor plays a big part in that strategy.


I WOULD always be rebuilding (or at least adjusting) and searching for long term parts. All teams should. I would always be looking to upgrade.

I don't keep Cutch around because of his history, especially since his gone after 2018, but extending him would never cross my mind. If I can get six years (or twelve) of production for Cutch I would do it.

I would have done exactly what NH did last season with Melancon.

I would have absolutely done what he did with Liriano.



This franchise will always be on a budget. We have cheap tickets, a small fan base, and a small area from which to draw (braves can draw from central NC, eastern Tennessee, eastern Mississippi, and northern Florida and everything in the middle). We will never get premium FA's. Ever. Non home grown talent should come from exploiting other teams talent with surplus and market inefficiencies. Last year, it was relievers. If I could get what the Cubs gave for Chapman for Rivera, I'd do it.

If your long term part is at top market value, you will trade him? You will never win that way. You will never have that star player producing because you will be moving him for another player.



For example, if you trade McCutchen and get a younger outfielder in return, you won't get McCutchen production form that player for years to come. Inserting Meadows now wouldn't be the same production. You will be taking a talent hit big time. Then in three years when that player or Meadows is good/great, you will trade that player? When does it stop?



I would rather add to the home grown talent and go for it. We saw what rebuilding can do as the team made the playoffs three years in a row. If you think those players are done and can't repeat, fine. But if you think they still have juice left, they need to bring in others to help.



Personally, I think there is juice left. I don't want to rebuild as I think the core is pretty good. They just need some more pieces.

303B333F3A3B206563142D353C3B3B7A373B540 wrote: If your long term part is at top market value, you will trade him?  You will never win that way.  You will never have that star player producing because you will be moving him for another player. 



For example,  if you trade McCutchen and get a younger outfielder in return, you won't get McCutchen production form that player for years to come.  Inserting Meadows now wouldn't be the same production.  You will be taking a talent hit big time.  Then in three years when that player or Meadows is good/great, you will trade that player?  When does it stop? 



I would rather add to the home grown talent and go for it.  We saw what rebuilding can do as the team made the playoffs three years in a row.  If you think those players are done and can't repeat, fine.  But if you think they still have juice left, they need to bring in others to help. 



Personally, I think there is juice left.  I don't want to rebuild as I think the core is pretty good.  They just need some more pieces. 




I can guarantee you we're not going to get Cutch like production out of Cutch in 2019. The question is what do we have in 2019? A draft pick that realistically won't make the majors until 2023 or several players that will be helpful in 2018 or 2019, perhaps even replacing Cutch? I'd prefer the latter. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I'd be willing to wager that Cutch has hit .250 or less in 6 of the last 9 months. He was hitting .200 36 days ago. If I can get a top 100 prospect position player, a top 100 prospect pitcher and a lottery ticket for him, I'll cash that in now. We are seven game under .500. We were around 7games under .500 when Cutch got hot.



My idea would to be a hybrid of Giles and Bay as well as what we've done with our current outfield.. Bay replaced Giles and also got us Perer. The Giles trade replaced Giles and got us a starter.



Same with Hammer for Melancon and now Melancon for Rivero.

(To segway myself, I would trade Rivero if an amazing offer came in. I'd rather have six years (18 total years) of a ss, an of, and a sp than five years of a lights out closer. I think Rivero might be the most valuable trade piece in baseball at this moment. I'd exploite that).



I would then attempt to sign them under market value (like Marte and Polanco) early in the cycle and start shopping them with two years left on the deal (like Cutch).



Instead of rebuilding, I would constantly be tweaking. I'm not trying to trade anyone early in the process (Bell and Taillon are going nowhere), but trying to replace them late in the contract when their bargain salary (signed five years ago) along with the talent can bring back multiple assets.

I'd also look to deal players who aren't in favor of extensions (Cole?) when they get expensive to optimize return.



To sum up, I'm a Pirates fan first. I want them to win, and set themselves to win in the future.

I doubt I've ever enjoyed a baseball player more than Cutch. I hope to meet him one day and thank him for all the memories and joy I received from watching him play.....but I'd deal him tomorrow if it made us better in 18 and beyond.



Sorry for the long post. All my customers are doing inventory heading into the fourth, so I've got a little free time.

4974736974731D0 wrote: If your long term part is at top market value, you will trade him?  You will never win that way.  You will never have that star player producing because you will be moving him for another player. 



For example,  if you trade McCutchen and get a younger outfielder in return, you won't get McCutchen production form that player for years to come.  Inserting Meadows now wouldn't be the same production.  You will be taking a talent hit big time.  Then in three years when that player or Meadows is good/great, you will trade that player?  When does it stop? 



I would rather add to the home grown talent and go for it.  We saw what rebuilding can do as the team made the playoffs three years in a row.  If you think those players are done and can't repeat, fine.  But if you think they still have juice left, they need to bring in others to help. 



Personally, I think there is juice left.  I don't want to rebuild as I think the core is pretty good.  They just need some more pieces. 




I can guarantee you we're not going to get Cutch like production out of Cutch in 2019.  The question is what do we have in 2019?  A draft pick that realistically won't make the majors until 2023 or several players that will be helpful in 2018 or 2019, perhaps even replacing Cutch?  I'd prefer the latter.  I don't have the stats in front of me, but I'd be willing to wager that Cutch has hit .250 or less in 6 of the last 9 months.  He was hitting .200 36 days ago.  If I can get a top 100 prospect position player, a top 100 prospect pitcher and a lottery ticket for him, I'll cash that in now.  We are seven game under .500.  We were around 7games under .500 when Cutch got hot.



My idea would to be a hybrid of Giles and Bay as well as what we've done with our current outfield..  Bay replaced Giles and also got us Perer.  The Giles trade replaced Giles and got us a starter.



Same with Hammer for Melancon and now Melancon for Rivero.

(To segway myself, I would trade Rivero if an amazing offer came in.  I'd rather have six years (18 total years) of a ss, an of, and a sp than five years of a lights out closer.  I think Rivero might be the most valuable trade piece in baseball at this moment.  I'd exploite that).



I would then attempt to sign them under market value (like Marte and Polanco) early in the cycle and start shopping them with two years left on the deal (like Cutch).



Instead of rebuilding, I would constantly be tweaking.  I'm not trying to trade anyone early in the process (Bell and Taillon are going nowhere), but trying to replace them late in the contract when their bargain salary (signed five years ago) along with the talent can bring back multiple assets.

I'd also look to deal players who aren't in favor of extensions (Cole?) when they get expensive to optimize return.



To sum up, I'm a Pirates fan first.  I want them to win, and set themselves to win in the future.

I doubt I've ever enjoyed a baseball player more than Cutch.  I hope to meet him one day and thank him for all the memories and joy I received from watching him play.....but I'd deal him tomorrow if it made us better in 18 and beyond.



Sorry for the long post.  All my customers are doing inventory heading into the fourth, so I've got a little free time.


You're not allowed to speculate on this stuff without specific names.



I want names.

Tintin,



You would hav traded McCutchen after 2012. He wouldn't have been around for the playoff run.



You would have traded Harrison after 2015. Cole would have been gone then too.



When were you trading Walker, Alvarez, Liriano, Burnett, and Martin? They peaked so the Pirates could make their run. In your situation, you would have dealt them.



Again, when does it stop? Why trade Rivero now instead of using him for at least the next four years? He might never have this type of season again, but he could still be a top relief pitcher for years to come.