Last Minute Trade Buzz

[SteadyFreddy]

676C64686D6C773234437A626B6C6C2D606C030 wrote: I don't know that.



They brought in  pitchers who were successful in Liriano, Burnett, and Volquez. 



I am not sure why you are on this "they are cheap" agenda again.  If that was the case, why did they extend Cervelli, Marte, Polanco, and Harrison?  The free agent market for pitchers was outrageous last off season.  That doesn't mean it will be like that again or they won't try to sign someone again. 



These moves did not make the team worse.  They could have made them better.  We don't know yet because they haven't played a game yet.  We will find out if the team is better or not shortly (see how Nova does compared to what Niese, Nicasio, and Liriano already did fro the Pirates).  We will really know if they got better in 2017 when comparing Liriano to Hutchison. We aren't going to know if they Hutchinson is better then Liriano at least for this season because they are sending him right down to AAA for the rest of the season. That shows how much confidence they have in him and what they think of him. Plus, they also don't want to call him up so they can save another year of control of this guy. And yes they are cheap and I'm not going to applaud them for extending guys like Marte,Polanco, Cervelli etc. That's what good teams that actually want to win do. They don't bribe other teams to take two of your top ten prospects away just so that they can pay a players contract that you no longer want to pay. That's cheap and there is no other way to say it.

[rucker59@gmail.com]

30020E0E1A280B020F0A0502630 wrote: Is anyone still not convinced that after all these moves yesterday that winning is not this teams and this owners top priority when push comes to shove. I been saying that for awhile on here and get scolded and laughed at. But these moves yesterday absolutely proves this point to be true. This team would rather save money and at the same time do the unthinkable of pretty much bribing another team with 2 of your top 10 prospects just so they will eat a player you want to get rid of (Liriano's) entire salary. It's a disgrace and Huntington and this front office should be absolutely embarrassed and ashamed of themselves.


Totally agree and give you credit for not using the word "trades" for the obvious salary dump and the two deck shuffling moves with the NY teams where Nova and Bastardo have been recognized by both the fans and media as being useless.


Every "deal" was a salary dump including the Shark. I give no credit for the return on Mark. No other team in the history of baseball that is in the middle of a playoff race would trade the best closer in the game for an up-and-down 7th inning guy, especially when the new closer (Watson) has been totally inconsistent this year. 



If that's not enough to confirm this move as a dump, all we need to know to prove it is that not ONE PENNY went back into the team. No effort to use Mark's dumped salary to fill a need on this team.  Instead more millions were dumped. 



No one can tell me Malacon was a good baseball move under the circumstances.  It was a pure dump. 



The whole thing is disgusting.




IMO, all the trades were fine...except "that one." All the trades were fine??? So you were fine getting garbage like Nova who is a 2 month rental who really cant help you. And you were fine with swapping Niese for Bastardo who you didn't resign in the offseason?? So essentially Neil Walker was traded for nothing?? And plus you gave away 2 top 10 prospects and sold guys off and didn't help or restock the Minor League's at all. Huntington's statement yesterday of they felt the moves they made yesterday helped them still compete for a playoff spot this season is complete and total crap.




You can't redo the past, Niese for Bastardo TODAY is a boring but fine trade (and is ADDING payroll).  Nova is boring but fine.  We need to focus what we're mad at here.  These trades wont help this team win now and next year and in the future. So no they aren't fine. If you want to keep kissing this teams butt for wanting to save money first instead of winning games on the field that's fine. Myself and other people on this board refuse to do so. The deal with McGuire and Ramirez proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that this team will do anything to save money and there is no depth that they wont stoop to do so.




I'll bite--



Who the hell's butt am I kissing exactly?   We made an awful deal for a bad reason. 



AGAIN--the Bastardo deal IS NOT SAVING MONEY.  It might not help a TON but yesterday at 3:59 everyone hated Niese and wanted to cut him.  Hey, we got anything at all.  We moved on from a bad (see that?) trade.  Lumping all of these deals together as being the same is not helpful, and it does not represent critical thinking.   



Keeping players in the minors and veterans in the majors IS NOT SAVING MONEY IN FRONT OF EVERYTHING ELSE.  You might not like them doing that but it is not saving money in any way.  Putting every aspect of team management into one big pot and stirring it together does not represent critical thinking. 



Nobody's going to like everything (or maybe anything) a team does.  But guess what?  We learn more if we can be a bit more nuanced than "we don't want to winnnnnnnnnN!!!!!!!!!"  It's super clear that the different trades were made for different reasons, and it's okay to see them all individually; and no, it doesn't mean anybody is kissing anybody's butt. 




I've got no problem with the trade to the Mets. A definite upgrade. I Do wonder however - taking on a $6M salary for a middle relief guy seems like a waste of what is now obviously a very limited payroll. How is this justified under the circumstances?



Also, you will not see me critiquing the Walker trade. It didn't work out. Sometimes they don't work out. You move on. Neal did a great job moving

[dogknot17@yahoo.co]

So, what is it? Are they being cheap or do they want to win?



You contradicted yourself saying you won't applaud them in extending some guys as "That's what good teams that actually want to win do." So, they do want to win??? They would save so much money by not extending anyone and just trading them away after a few years, right?



Yes, smart to save another year of Hutchison. But you know that as time tables are discussed over and over here. Why use Hutchison for four starts and lose a year of control? How does that make sense to you?

[SteadyFreddy]

Huntington still went against his own philosophy and traded his own prospects who were in the top 10, and who he values so much and who he talks about constantly and got nothing back. Plus, he said over the weekend after they traded Melancon he said that deal allows them to take the money that they saved by getting rid of Melancon and use that money to make the team better at the deadline which they obviously did not do.

[SammyKhalifa]

515640484651161A63444E424A4F0D404C4E230 wrote:

I've got no problem with the trade to the Mets.  A definite upgrade.   I Do wonder however - taking on a $6M salary for a middle relief guy seems like a waste of what is now obviously a very limited payroll. How is this justified under the circumstances?



Also, you will not see me critiquing the Walker trade.  It didn't work out.  Sometimes they don't work out.  You move on.  Neal did a great job moving


Yeah, I have no idea if getting Bastardo was the right move or not.  It seems like he'll be more useful to us than Niese but that's not saying a lot. 



HOWEVER, I'm pretty sure anyone who looks at it for more than thirty seconds will know that we didn't pick up his 6MM for next year because we're cheap. That there are different things going on in that move than the other one.

[SteadyFreddy]

5B50585451504B0E087F465E575050115C503F0 wrote: So, what is it?  Are they being cheap or do they want to win?



You contradicted yourself saying you won't applaud them in extending some guys as "That's what good teams that actually want to win do."  So, they do want to win???  They would save so much money by not extending anyone and just trading them away after a few years, right?



Yes, smart to save another year of Hutchison.  But you know that as time tables are discussed over and over here.  Why use Hutchison for four starts and lose a year of control?  How does that make sense to you? They want to win but only within a certain amount of constraints. They arent going to go out and sign a starting pitcher who has some pedigree and can maybe help this team get over the hump if they have to pay more money then what is within their constraints. They had a chance to do it this past offseason coming off of a 98 win season?? Did they do it?? No they didn't. They were content with going with garbage like Locke, Niese, Nicasio, and Vogelsong and "hoping" that maybe one or two of them would work out instead of going out and actually bringing a starting pitcher in here with some pedigree or re-signing a guy like JA Happ who is pitching out of his mind this season. And here we are 8-9 months later and the Pirates still haven't resolved the problem and they are still looking for starting pitching as both Locke and Vogelsong are still in the starting rotation.

[SteadyFreddy]

192B27273301222B26232C2B4A0 wrote:

I've got no problem with the trade to the Mets.  A definite upgrade.   I Do wonder however - taking on a $6M salary for a middle relief guy seems like a waste of what is now obviously a very limited payroll. How is this justified under the circumstances?



Also, you will not see me critiquing the Walker trade.  It didn't work out.  Sometimes they don't work out.  You move on.  Neal did a great job moving


Yeah, I have no idea if getting Bastardo was the right move or not.  It seems like he'll be more useful to us than Niese but that's not saying a lot. 



HOWEVER, I'm pretty sure anyone who looks at it for more than thirty seconds will know that we didn't pick up his 6MM for next year because we're cheap.  That there are different things going on in that move than the other one.  The Bastardo pick-up is probably the only deal made yesterday that has a chance to help the Pirates next season in a positive way. To answer the question would I rather have Niese or Bastardo I would definitely take Bastardo. However, I would rather have Huntington had made a better deal in the offseason then Niese for Walker instead of having to go back and get a guy you didn't resign last season. Ill give Huntington credit for at least dumping Niese and admitting he screwed up.

[Ecbucs]

I have had confidence that the Bucs were heading in the right direction even though I disagreed with the idea of 2016 should be a bridge year.



Now I question whether the team has the where with all to be a true contender consistently.  Last year may very well have been the high mark for this team.



I and others had been impressed by Pirates pitching and attributed a lot of that success to Searage and Pirates ability to get the most out of many pitchers. This year has changed that.  There certainly were failures along with the successes (think Liz, Locke and Niese) and maybe there is no reason to think they have a system to get good results consistently.



Maybe they just need to have more talented pitchers.  With the deals made I don't know if the Bucs have the financial resources or if they do have them if they are willing to spend what is needed to put together a good pitching staff.  Cole is going to get expensive soon.  Teams almost have to have at least one or two starters that have been around for a while in order to contend.  Last year the Bucs had Burnett and Liriano.  I just don't see the team being able to contend if they are going to rely on cheap pitchers that are in pre-arbitration or early arbitration years.



Maybe the team will do great next year.  Hopefully NH has orders that next year has to be better than this year and that this bridge year is not a bridge to no where.



Very likely these deals (specifically the Liriano deal) is the most criticism NH has received in his tenure with the Pirates.

[AdrianBrown]

I absolutely hate this trade. I'm fine with giving up Liriano, but giving up the prospects just doesn't make any sense to me.



Here are the things I still can’t understand:



- Huntington talked about how they gave up prospects so they could get Hutchinson, but then he had nothing good to say about Hutchinson the rest of the interview as if he was an after thought.

- Giving up Liriano at his lowest point seems like a bad strategy for a team like the Pirates, but I’m fine with that to an extent assuming they use the money for something important next year, but throwing in the two prospects just seems desperate. We basically traded prospects for cash. That flies in the face of our strategy during the draft. We have prided ourselves on spending extra money to build up our prospect pool and then we go and sell them for cash now? Seems like it is counterproductive?

- Huntington talked about how both prospects were blocked and expendable (McGuire by Diaz, Stewart, and Cervelli), Ramirez by (Polanco, Cutch, Meadows, Marte, etc). But other teams don’t have that problem. Especially McGuire with his strong defensive skills could have been someone we flipped to a team like the Braves for a legitimate prospect at a different position at least. They were borderline top 100 prospects. Or novel idea we could have traded them to help our team this year. Do the Rays really say no to a trade of McGuire, Ramirez, and someone like Brault for Moore? Maybe they do, but at least it is a start to conversation.

- And if the Pirates were going to make the playoffs this year it was going to come down to Liriano, Cole, and Cutch turning it around and being stars. Now we dealt Liriano which in my mind punts on the season. But instead of doing that, we focus on getting returns for players that will help us this year (Riverio in the Melancon trade, trading for Nova, getting Bastardo for Niese). Plus Bastardo will cost us 6.5 million next year. That is expensive for a middle reliever. If you are going to sell Liriano, then go all out and set yourself up for next year. Trade Freese, Joyce, Niese, Feliz, Jaso, Locke, etc. See what you pick up. I bet you could have packaged one of those hitters with Liriano and gotten out from under his contract and you would still be set up for next year and keep your prospects. I hate the idea of going halfway. Either sell or buy. Don’t tread the line because in the end you don’t end up getting much help this year or next.



All in all, this day reminds me very much of how I felt after the Penguins trade deadline when they gave up Despres for Lovejoy. Or when Bobby Hill showed up in Pittsburgh for Aramis Ramirez.



Not a happy camper right now.

[AdrianBrown]

Having said that, I am fine with the Nova trade, the Bastardo trade, and Melancon trade. It was just this last one that seemed to be a bridge too far.