I just can't get past the thought that McGuire was so easily expendable not less than two months after the Pirates' catching situation was so dire at the ML level due to injuries that they had to bring back Erik flipping Kratz.
You can never, ever have too many quality catchers in your organization.
Last Minute Trade Buzz
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
Last Minute Trade Buzz
2200130E0D080F00231402020E610 wrote: There's so much going on here. SammyKhalifa was right when he said earlier that we need to focus on what we are actually mad about. Good idea. When I think through all of this very carefully, here is what it all boils down to for me:
1. We used 2 top-tier prospects with value to help get rid of a player in a salary dump, instead of using them to ACQUIRE talent that could help this year's team or next. To me, using top prospects that way is virtually unheard of.
2. Sending 2 prospects to the Yankees for 2 months of Nova. I'll guarantee that when those names are announced we'll all go ballistic again. I'm going to guess Cole Tucker and Tito Polo ... or something along those lines. The return for Nova should have been "cash considerations" or Locke or Nicasio or Vogelsong, etc...
3. BOTTOM LINE -- We are letting 4 prospects walk ... and what exactly are we getting in return that has any value? We let 4 prospects walk and what are we getting in return that will help the 2016 Pirates, or the 2017 Pirates?
Everything else I'm okay with. But losing 4 prospects and getting nothing in return, or a negligible upgrade at best, is inexcusable.
Good post.
If you look at things today for this year, they may actually be a marginally better team. Nova has been better than Liriano. Bastardo will be better than Niese from the bullpen. Melancon for Rivero seems a bit lopsided today, but Rivero has the potential to put it together and equal Melancon today.
Looking to next year, they did nothing to hurt the team. If you assume that this year's Liriano was next year's Liriano, it's great he's gone. Nova, Vogelsong, and Niese will all be out of the way. They moved no position players. So, they will trot out a rotation that is all very young and promising. They (esp. Searage) really think highly of Hutchinson and think they can use the offseason to get him in a great spot for next year and moving forward.
They now have a bunch of cash to use this offseason. NH has already mentioned that factor. We will see what happens with it.
At the end of the day, this all boils down to trading away some prospects who may have been able to help the team in a few years or may have been used to fetch some other trade pieces in a few years. Either way, the team isn't hurt now or next year by these trades.
1. We used 2 top-tier prospects with value to help get rid of a player in a salary dump, instead of using them to ACQUIRE talent that could help this year's team or next. To me, using top prospects that way is virtually unheard of.
2. Sending 2 prospects to the Yankees for 2 months of Nova. I'll guarantee that when those names are announced we'll all go ballistic again. I'm going to guess Cole Tucker and Tito Polo ... or something along those lines. The return for Nova should have been "cash considerations" or Locke or Nicasio or Vogelsong, etc...
3. BOTTOM LINE -- We are letting 4 prospects walk ... and what exactly are we getting in return that has any value? We let 4 prospects walk and what are we getting in return that will help the 2016 Pirates, or the 2017 Pirates?
Everything else I'm okay with. But losing 4 prospects and getting nothing in return, or a negligible upgrade at best, is inexcusable.
Good post.
If you look at things today for this year, they may actually be a marginally better team. Nova has been better than Liriano. Bastardo will be better than Niese from the bullpen. Melancon for Rivero seems a bit lopsided today, but Rivero has the potential to put it together and equal Melancon today.
Looking to next year, they did nothing to hurt the team. If you assume that this year's Liriano was next year's Liriano, it's great he's gone. Nova, Vogelsong, and Niese will all be out of the way. They moved no position players. So, they will trot out a rotation that is all very young and promising. They (esp. Searage) really think highly of Hutchinson and think they can use the offseason to get him in a great spot for next year and moving forward.
They now have a bunch of cash to use this offseason. NH has already mentioned that factor. We will see what happens with it.
At the end of the day, this all boils down to trading away some prospects who may have been able to help the team in a few years or may have been used to fetch some other trade pieces in a few years. Either way, the team isn't hurt now or next year by these trades.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Last Minute Trade Buzz
795B48555653545B784F5959553A0 wrote: It's not a matter of whether the prospects dealt (Ramirez and McGuire) could have helped the Pirates in the next 3-4 years. I agree they may well be blocked.
The problem is they have value to other teams and could have / should have been used in order to acquire players to help address an area of weakness.
They were used to bring in Hutchison. Pitching is a weakness. Hutchison is a pitcher.
I am not saying I agree with moving McGuire, but pointing out what actually happened. I also don't think McGuire is in the majors in 2018. His offense isn't there yet.
The problem is they have value to other teams and could have / should have been used in order to acquire players to help address an area of weakness.
They were used to bring in Hutchison. Pitching is a weakness. Hutchison is a pitcher.
I am not saying I agree with moving McGuire, but pointing out what actually happened. I also don't think McGuire is in the majors in 2018. His offense isn't there yet.
Last Minute Trade Buzz
I am usually deferential to management on stuff like this because we don't know all the facts. However, I agree with many posters that I don't like giving up prospects to have someone take salary. We had to play Kratz and Frier at catcher this year and both Diaz and Cervelli have injuries in their history. Also, I agree with the sentiment that you use prospects to get value not to have someone take salary. I would have preferred rolling the dice and letting Liriano pitch the rest of the year to see if he improved his value to trade in the offseason.
-
UtahPirate
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 10:36 pm
Last Minute Trade Buzz
They seemed so desperate to make that Liriano deal that I keep waiting for some sort of backstory to reveal itself. I really don't think we are being told the whole story. This was not in line with NH modus operandi of protecting prospect assets. It was not in line with his trading history (while the other three were very much NH trades).
So what's the story? Why such desperation to get rid of Liriano? I don't think financial flexibility answers that question.
So what's the story? Why such desperation to get rid of Liriano? I don't think financial flexibility answers that question.
-
Bobster21
Last Minute Trade Buzz
736E4A4846230 wrote:
At the end of the day, this all boils down to trading away some prospects who may have been able to help the team in a few years or may have been used to fetch some other trade pieces in a few years. Either way, the team isn't hurt now or next year by these trades.
The problem is that the 2 top-10 prospects were not part of what we normally consider a trade. It certainly didn't take Liriano, Ramirez and McGuire to get Hutchison. Ramirez and McGuire were only sent to Toronto because that's the only way the Blue Jays would take Liriano's contract off their hands. So 2 top-10 prospects were sacrificed to fuel a salary dump. And this was a salary dump by a team that started off the season saying they hadn't spent as much on payroll as they could have and continues to have one of the smallest payrolls in MLB. At the end of the day, it boils down to an obsession with cutting payroll even if they have to give away top prospects to do so in a year in which the payroll they are so desperate to reduce is already one of MLB's lowest.
This sends a very depressing message for future seasons. They will manage the payroll to present a competitive team. But lowering payroll--even their modest payroll--will trump any desires to add talent to make them a championship caliber team. Why trade 2 talented but blocked prospects-if that's what they were-for talent that could be better used when you can give them away to shed payroll? How do you compete with the Cubs, Cards, and the best of the other divisions with a philosophy like that?
At the end of the day, this all boils down to trading away some prospects who may have been able to help the team in a few years or may have been used to fetch some other trade pieces in a few years. Either way, the team isn't hurt now or next year by these trades.
The problem is that the 2 top-10 prospects were not part of what we normally consider a trade. It certainly didn't take Liriano, Ramirez and McGuire to get Hutchison. Ramirez and McGuire were only sent to Toronto because that's the only way the Blue Jays would take Liriano's contract off their hands. So 2 top-10 prospects were sacrificed to fuel a salary dump. And this was a salary dump by a team that started off the season saying they hadn't spent as much on payroll as they could have and continues to have one of the smallest payrolls in MLB. At the end of the day, it boils down to an obsession with cutting payroll even if they have to give away top prospects to do so in a year in which the payroll they are so desperate to reduce is already one of MLB's lowest.
This sends a very depressing message for future seasons. They will manage the payroll to present a competitive team. But lowering payroll--even their modest payroll--will trump any desires to add talent to make them a championship caliber team. Why trade 2 talented but blocked prospects-if that's what they were-for talent that could be better used when you can give them away to shed payroll? How do you compete with the Cubs, Cards, and the best of the other divisions with a philosophy like that?
Last Minute Trade Buzz
35140108300912011405600 wrote: They seemed so desperate to make that Liriano deal that I keep waiting for some sort of backstory to reveal itself. I really don't think we are being told the whole story. This was not in line with NH modus operandi of protecting prospect assets. It was not in line with his trading history (while the other three were very much NH trades).
So what's the story? Why such desperation to get rid of Liriano? I don't think financial flexibility answers that question.
Absolutely agree. I am flabbergasted by this trade. It is as if David Littlefield took NH out to lunch and asked if he could make a trade for old-times' sakes.
So what's the story? Why such desperation to get rid of Liriano? I don't think financial flexibility answers that question.
Absolutely agree. I am flabbergasted by this trade. It is as if David Littlefield took NH out to lunch and asked if he could make a trade for old-times' sakes.
-
BuccoVelo
Last Minute Trade Buzz
For me, it isn't even McGuire and Ramirez specifically - I have some doubts about both in terms of their eventual success in MLB. But that really isn't even the point here.
The most obvious issue is that you've had two golden opportunities at the trade deadline the past two seasons to add to a team that had championship potential and NH was unwilling to part with any prospects of any significance in order to get legitimate MLB talent to potentially put them over the top. He then turns around and deals two fringe top-100 prospects in all of MLB in what amounts to a pure salary dump? It is just totally backward in terms of what the priorities should be for any MLB franchise.
The second issue is that you aren't even dumping all that much salary in today's MLB. Pitching is extremely expensive and betting $13 million over one season that someone like Francisco Liriano who had three excellent seasons in a row prior to 2016 will bounce back is something that a true contender should be willing to do. It isn't like they are going to sign a comparable talent in free agency, because they never have before.
The third issue is understanding opportunity cost as it relates to any legitimate prospects at this stage of their development and what is sacrificed when you either (A) fail to trade prospects at a point of relatively high value (because most prospects do not fully pan out, if at all) or (B) trade them in a deal that doesn't bring back actual present value to your baseball team (which this deal quite obviously does not). People who just focus on the flaws of McGuire and Ramirez and the likelihood of their eventual MLB success totally miss the point of their current value as prospects and trade chips. They may absolutely turn out to be no loss whatsoever (although I would question anybody with significant confidence in this proposition - look at Alex Dickerson and Robbie Grossman right now), but that still doesn't take into account the opportunity cost of not utilizing their current value to bring back something more substantive to help the Pirates.
No matter how good Drew Hutchison may turn out to be, and he does profile as somebody that Ray Searage might have some success in "fixing", this trade is unbelievably flawed in both theory and execution and should be extremely disappointing for any fan of the Pirates.
The most obvious issue is that you've had two golden opportunities at the trade deadline the past two seasons to add to a team that had championship potential and NH was unwilling to part with any prospects of any significance in order to get legitimate MLB talent to potentially put them over the top. He then turns around and deals two fringe top-100 prospects in all of MLB in what amounts to a pure salary dump? It is just totally backward in terms of what the priorities should be for any MLB franchise.
The second issue is that you aren't even dumping all that much salary in today's MLB. Pitching is extremely expensive and betting $13 million over one season that someone like Francisco Liriano who had three excellent seasons in a row prior to 2016 will bounce back is something that a true contender should be willing to do. It isn't like they are going to sign a comparable talent in free agency, because they never have before.
The third issue is understanding opportunity cost as it relates to any legitimate prospects at this stage of their development and what is sacrificed when you either (A) fail to trade prospects at a point of relatively high value (because most prospects do not fully pan out, if at all) or (B) trade them in a deal that doesn't bring back actual present value to your baseball team (which this deal quite obviously does not). People who just focus on the flaws of McGuire and Ramirez and the likelihood of their eventual MLB success totally miss the point of their current value as prospects and trade chips. They may absolutely turn out to be no loss whatsoever (although I would question anybody with significant confidence in this proposition - look at Alex Dickerson and Robbie Grossman right now), but that still doesn't take into account the opportunity cost of not utilizing their current value to bring back something more substantive to help the Pirates.
No matter how good Drew Hutchison may turn out to be, and he does profile as somebody that Ray Searage might have some success in "fixing", this trade is unbelievably flawed in both theory and execution and should be extremely disappointing for any fan of the Pirates.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Last Minute Trade Buzz
715C51404756410102330 wrote:
At the end of the day, this all boils down to trading away some prospects who may have been able to help the team in a few years or may have been used to fetch some other trade pieces in a few years. Either way, the team isn't hurt now or next year by these trades.
The problem is that the 2 top-10 prospects were not part of what we normally consider a trade. It certainly didn't take Liriano, Ramirez and McGuire to get Hutchison. Ramirez and McGuire were only sent to Toronto because that's the only way the Blue Jays would take Liriano's contract off their hands. So 2 top-10 prospects were sacrificed to fuel a salary dump. And this was a salary dump by a team that started off the season saying they hadn't spent as much on payroll as they could have and continues to have one of the smallest payrolls in MLB. At the end of the day, it boils down to an obsession with cutting payroll even if they have to give away top prospects to do so in a year in which the payroll they are so desperate to reduce is already one of MLB's lowest.
This sends a very depressing message for future seasons. They will manage the payroll to present a competitive team. But lowering payroll--even their modest payroll--will trump any desires to add talent to make them a championship caliber team. Why trade 2 talented but blocked prospects-if that's what they were-for talent that could be better used when you can give them away to shed payroll? How do you compete with the Cubs, Cards, and the best of the other divisions with a philosophy like that?
I'm not buying that wholesale. If it were the case why pick up Bastardo? You can question whether Bastardo will be any good but you have to agree that nobody would have batted an eye if we dropped off Niese for some nobody no-cost filler player in Low A.
At the end of the day, this all boils down to trading away some prospects who may have been able to help the team in a few years or may have been used to fetch some other trade pieces in a few years. Either way, the team isn't hurt now or next year by these trades.
The problem is that the 2 top-10 prospects were not part of what we normally consider a trade. It certainly didn't take Liriano, Ramirez and McGuire to get Hutchison. Ramirez and McGuire were only sent to Toronto because that's the only way the Blue Jays would take Liriano's contract off their hands. So 2 top-10 prospects were sacrificed to fuel a salary dump. And this was a salary dump by a team that started off the season saying they hadn't spent as much on payroll as they could have and continues to have one of the smallest payrolls in MLB. At the end of the day, it boils down to an obsession with cutting payroll even if they have to give away top prospects to do so in a year in which the payroll they are so desperate to reduce is already one of MLB's lowest.
This sends a very depressing message for future seasons. They will manage the payroll to present a competitive team. But lowering payroll--even their modest payroll--will trump any desires to add talent to make them a championship caliber team. Why trade 2 talented but blocked prospects-if that's what they were-for talent that could be better used when you can give them away to shed payroll? How do you compete with the Cubs, Cards, and the best of the other divisions with a philosophy like that?
I'm not buying that wholesale. If it were the case why pick up Bastardo? You can question whether Bastardo will be any good but you have to agree that nobody would have batted an eye if we dropped off Niese for some nobody no-cost filler player in Low A.
-
Bobster21
Last Minute Trade Buzz
477579796D5F7C75787D7275140 wrote:
At the end of the day, this all boils down to trading away some prospects who may have been able to help the team in a few years or may have been used to fetch some other trade pieces in a few years. Either way, the team isn't hurt now or next year by these trades.
The problem is that the 2 top-10 prospects were not part of what we normally consider a trade. It certainly didn't take Liriano, Ramirez and McGuire to get Hutchison. Ramirez and McGuire were only sent to Toronto because that's the only way the Blue Jays would take Liriano's contract off their hands. So 2 top-10 prospects were sacrificed to fuel a salary dump. And this was a salary dump by a team that started off the season saying they hadn't spent as much on payroll as they could have and continues to have one of the smallest payrolls in MLB. At the end of the day, it boils down to an obsession with cutting payroll even if they have to give away top prospects to do so in a year in which the payroll they are so desperate to reduce is already one of MLB's lowest.
This sends a very depressing message for future seasons. They will manage the payroll to present a competitive team. But lowering payroll--even their modest payroll--will trump any desires to add talent to make them a championship caliber team. Why trade 2 talented but blocked prospects-if that's what they were-for talent that could be better used when you can give them away to shed payroll? How do you compete with the Cubs, Cards, and the best of the other divisions with a philosophy like that?
I'm not buying that wholesale. If it were the case why pick up Bastardo? You can question whether Bastardo will be any good but you have to agree that nobody would have batted an eye if we dropped off Niese for some nobody no-cost filler player in Low A.
Because they still want to be competitive and think Bastardo will be of more value than Niese. They were able to obtain Bastardo but still reduce payroll. They don't just want to field then 25 cheapest players possible. But the desperation move to shed Liriano's salary while acquiring Bastardo shows they want to be competitive to a point--but only to a point.
At the end of the day, this all boils down to trading away some prospects who may have been able to help the team in a few years or may have been used to fetch some other trade pieces in a few years. Either way, the team isn't hurt now or next year by these trades.
The problem is that the 2 top-10 prospects were not part of what we normally consider a trade. It certainly didn't take Liriano, Ramirez and McGuire to get Hutchison. Ramirez and McGuire were only sent to Toronto because that's the only way the Blue Jays would take Liriano's contract off their hands. So 2 top-10 prospects were sacrificed to fuel a salary dump. And this was a salary dump by a team that started off the season saying they hadn't spent as much on payroll as they could have and continues to have one of the smallest payrolls in MLB. At the end of the day, it boils down to an obsession with cutting payroll even if they have to give away top prospects to do so in a year in which the payroll they are so desperate to reduce is already one of MLB's lowest.
This sends a very depressing message for future seasons. They will manage the payroll to present a competitive team. But lowering payroll--even their modest payroll--will trump any desires to add talent to make them a championship caliber team. Why trade 2 talented but blocked prospects-if that's what they were-for talent that could be better used when you can give them away to shed payroll? How do you compete with the Cubs, Cards, and the best of the other divisions with a philosophy like that?
I'm not buying that wholesale. If it were the case why pick up Bastardo? You can question whether Bastardo will be any good but you have to agree that nobody would have batted an eye if we dropped off Niese for some nobody no-cost filler player in Low A.
Because they still want to be competitive and think Bastardo will be of more value than Niese. They were able to obtain Bastardo but still reduce payroll. They don't just want to field then 25 cheapest players possible. But the desperation move to shed Liriano's salary while acquiring Bastardo shows they want to be competitive to a point--but only to a point.