OnlyBucs

6843545B220 wrote: WV Buccos already commented on the thread inviting opinion. Sorry, but your closing comment is also formed in the request for opinion.

[highlight]The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?

[/highlight]

Tune in to find out.



By inviting replies, you are asking for opinions. Every reply is someone's opinion, which you seem to disagree with.



My opinion is this - you are simply taking another swipe at Cherington and his staff using examples of two other franchises in different sports, from two completely different eras.



The Pirates cannot build completely through the draft. They'll never sign an expensive free agent. Without a very strong farm system, they can't make the type of trades where they are so deep they can offer impactful prospects for impactful players, even though that trend is declining because teams don't give up top prospects for short term gains.



The other management team never was good at drafting and developing players in 10+ years - they deserved the scorn they got. You continue to beat the same drum on this group after one - ONE - draft. Give it, and us, a break.
Even with a strong farm system they will not trade for impactful players because they come with large contracts based on their previous impact. When they gave away the farm for a previously impactful player in Archer, they raved about how team friendly his contract was. They didn't seem to mind that he hadn't been good for 3 years and was having a career worst season at the time of the trade. It was all about the contract. I believe they could have received a much, much better player than Archer for that package but better players come with larger contracts, which is verboten in the Nutting realm. 

Agreed Bobster, and even if that weren't the case, the Archer trade was enough to scare them off from doing it again.

042F38374E0 wrote: WV Buccos already commented on the thread inviting opinion. Sorry, but your closing comment is also formed in the request for opinion.

[highlight]The quesition to us is- is Ben and Company closer to the 1974 Steelers....or, The Sixers' "Process"?

[/highlight]

Tune in to find out.



By inviting replies, you are asking for opinions. Every reply is someone's opinion, which you seem to disagree with.



My opinion is this - you are simply taking another swipe at Cherington and his staff using examples of two other franchises in different sports, from two completely different eras.



[highlight][/highlight]  [highlight]That wasn't my intent.  That's your interpretation, so I;m not commenting further.[/highlight] I gave my explantion for picking the two examples.



What I wrote stands on its own.  There is no way to predict with certainty which players will become successful and which won't- in many cases. 



Some have warning signs that teams are apparently willing to overlook, but in many cases, there aren't any. 



This holds true- again- with any sport and with every team.  Or, it's been that history.



If some of the "Sure Things" aren't sure things, then those who rated lower aren't going to be much less hard to predict.



The Pirates cannot build completely through the draft. They'll never sign an expensive free agent. Without a very strong farm system, they can't make the type of trades where they are so deep they can offer impactful prospects for impactful players, even though that trend is declining because teams don't give up top prospects for short term gains.



The other management team never was good at drafting and developing players in 10+ years - they deserved the scorn they got. You continue to beat the same drum on this group after one - ONE - draft. Give it, and us, a break.

Weenie's basic question was are the Pirates half full or half empty. Very few answered that question (I did), but instead went on spouting their theories about drafting players.

4D565B5A535F503E0 wrote: Weenie's basic question was are the Pirates half full or half empty.   Very few answered that question (I did), but instead went on spouting their theories about drafting players.
Okay.....

You're half full

Weenie's half full



together, you're full of it

445F52535A5659370 wrote: Weenie's basic question was are the Pirates half full or half empty.   Very few answered that question (I did), but instead went on spouting their theories about drafting players.
If you don't like the answers, don't ask the questions

I didn't ask any quesetions, in that sense. It was rhetorical.  We have to "tune in to find out" how well the guys we draft do.



All I've said- and, continue to say- is that it isn't all that unusual for about half of the top selections to not do as well as expected. 



Others continue to dwell on past miskakes. I've stayed out of that, because of the above.  The last time I questioned a pick was Daniel Moskos over Matt Wieters. 

4C6A6D78717D6A7C741F0 wrote: Weenie's basic question was are the Pirates half full or half empty.   Very few answered that question (I did), but instead went on spouting their theories about drafting players.
Okay.....

You're half full

Weenie's half full



together, you're full of it
__________

Trolling again.