OnlyBucs

725F52434455420201300 wrote: Splitting hairs, but I actually think we were okay at getting talent for the most part but failures and keeping them good or developing them.  Either way, yeh it comes down to whether we have the people to do all of that now.
I too am critical of how players were developed. The Bucs never got the most of what Cole or Morton had. And they had no idea how to develop Glasnow. And didn't seem to know what they had in Meadows. It's frustrating to see other teams get out of former Pirates what the Pirates were unable to get. 



But outside of the players lost in the disastrous Archer trade, I'm probably forgetting some but I can't think of any failed Pirate prospects (regardless of how they were acquired) who just needed a different organization to blossom. Even Pedro Alvarez--a one trick pony (power if a ball was left over the plate but no other hitting or fielding skills)--continued to fail when given chances with the Orioles and Marlins. So if seems the Pirates have demonstrated both poor recognition of talent when obtaining prospects and poor development of those with the most ability.



Of course in fairness, Ke'Bryan Hayes was drafted and developed under the NH regime. So it looks like they got it right with him. And Keller shows promise if he can stop walking almost a batter per inning. But Nick Kingham was supposed to be the next big thing. I wonder if he's speaking Korean now.


I wonder what Polanco would have done if he was traded a few years ago. Granted, he has had a ton of health issues, but I'd argue he was an example of poor development. He has way too much talent to look so poor at the MLB level. Maybe I just bought in to the national talk of best OF in baseball, but Polanco was a real disappointment. Development doesn't stop when a guy hits the majors.

190420222C490 wrote: So ... with the four major trades that BC has made since he has come aboard, how would you rank the trades based on return.  Granted, we have no idea besides rankings and minor league stats and some quotes, but ...



1. Musgrove

2. Marte

3. Taillon













4. Bell






I agree with this.  The Bell trade was strange as we can now compare them to the other trades.  Crowe was rated pretty high.  Maybe he was rushed to the majors making his stock drop.  But it seems like they are really hedging their hopes on Yean being a stud.  He seems like the highest upside guy they got in any of the trades.  Maybe you could make a case for Head.


I also concur with this ranking of the trades

786062656572636479786E0B0 wrote: I may be in the minority, but I like what Ben Cherington has acquired in the 4 major trades he has made since last January. He has added pitching, a catcher, a shortstop and two outfielders who all appear to be talented players. When you add Nick Gonzales and the  pitchers we added in the June draft, I think this will be an exciting team beginning late 2022 and beyond.
I like that he is willing to take the criticism and risk.  It remains to be seen if Cherington has the ability to identify real talent and have the staff to develop these players.  He's obviously going big and I like the approach but really  now the real work begins into developing these prospects into tremendously talented players.  We must be able to bring up impact players year after year in order to be truly competitive.   Over the last 20 years we might bring up a impact player every 5 years that didn't and won't work for a small market team.  We must be able to bring up a real impact player ever year and a couple of good supportive players ever year.   A module like that would definitely change the fortunes of the Pirates.  We're all in now, just hope we have the people in place who can evaluate real talent and be able to develop that talent.


It's easier to accept criticism when he has the full support of his boss. I don't see any of his moves as being very risky. It's not like his job's in any jeopardy.



He just saved his boss close to $2 million.

694C4F4F5A714C444651230 wrote: So ... with the four major trades that BC has made since he has come aboard, how would you rank the trades based on return.  Granted, we have no idea besides rankings and minor league stats and some quotes, but ...



1. Musgrove

2. Marte

3. Taillon













4. Bell






I agree with this.  The Bell trade was strange as we can now compare them to the other trades.  Crowe was rated pretty high.  Maybe he was rushed to the majors making his stock drop.  But it seems like they are really hedging their hopes on Yean being a stud.  He seems like the highest upside guy they got in any of the trades.  Maybe you could make a case for Head.


I also concur with this ranking of the trades


Tough to rate based on no minor league season last year, but I would tend to agree with the rankings as well. Wouldn't surprise me to see the 2 guys from the Marte trade to wind up as the best return of any of the players.



Kinda tough not to like Head - I mean, who doesn't mind Head?

755E49463F0 wrote: So ... with the four major trades that BC has made since he has come aboard, how would you rank the trades based on return.  Granted, we have no idea besides rankings and minor league stats and some quotes, but ...



1. Musgrove

2. Marte

3. Taillon













4. Bell






I agree with this.  The Bell trade was strange as we can now compare them to the other trades.  Crowe was rated pretty high.  Maybe he was rushed to the majors making his stock drop.  But it seems like they are really hedging their hopes on Yean being a stud.  He seems like the highest upside guy they got in any of the trades.  Maybe you could make a case for Head.


I also concur with this ranking of the trades


Tough to rate based on no minor league season last year, but I would tend to agree with the rankings as well. Wouldn't surprise me to see the 2 guys from the Marte trade to wind up as the best return of any of the players.



Kinda tough not to like Head - I mean, who doesn't mind Head?


Head is a pretty bad movie even with Frank Zappa Ray Nitschke in it.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_(fil ... Nesmith%20),%20and%20distributed%20by%20Columbia%20Pictures%20.

With respect to ranking the trades, I believe Bell had the least value of any of the 4 players traded, thus, the return for him should not have been as great as the other 3 players.



Marte had demonstrated that he could perform well at the major league level and that he was worth his salary.



Musgrove has 2 years of control, can work as either a starter or reliever, and is an inexpensive # 4 - 5 starter.



The only real risk with Tallion is his health. If he is healthy and can return to form, a salary of slightly north of $2 mil for a major league starter is a god-send, particularly to a team that is trying to stay below the luxury tax threshold. In comparison, I note that Garrett Richardson recently signed with the Red Sox for $10 mil and he hasn't won more than 5 games in a season since 2015.



With respect to Bell --- he has been inconsistent at the plate, his strike-outs jumped dramatically last year, he cannot field, he is not a good base-runner. He also is due $6.7 mil or so next year. Perhaps he will find himself, but there appears to be as great a likelihood that he will go the way of Alvarez (noted earlier in this thread).



With respect to Bell, BC knew that he was one of the players he had to move to reduce salary obligations for next year. Polanco is unmovable and Bell had the next highest salary on the team. I've got to believe that BC shopped Bell hard and that he came to the conclusion that the return he received is the best that was available.



In short, I will not bust BC for the Bell return.

2A0F0C0C19320F070512600 wrote: So ... with the four major trades that BC has made since he has come aboard, how would you rank the trades based on return.  Granted, we have no idea besides rankings and minor league stats and some quotes, but ...



1. Musgrove

2. Marte

3. Taillon













4. Bell






I agree with this.  The Bell trade was strange as we can now compare them to the other trades.  Crowe was rated pretty high.  Maybe he was rushed to the majors making his stock drop.  But it seems like they are really hedging their hopes on Yean being a stud.  He seems like the highest upside guy they got in any of the trades.  Maybe you could make a case for Head.


I also concur with this ranking of the trades




You guys are no fun with everyone concurring. So for being surprised at the return, I'll go with:



1: Taillon

2: Musgrove

3: Marte

4: Bell



If this is about prospect return and which trade is most likely to result in the players actually contributing to the MLB club at some point in the future, I understand these ranking, but still disagree (see below). But I was honestly pleasantly surprised at the number of prospects we got for a pitcher that you have to hold your breath for (and I love the guy and hope he does really well).



Prospect lists don't always impress me -- after the top 7 or so on most lists I would suspect that most teams #10 through #40 might be interchangeable to some degree. That's especially true for prospects #20 through #40 -- we've seen how prospects tier when ranking our own on this board from year-to-year and every year for us once you get past #15 or so it becomes a crap shoot - and that was when we were considered to have a deep system. But a lot of lists are made from where the prospect was drafted rather than how well he is progressing as a player. That means with good scouting you can catch a rising star now when they are in the lower minors and haven't gotten enough attention to pass the higher draft picks who are faltering.



I liked that there seems to be a little more risk on these 4 prospects. Yajure ranks #15 in MLB prospect list, but he's already touched the majors at 22. That's impressive. Escotto at 19 years old, hasn't been out of the Dominican Summer League yet but put up good numbers there. Smith at 20 was really solid in High A, obviously has plenty to prove, and Contreras seems the most middling of the 4, although he is young as well.



For me this trade seemed to have more of Sanders', who is supposed to be a great talent evaluator, fingerprints on it. But I think it's quite a package for Taillon and hope a sign that our scouting and evaluation skills have gotten better with the new front office as these players may help prove that.



In terms of which trade might prove to contribute most to our future I would go:



1: Marte

2: Musgrove

3: Taillon

4: Bell



I still believe Pegeuro and Malone have the greatest ceilings as prospects. Head seems to be another solid prospect with 4 suspects (not Top 10 in their system) behind him in that trade. And while the Taillon trade may be for 4 suspects, I'm really hoping the risk/return of a couple of those players pays off.