717A727E7B7A612422556C747D7A7A3B767A150 wrote: People look at pitching match ups too much in my opinion. The pitchers got to get out the other teams' hitters. They don't have to be better than their opposing pitcher.
The Pirates have rocked many top pitchers over the years. In 2016, the Pirates rocked Kershaw and won the game 11-2. The Pirates faced Arrieta six times and rocked him three of those times. The Pirates were 2-2 in games against Lester too.
I agree they need a pitcher and someone who can give them a real chance in one outing. That guy could be Cole or Taillon too.
Well, he has to be better at getting their guys out than the other guy is at getting yours. It's like quartebacks in that regards I suppose. Quarterbacks don't directly face off either but teams without really good ones rarely win.
What about the lineup?
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
What about the lineup?
4C716F626D676C4E6671606667030 wrote: So then you're trading Polanco, Glasnow and probably Meadows for Sale - how does that make the Pirates better?
You don't include Meadows in that deal. Polanco and Glasnow are the talent equivalent of Moncada and Kopech. The Pirates can match or exceed the talent of Class A level prospects Basabe and Diaz easily enough with Brault +.
As for making the Pirates better, obtaining a true ace to the starting staff is unquestionably the biggest need we have. With the Bucs facing what looks to be a long spell of competing almost exclusively for a Wild Card and not a Division Championship having an ace greatly increases the chances of advancing from the play-in game to a series. No other addition offers that kind of boost.
I really doubt that the White Sox agree that Glasnow/Polanco = Moncado/Kopech. It's a subjective assessment, so I'm not saying you can't make that case, but I am saying that the White Sox wouldn't agree with your case and would have declined the offer.
Well, we'll never know which of us is correct. As far as I know the Pirates were not reported to be in on Sale. For a team that could significantly increase their chances of winning a championship by acquiring an ace starting pitcher that they could actually afford to pay, and not make a substantial effort to do so is what is so disconcerting. To me it shows a kind of intractable organizational thinking and an aversion to risk regardless of potential reward. It appears they'll only go outside the box in their thinking to save money, not to win a championship.
You don't include Meadows in that deal. Polanco and Glasnow are the talent equivalent of Moncada and Kopech. The Pirates can match or exceed the talent of Class A level prospects Basabe and Diaz easily enough with Brault +.
As for making the Pirates better, obtaining a true ace to the starting staff is unquestionably the biggest need we have. With the Bucs facing what looks to be a long spell of competing almost exclusively for a Wild Card and not a Division Championship having an ace greatly increases the chances of advancing from the play-in game to a series. No other addition offers that kind of boost.
I really doubt that the White Sox agree that Glasnow/Polanco = Moncado/Kopech. It's a subjective assessment, so I'm not saying you can't make that case, but I am saying that the White Sox wouldn't agree with your case and would have declined the offer.
Well, we'll never know which of us is correct. As far as I know the Pirates were not reported to be in on Sale. For a team that could significantly increase their chances of winning a championship by acquiring an ace starting pitcher that they could actually afford to pay, and not make a substantial effort to do so is what is so disconcerting. To me it shows a kind of intractable organizational thinking and an aversion to risk regardless of potential reward. It appears they'll only go outside the box in their thinking to save money, not to win a championship.
-
Bobster21
What about the lineup?
3A31393530312A6F691E273F363131703D315E0 wrote: People look at pitching match ups too much in my opinion. The pitchers got to get out the other teams' hitters. They don't have to be better than their opposing pitcher.
The Pirates have rocked many top pitchers over the years. In 2016, the Pirates rocked Kershaw and won the game 11-2. The Pirates faced Arrieta six times and rocked him three of those times. The Pirates were 2-2 in games against Lester too.
I agree they need a pitcher and someone who can give them a real chance in one outing. That guy could be Cole or Taillon too.
A valid point but only true to an extent. As evidence I offer Steve Carlton and the 1972 Phillies. The Phillies won a pathetic 59 games that year. Carlton won 27 of those 59. Offensively, the Phillies were awful. They were 11th of the 12 NL teams in runs scored. They were 9th in BA and SLG and 11th in OBP. Which means that Carlton was almost always having to shut down a better offensive lineup than his opposing pitcher. But he had the ability to do exactly that. So even if the Pirates have a stronger lineup than many opponenents, it can be negated by superior opponent pitching.
The Pirates have rocked many top pitchers over the years. In 2016, the Pirates rocked Kershaw and won the game 11-2. The Pirates faced Arrieta six times and rocked him three of those times. The Pirates were 2-2 in games against Lester too.
I agree they need a pitcher and someone who can give them a real chance in one outing. That guy could be Cole or Taillon too.
A valid point but only true to an extent. As evidence I offer Steve Carlton and the 1972 Phillies. The Phillies won a pathetic 59 games that year. Carlton won 27 of those 59. Offensively, the Phillies were awful. They were 11th of the 12 NL teams in runs scored. They were 9th in BA and SLG and 11th in OBP. Which means that Carlton was almost always having to shut down a better offensive lineup than his opposing pitcher. But he had the ability to do exactly that. So even if the Pirates have a stronger lineup than many opponenents, it can be negated by superior opponent pitching.
-
OrlandoMerced
What about the lineup?
Yes, if the White Sox were to have accepted Glasnow and Polanco as the centerpiece of a deal for Sale, then yes, the Pirates are dumb/cheap/inept, all sorts of things. Basing this solely on the report of what the Nats offered, I find it hard to believe that the White Sox and Pirates would have agreed to a package that the WS would have preferred over Moncado and Kopech. I have a feeling that premium the Red Sox paid for Moncado and him being the #1 prospect in baseball made the perceived value of that Red Sox package higher than it actually is, and also hard to beat. Complaining about their lack of effort on Sale is just axe grinding.
What about the lineup?
Questioning their effort concerning obtaining Sale is part of being a fan. Whether it's 'axe grinding' as you suggest depends entirely upon accepting your admittedly subjective assumptions and player evaluations with which I happen to disagree.
What about the lineup?
122F313C33393210382F3E38395D0 wrote: Yes, if the White Sox were to have accepted Glasnow and Polanco as the centerpiece of a deal for Sale, then yes, the Pirates are dumb/cheap/inept, all sorts of things. Basing this solely on the report of what the Nats offered, I find it hard to believe that the White Sox and Pirates would have agreed to a package that the WS would have preferred over Moncado and Kopech. I have a feeling that premium the Red Sox paid for Moncado and him being the #1 prospect in baseball made the perceived value of that Red Sox package higher than it actually is, and also hard to beat. Complaining about their lack of effort on Sale is just axe grinding.
I look at Sale as an example of what the Bucs could try to do. It doesn't have to be go for Sale but he is the good track record low price type of pitcher that would help the Pirates rotation as is Quintana. Others have mentioned one of the Cleveland starters.
I look at Sale as an example of what the Bucs could try to do. It doesn't have to be go for Sale but he is the good track record low price type of pitcher that would help the Pirates rotation as is Quintana. Others have mentioned one of the Cleveland starters.
-
rucker59@gmail.com
What about the lineup?
416766716777040 wrote: Yes, if the White Sox were to have accepted Glasnow and Polanco as the centerpiece of a deal for Sale, then yes, the Pirates are dumb/cheap/inept, all sorts of things. Basing this solely on the report of what the Nats offered, I find it hard to believe that the White Sox and Pirates would have agreed to a package that the WS would have preferred over Moncado and Kopech. I have a feeling that premium the Red Sox paid for Moncado and him being the #1 prospect in baseball made the perceived value of that Red Sox package higher than it actually is, and also hard to beat. Complaining about their lack of effort on Sale is just axe grinding.
I look at Sale as an example of what the Bucs could try to do. It doesn't have to be go for Sale but he is the good track record low price type of pitcher that would help the Pirates rotation as is Quintana. Others have mentioned one of the Cleveland starters.
Anybody got any idea why the Nats or Red Sox would even be interested in Sale? Aren't they good enough already....
I look at Sale as an example of what the Bucs could try to do. It doesn't have to be go for Sale but he is the good track record low price type of pitcher that would help the Pirates rotation as is Quintana. Others have mentioned one of the Cleveland starters.
Anybody got any idea why the Nats or Red Sox would even be interested in Sale? Aren't they good enough already....
-
OrlandoMerced
What about the lineup?
4F69687F69790A0 wrote:
I look at Sale as an example of what the Bucs could try to do. It doesn't have to be go for Sale but he is the good track record low price type of pitcher that would help the Pirates rotation as is Quintana. Others have mentioned one of the Cleveland starters.
Not trying to be contrarian here, but the Indians had a three man rotation in the WS, I'm pretty sure SP depth is the last thing they'd look to trade this offseason. I definitely saw Quintana as a logical target, up until that Eaton trade. That return Chicago got from Washington was insane and might have skewed their internal compass for judging reasonable packages.
I think the best thing for the Pirates right now is to try and find some stop gap SP's to get them through the first part of the season. NH has shown the last two trade deadlines that he knows which pitchers to target midseason (Happ and Nova). I think the prospect cost for 2017 contributions are too high right now, I assume the Rays are answering every call from NH with "Glasnow and Meadows", or even worse, they might be asking for Bell or Taillon.
I look at Sale as an example of what the Bucs could try to do. It doesn't have to be go for Sale but he is the good track record low price type of pitcher that would help the Pirates rotation as is Quintana. Others have mentioned one of the Cleveland starters.
Not trying to be contrarian here, but the Indians had a three man rotation in the WS, I'm pretty sure SP depth is the last thing they'd look to trade this offseason. I definitely saw Quintana as a logical target, up until that Eaton trade. That return Chicago got from Washington was insane and might have skewed their internal compass for judging reasonable packages.
I think the best thing for the Pirates right now is to try and find some stop gap SP's to get them through the first part of the season. NH has shown the last two trade deadlines that he knows which pitchers to target midseason (Happ and Nova). I think the prospect cost for 2017 contributions are too high right now, I assume the Rays are answering every call from NH with "Glasnow and Meadows", or even worse, they might be asking for Bell or Taillon.
What about the lineup?
The Rays are right up there on my list of teams to avoid when it comes to trading. They are always after the top-most dollar in a deal (although I suppose they all are).
Pittsburgh's problem last year was that they planned for young pitchers from AAA to be ready mid-year, so they had to look for guys to slot in for part year. The guys who profile for that are either really marginal or want a better set-up (I am talking now of what NH would actually do, not some dream of what he would do if things were different and they had money to spend and a willingness to spend it). That hurt them getting pitchers last year and from what I can see it's hurting them again this year. Of course this year there just weren't many good free-agent pitchers out there.
Pittsburgh's problem last year was that they planned for young pitchers from AAA to be ready mid-year, so they had to look for guys to slot in for part year. The guys who profile for that are either really marginal or want a better set-up (I am talking now of what NH would actually do, not some dream of what he would do if things were different and they had money to spend and a willingness to spend it). That hurt them getting pitchers last year and from what I can see it's hurting them again this year. Of course this year there just weren't many good free-agent pitchers out there.
-
OrlandoMerced
What about the lineup?
So clearly last year they failed to assemble an adequate pitching staff. Going into the season, they had Liriano and Cole as their 1-2, then a collection of Niese, Locke, Nicasio and Vogelsong with a AAA rotation of Glasnow, Taillon, Kuhl, Williams and Brault.
Nicasio was miscast as a starter, Niese was a scouting error, Locke was the usual Locke, but I think Vogelsong was a good signing. He predictably fell off a cliff, but had the other players done anything, he could have been removed when he reached that cliff instead of being sent out there and watch his ERA move from 3 to 5 in a handful of appearances.
So for 2017, they have Taillon, Cole and Kuhl, and presumably a couple of warm bodies that they'll bring in. Then the AAA rotation of Glasnow, Kingham, Brault, Williams (and that one guy who had a good year last year). I only see the need for one sure thing starter, there is a good chance that one of those AAA guys is able to break through and pencil himself into the ML rotation.
Nicasio was miscast as a starter, Niese was a scouting error, Locke was the usual Locke, but I think Vogelsong was a good signing. He predictably fell off a cliff, but had the other players done anything, he could have been removed when he reached that cliff instead of being sent out there and watch his ERA move from 3 to 5 in a handful of appearances.
So for 2017, they have Taillon, Cole and Kuhl, and presumably a couple of warm bodies that they'll bring in. Then the AAA rotation of Glasnow, Kingham, Brault, Williams (and that one guy who had a good year last year). I only see the need for one sure thing starter, there is a good chance that one of those AAA guys is able to break through and pencil himself into the ML rotation.