OnlyBucs

My post # 11...





Oh my aching ass. I can't believe some of you are OK with giving up those 3 guys for a 29 year old P that hasn't been very good for what will be THREE years. Yep , this will be the 3rd consecutive year his ERA will be over 4. This ws a sick in the head deal for a team that will be watching TV when the playoffs start.



This move was made by management to appease some of the fans that are stupid enough to buy this. Rather than spend some money , they elected to appease suckers into buying into this

Post # 21. There are more but this is the last one I'll do . Unfortunately all the Archer lovers were reluctant to bet.







I'm willing to lay some money that Glasnow's stats in 2019 will be close to or better than Archer's. You willing to send like 1K to a moderator ? I'll take 8-5 , so you lay 1600 to win 1000 or 800 to win 500.

In the event you all want to see who liked this trade and who didn't , I'm bumping the thread agin.



One person posted multiple times on how much he hated this. Most rated it OK to good.

Of course this has turned out to be a historically bad trade, but at the time I didn't mind it until Baz was thrown in. I thought Meadows could become something, but Glasnow seemed like AAAA.

4F4B4374627247606F010 wrote: Of course this has turned out to be a historically bad trade, but at the time I didn't mind it until Baz was thrown in. I thought Meadows could become something, but Glasnow seemed like AAAA.


Where you were wrong on Glasnow is it was the organization's failure. Pounding the bottom of the plate with sinking fastballs and little use of sliders , curves was not the way to go. This was not as obvious then as it is now , but many suspected it.

5C5B4A594A1B162F0 wrote: Of course this has turned out to be a historically bad trade, but at the time I didn't mind it until Baz was thrown in. I thought Meadows could become something, but Glasnow seemed like AAAA.


Where you were wrong on Glasnow is it was the organization's failure. Pounding the bottom of the plate with sinking fastballs and little use of sliders , curves was not the way to go. This was not as obvious then as it is now , but many suspected it.




Absolutely. And the worst part of it was, it's not like it took a while to turn him around.

5551596E78685D7A751B0 wrote: Of course this has turned out to be a historically bad trade, but at the time I didn't mind it until Baz was thrown in. I thought Meadows could become something, but Glasnow seemed like AAAA.


Where you were wrong on Glasnow is it was the organization's failure. Pounding the bottom of the plate with sinking fastballs and little use of sliders , curves was not the way to go. This was not as obvious then as it is now , but many suspected it.




Absolutely. And the worst part of it was, it's not like it took a while to turn him around.
just think if this deal hadn't been made NH might still be in charge. Makes me shudder.

1F1B1324322217303F510 wrote: Of course this has turned out to be a historically bad trade, but at the time I didn't mind it until Baz was thrown in. I thought Meadows could become something, but Glasnow seemed like AAAA.


Where you were wrong on Glasnow is it was the organization's failure. Pounding the bottom of the plate with sinking fastballs and little use of sliders , curves was not the way to go. This was not as obvious then as it is now , but many suspected it.




Absolutely. And the worst part of it was, it's not like it took a while to turn him around.




Yes and at the same time Meadows was looking good. So we already knew this was probably going to backfire when the PTBNL was announced 3-4 weeks later. Then it was evident that this one could end up to be an epic blunder.

7E7A7245534376515E300 wrote: Of course this has turned out to be a historically bad trade, but at the time I didn't mind it until Baz was thrown in. I thought Meadows could become something, but Glasnow seemed like AAAA.


Where you were wrong on Glasnow is it was the organization's failure. Pounding the bottom of the plate with sinking fastballs and little use of sliders , curves was not the way to go. This was not as obvious then as it is now , but many suspected it.




Absolutely. And the worst part of it was, it's not like it took a while to turn him around.


I read separate interviews with both Glasnow and Cole and both of them said from the very first meeting they had with their new coaching staff, the presentation about how the team wanted them to pitch just "clicked". Those teams had a plan for them before they even showed up.



It was stuff they never head from the Pirates staff.

62454E6D200 wrote: Of course this has turned out to be a historically bad trade, but at the time I didn't mind it until Baz was thrown in. I thought Meadows could become something, but Glasnow seemed like AAAA.


Where you were wrong on Glasnow is it was the organization's failure. Pounding the bottom of the plate with sinking fastballs and little use of sliders , curves was not the way to go. This was not as obvious then as it is now , but many suspected it.




Absolutely. And the worst part of it was, it's not like it took a while to turn him around.


I read separate interviews with both Glasnow and Cole and both of them said from the very first meeting they had with their new coaching staff, the presentation about how the team wanted them to pitch just "clicked". Those teams had a plan for them before they even showed up.



It was stuff they never head from the Pirates staff.


Cole said the Houston coaches showed him a lot of film that helped and he credited advice he received from Verlander and Keuchel. Glasnow said Tampa told him just to pitch the way he had been successful in the minors. He had always had success working high in the zone but the Pirates insisted all their pitches stay low in the zone. So he had immediate success in Tampa.