666D65696C6D763335427B636A6D6D2C616D020 wrote: My point is that no team would survive when their top two starters are terrible or have down years. Liriano was terrible. Cole had his worst year. Once that happened, it didn't matter who they had at sixth or seventh in their plans. Those guys would have never got a start over Cole or Liriano.
Are you surprised how the Mets, Cubs, Royals and Marlins are doing right now? I am not. They aren't getting the same production they got last year from their top pitchers.
The Pirates depth wasn't very good in 2016, but the poop runs down hill.
I agree with that, but like I said that doesn't excuse the team from not having better options. They could not have planned for all of those things going wrong but should have had at least one backup plan. It would not have cost too much; and if even an idiot like me could see it coming, certainly the team management could.
Is this season over yet???
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Is this season over yet???
Who would have been the better option than Gerrit Cole that was in the Pirates bullpen or in the minors? Or a cheap Free Agent? Cole was not going to be benched, moved to the bullpen, or sent down. No way was that ever in anyone's mind.
When Cole, along with Liriano, struggle and don't perform, the team is done. It had nothing to do with Trevor Williams, Jeff Locke, or Ryan Vogelsong.
When Cole, along with Liriano, struggle and don't perform, the team is done. It had nothing to do with Trevor Williams, Jeff Locke, or Ryan Vogelsong.
Is this season over yet???
There are unforeseen issues and issues teams should anticipate.
Last year I don't think anyone anticipated Liriano falling apart or Cole only performing to a slightly above average level (and yes, he was slightly above average despite what some may tell you). But anyone paying attention could have seen the rest of the rotation was tenuous at best and had a good chance of performing poorly with Locke, Nicasio, Neise and Vogelsong. It was a poorly constructed plan and apparently did not have a fallback solution should it go bad. And it did. That's on the Pirate front office.
This year I don't think anyone expected Marte to miss half the season or Kang to miss possibly the entire season. But once again, the back of the rotation was fragile, with no real contingency. Guess what? It's failing and failing big time. Currently Glasnow and Kuhl have a combined ERA of 6.86 and there's no other viable options to replace either. Even with Marte and Kang, the Pirates would not be competing with that level of production from the BOR. That's on the Pirate front office.
Last year I don't think anyone anticipated Liriano falling apart or Cole only performing to a slightly above average level (and yes, he was slightly above average despite what some may tell you). But anyone paying attention could have seen the rest of the rotation was tenuous at best and had a good chance of performing poorly with Locke, Nicasio, Neise and Vogelsong. It was a poorly constructed plan and apparently did not have a fallback solution should it go bad. And it did. That's on the Pirate front office.
This year I don't think anyone expected Marte to miss half the season or Kang to miss possibly the entire season. But once again, the back of the rotation was fragile, with no real contingency. Guess what? It's failing and failing big time. Currently Glasnow and Kuhl have a combined ERA of 6.86 and there's no other viable options to replace either. Even with Marte and Kang, the Pirates would not be competing with that level of production from the BOR. That's on the Pirate front office.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Is this season over yet???
I do disagree.
Marte and Kang would make a huge difference. Frazier and Freese injuries are unfortunate. Has to be tough to lose four guys the first month of the season.
Taillon is a big blow too. The front three starters were carrying this team. Kuhl and Glasnow have been really bad, overall. Kuhl was good at the start of the season and Glasnow is getting better. I feel the top three could carry the bottom two with a full line up. I don't think they would have one of the worst records in baseball with Marte and Kang.
Marte and Kang would make a huge difference. Frazier and Freese injuries are unfortunate. Has to be tough to lose four guys the first month of the season.
Taillon is a big blow too. The front three starters were carrying this team. Kuhl and Glasnow have been really bad, overall. Kuhl was good at the start of the season and Glasnow is getting better. I feel the top three could carry the bottom two with a full line up. I don't think they would have one of the worst records in baseball with Marte and Kang.
Is this season over yet???
4D6D7E63620C0 wrote: There are unforeseen issues and issues teams should anticipate.
Last year I don't think anyone anticipated Liriano falling apart or Cole only performing to a slightly above average level (and yes, he was slightly above average despite what some may tell you). But anyone paying attention could have seen the rest of the rotation was tenuous at best and had a good chance of performing poorly with Locke, Nicasio, Neise and Vogelsong. It was a poorly constructed plan and apparently did not have a fallback solution should it go bad. And it did. That's on the Pirate front office.
This year I don't think anyone expected Marte to miss half the season or Kang to miss possibly the entire season. But once again, the back of the rotation was fragile, with no real contingency. Guess what? It's failing and failing big time. Currently Glasnow and Kuhl have a combined ERA of 6.86 and there's no other viable options to replace either. Even with Marte and Kang, the Pirates would not be competing with that level of production from the BOR. That's on the Pirate front office.
to me this just points out that you need to go for it when you have a chance. Deciding to pass on a year because next year is going to be better and two years from now even better is unlikely to happen.
Last year I don't think anyone anticipated Liriano falling apart or Cole only performing to a slightly above average level (and yes, he was slightly above average despite what some may tell you). But anyone paying attention could have seen the rest of the rotation was tenuous at best and had a good chance of performing poorly with Locke, Nicasio, Neise and Vogelsong. It was a poorly constructed plan and apparently did not have a fallback solution should it go bad. And it did. That's on the Pirate front office.
This year I don't think anyone expected Marte to miss half the season or Kang to miss possibly the entire season. But once again, the back of the rotation was fragile, with no real contingency. Guess what? It's failing and failing big time. Currently Glasnow and Kuhl have a combined ERA of 6.86 and there's no other viable options to replace either. Even with Marte and Kang, the Pirates would not be competing with that level of production from the BOR. That's on the Pirate front office.
to me this just points out that you need to go for it when you have a chance. Deciding to pass on a year because next year is going to be better and two years from now even better is unlikely to happen.
Is this season over yet???
062021362030430 wrote:
to me this just points out that you need to go for it when you have a chance.
I totally agree. But Bob Nutting's goal is not winning championships, so this organization will never, "go for it."
Nutting's goal is profit. To reach his goal, the team needs to be competitive...with some sort of a chance to make the postseason.
"Going for it," means that you will give up multiple players/prospects (some of which will have excellent pedigrees) for established stars and/or invest in the team in the offseason to increase your chances at winning a championship now.
The risk, of course, is that by giving up these prospects you may put the team in a position to not be as competitive in the future, while you don't have any guarantee that you'll win a championship.
Neal Huntington has REPEATEDLY used this as his reason for not trading high end prospects, so this is not something I'm speculating on.
Their goal is to be a competitive team for as many seasons as possible. If they win a championship I'm quite certain that Nutting, Coonelly and Huntington would be absolutely thrilled. But the fact that they haven't won one and that they aren't anywhere close to winning one doesn't bother any of them in the least and they're not going to change how they conduct business.
to me this just points out that you need to go for it when you have a chance.
I totally agree. But Bob Nutting's goal is not winning championships, so this organization will never, "go for it."
Nutting's goal is profit. To reach his goal, the team needs to be competitive...with some sort of a chance to make the postseason.
"Going for it," means that you will give up multiple players/prospects (some of which will have excellent pedigrees) for established stars and/or invest in the team in the offseason to increase your chances at winning a championship now.
The risk, of course, is that by giving up these prospects you may put the team in a position to not be as competitive in the future, while you don't have any guarantee that you'll win a championship.
Neal Huntington has REPEATEDLY used this as his reason for not trading high end prospects, so this is not something I'm speculating on.
Their goal is to be a competitive team for as many seasons as possible. If they win a championship I'm quite certain that Nutting, Coonelly and Huntington would be absolutely thrilled. But the fact that they haven't won one and that they aren't anywhere close to winning one doesn't bother any of them in the least and they're not going to change how they conduct business.