5F565E4F413B0 wrote: I have a feeling that the Blue Jays are going to be questioning themselves about some of these recent roster decisions.
Oh sure. They're definitely going to regret picking up 17 million in salary over a year and a half for Liriano, and at the time their #5 and #6 prospects McGuire and Ramirez.
Loosing sleep over that one, I'm sure. He closed out his season so strongly that his 2nd half ERA ended up at 4.09 with a 3k/BB ratio. Over 10 strikeouts per 9.
Come on
I'm sure they'd be much better off with Encarnacion than Liriano and Kendry Morales.
No transaction is made in a vacuum and multi-year commitments have impact on future options.
You seem to think that the only constraint that teams have are financial. If that were the case, why are the Yankees irrelevant going into 2017?
There are payroll constraints, there are 25 man roster constraints, there are 40 man roster constraints, there are playing time constraints at both the major league, and minor league levels.
I was happy when I saw that the Pirates had gotten rid of Liriano last year, it sucked to find out Mcguire and Ramirez were sent off to make it happen. But neither of those guys made the Baseball America or Baseball Prospectus 2017 top 10 list for Toronto. They're both low ceiling prospects that would have progressively lost value as the Pirates held on to them.
I still view Liriano as a liability going into 2017, you can disagree with that. You seem pretty convinced that his 50 innings in Toronto is a better indicator than his disastrous first half with Pittsburgh.
Liriano or Nova?
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Liriano or Nova?
1B3B2835345A0 wrote: unfortunately the game isn't who extracts the best value. I.E. who has the best $ per win ratio. Maybe they should make a trophy for that.
Unfortunately, the game is who wins. Pennants, championships, division titles, etc...
Sometimes, when you're getting 5 million dollar production on a 10 million dollar contract, YOU JUST NEED TO EAT IT and take the production you're "overpaying for" instead of going into dump mode. Maybe you just need to shut down a player or change their role while you eat the contract, in the belief that they will turn it around?
What you don't need to do is "extract great value" from them while they're producing, and then as soon as they have a bad year and underproduce that years salary, dump them. Those aren't baseball decisions, they're money decisions.
sure, it's hurts that awesome cost-win ratio but it wins more baseball games. That's the game.
I obviously agree with this post. Unfortunately it's exactly how the Pirates operate. But what I can't understand is why fans accept and defend this philosophy. We're not talking about going out and signing David a Price or Chapman. But we're talking about some team created metric that claims how much you can or cannot spend on a player based on how much value that player and contract provide. And it's as if there's a large group of fans content with finishing 2nd or even losing as long as the Pirates internal values are always priority number one.
I can only assume dogknot doesn't understand a word I just posted.
33 out of 42 people would rather have Nova than Liriano in this poll. Yet, you keep singling me out.
No one has answered why they wanted Happ so bad considering his past performance prior to the Pirates and using a small sample size. Nova is younger and had better seasons prior to joining the Pirates than Happ. But still no answer?
Let me ask again: Why did people want Happ last year?
Unfortunately, the game is who wins. Pennants, championships, division titles, etc...
Sometimes, when you're getting 5 million dollar production on a 10 million dollar contract, YOU JUST NEED TO EAT IT and take the production you're "overpaying for" instead of going into dump mode. Maybe you just need to shut down a player or change their role while you eat the contract, in the belief that they will turn it around?
What you don't need to do is "extract great value" from them while they're producing, and then as soon as they have a bad year and underproduce that years salary, dump them. Those aren't baseball decisions, they're money decisions.
sure, it's hurts that awesome cost-win ratio but it wins more baseball games. That's the game.
I obviously agree with this post. Unfortunately it's exactly how the Pirates operate. But what I can't understand is why fans accept and defend this philosophy. We're not talking about going out and signing David a Price or Chapman. But we're talking about some team created metric that claims how much you can or cannot spend on a player based on how much value that player and contract provide. And it's as if there's a large group of fans content with finishing 2nd or even losing as long as the Pirates internal values are always priority number one.
I can only assume dogknot doesn't understand a word I just posted.
33 out of 42 people would rather have Nova than Liriano in this poll. Yet, you keep singling me out.
No one has answered why they wanted Happ so bad considering his past performance prior to the Pirates and using a small sample size. Nova is younger and had better seasons prior to joining the Pirates than Happ. But still no answer?
Let me ask again: Why did people want Happ last year?
-
OrlandoMerced
Liriano or Nova?
I think fans wanted Happ back at that price. We were looking at it through the lens that the Pirates should have given Volquez that two year deal the Royals got him for. The thought being that the Pirates' reclamation projects are "fixed" and worth multi year commitments.
But at the same time, the Happ sample size was very small, but the Pirates also needed a starting pitcher for 2016. I think NH even said it in as many words. If he could have done it again, he would have moved Walker for prospects and used that money for Happ instead of Niese.
But that's also with the power of hindsight and Happ's 20 win 2016. It was the wrong decision, but it wasn't a breakdown in the decision making process.
But at the same time, the Happ sample size was very small, but the Pirates also needed a starting pitcher for 2016. I think NH even said it in as many words. If he could have done it again, he would have moved Walker for prospects and used that money for Happ instead of Niese.
But that's also with the power of hindsight and Happ's 20 win 2016. It was the wrong decision, but it wasn't a breakdown in the decision making process.
Liriano or Nova?
This is not a hard decision to me ... Nova. Liriano couldn't go deep in games. He was inconsistent. I think Nova can go deeper and be a more consistent starter.
Liriano or Nova?
6B60686461607B3E384F766E676060216C600F0 wrote: unfortunately the game isn't who extracts the best value. I.E. who has the best $ per win ratio. Maybe they should make a trophy for that.
Unfortunately, the game is who wins. Pennants, championships, division titles, etc...
Sometimes, when you're getting 5 million dollar production on a 10 million dollar contract, YOU JUST NEED TO EAT IT and take the production you're "overpaying for" instead of going into dump mode. Maybe you just need to shut down a player or change their role while you eat the contract, in the belief that they will turn it around?
What you don't need to do is "extract great value" from them while they're producing, and then as soon as they have a bad year and underproduce that years salary, dump them. Those aren't baseball decisions, they're money decisions.
sure, it's hurts that awesome cost-win ratio but it wins more baseball games. That's the game.
I obviously agree with this post. Unfortunately it's exactly how the Pirates operate. But what I can't understand is why fans accept and defend this philosophy. We're not talking about going out and signing David a Price or Chapman. But we're talking about some team created metric that claims how much you can or cannot spend on a player based on how much value that player and contract provide. And it's as if there's a large group of fans content with finishing 2nd or even losing as long as the Pirates internal values are always priority number one.
I can only assume dogknot doesn't understand a word I just posted.
33 out of 42 people would rather have Nova than Liriano in this poll. Yet, you keep singling me out.
No one has answered why they wanted Happ so bad considering his past performance prior to the Pirates and using a small sample size. Nova is younger and had better seasons prior to joining the Pirates than Happ. But still no answer?
Let me ask again: Why did people want Happ last year?
Thank you for proving my point that you didn't understand a single word if my previous post.
It had nothing to do with what the majority of this board wanted between Nova and Liriano. It had nothing to do with the boards' consensus regarding Happ. You're so blinded by your loyalty to this front office and quick to defend them you no longer even read what's posted. Or as I initially stated.....just not capable of understanding.
Unfortunately, the game is who wins. Pennants, championships, division titles, etc...
Sometimes, when you're getting 5 million dollar production on a 10 million dollar contract, YOU JUST NEED TO EAT IT and take the production you're "overpaying for" instead of going into dump mode. Maybe you just need to shut down a player or change their role while you eat the contract, in the belief that they will turn it around?
What you don't need to do is "extract great value" from them while they're producing, and then as soon as they have a bad year and underproduce that years salary, dump them. Those aren't baseball decisions, they're money decisions.
sure, it's hurts that awesome cost-win ratio but it wins more baseball games. That's the game.
I obviously agree with this post. Unfortunately it's exactly how the Pirates operate. But what I can't understand is why fans accept and defend this philosophy. We're not talking about going out and signing David a Price or Chapman. But we're talking about some team created metric that claims how much you can or cannot spend on a player based on how much value that player and contract provide. And it's as if there's a large group of fans content with finishing 2nd or even losing as long as the Pirates internal values are always priority number one.
I can only assume dogknot doesn't understand a word I just posted.
33 out of 42 people would rather have Nova than Liriano in this poll. Yet, you keep singling me out.
No one has answered why they wanted Happ so bad considering his past performance prior to the Pirates and using a small sample size. Nova is younger and had better seasons prior to joining the Pirates than Happ. But still no answer?
Let me ask again: Why did people want Happ last year?
Thank you for proving my point that you didn't understand a single word if my previous post.
It had nothing to do with what the majority of this board wanted between Nova and Liriano. It had nothing to do with the boards' consensus regarding Happ. You're so blinded by your loyalty to this front office and quick to defend them you no longer even read what's posted. Or as I initially stated.....just not capable of understanding.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Liriano or Nova?
No, I understand. I just don't agree. The Pirates signed a top free agent pitcher, but now fans are mad he was so cheap. I have said my opinion many times. I understand the Pirates plan (and they are following exactly what I have said).
This post is about having Nova or Liriano. What you don't understand is that my opinion on this poll is in the majority yet you single me out.
Yes, I do keep asking about Happ and no one is answering that question. People just answer that question with another question. The argument for Happ is the opposite to keep Liriano. Yet, mostly everyone wanted Happ based on his small sample size, but a few don't want Nova. Nova has had a better few years before joining the Pirates than Happ did.
I know what Liriano did for the Pirates. He was great. But he was awful last year and I wouldn't take the chance on him in the future. I wonder why the Giants gave up on Lincecum? Eventually, players lose their skill. Liriano needed a league change, something new.
This post is about having Nova or Liriano. What you don't understand is that my opinion on this poll is in the majority yet you single me out.
Yes, I do keep asking about Happ and no one is answering that question. People just answer that question with another question. The argument for Happ is the opposite to keep Liriano. Yet, mostly everyone wanted Happ based on his small sample size, but a few don't want Nova. Nova has had a better few years before joining the Pirates than Happ did.
I know what Liriano did for the Pirates. He was great. But he was awful last year and I wouldn't take the chance on him in the future. I wonder why the Giants gave up on Lincecum? Eventually, players lose their skill. Liriano needed a league change, something new.
-
Bobster21
Liriano or Nova?
4A41494540415A1F196E574F464141004D412E0 wrote: No, I understand. I just don't agree. The Pirates signed a top free agent pitcher, but now fans are mad he was so cheap. I have said my opinion many times. I understand the Pirates plan (and they are following exactly what I have said).
This post is about having Nova or Liriano. What you don't understand is that my opinion on this poll is in the majority yet you single me out.
Yes, I do keep asking about Happ and no one is answering that question. People just answer that question with another question. The argument for Happ is the opposite to keep Liriano. Yet, mostly everyone wanted Happ based on his small sample size, but a few don't want Nova. Nova has had a better few years before joining the Pirates than Happ did.
I know what Liriano did for the Pirates. He was great. But he was awful last year and I wouldn't take the chance on him in the future. I wonder why the Giants gave up on Lincecum? Eventually, players lose their skill. Liriano needed a league change, something new.
It's a matter of consistency. Throughout his career, Liriano has been consistently inconsistent. The good far outweighed the bad until last year when at age 32 the bad that previously was on display only occasionally became more consistent than the good. Happ became consistently good after working with Searage. The Pirates put a lot of stock in Searage's ability to improve pitchers so there was no reason to believe the consistency Happ showed after being acquired was a SSS fluke, which was proven when he went 20-4 last year. Like Happ, Nova significantly improved after working with Searage (who Nova cited in his decision to re-sign). Maybe, the FO learned that they shouldn't doubt Searage and that when he substantially improves a pitcher, it doesn't suddenly go away. So they let Happ walk but kept Nova.
This post is about having Nova or Liriano. What you don't understand is that my opinion on this poll is in the majority yet you single me out.
Yes, I do keep asking about Happ and no one is answering that question. People just answer that question with another question. The argument for Happ is the opposite to keep Liriano. Yet, mostly everyone wanted Happ based on his small sample size, but a few don't want Nova. Nova has had a better few years before joining the Pirates than Happ did.
I know what Liriano did for the Pirates. He was great. But he was awful last year and I wouldn't take the chance on him in the future. I wonder why the Giants gave up on Lincecum? Eventually, players lose their skill. Liriano needed a league change, something new.
It's a matter of consistency. Throughout his career, Liriano has been consistently inconsistent. The good far outweighed the bad until last year when at age 32 the bad that previously was on display only occasionally became more consistent than the good. Happ became consistently good after working with Searage. The Pirates put a lot of stock in Searage's ability to improve pitchers so there was no reason to believe the consistency Happ showed after being acquired was a SSS fluke, which was proven when he went 20-4 last year. Like Happ, Nova significantly improved after working with Searage (who Nova cited in his decision to re-sign). Maybe, the FO learned that they shouldn't doubt Searage and that when he substantially improves a pitcher, it doesn't suddenly go away. So they let Happ walk but kept Nova.
Liriano or Nova?
725F52434455420201300 wrote: No, I understand. I just don't agree. The Pirates signed a top free agent pitcher, but now fans are mad he was so cheap. I have said my opinion many times. I understand the Pirates plan (and they are following exactly what I have said).
This post is about having Nova or Liriano. What you don't understand is that my opinion on this poll is in the majority yet you single me out.
Yes, I do keep asking about Happ and no one is answering that question. People just answer that question with another question. The argument for Happ is the opposite to keep Liriano. Yet, mostly everyone wanted Happ based on his small sample size, but a few don't want Nova. Nova has had a better few years before joining the Pirates than Happ did.
I know what Liriano did for the Pirates. He was great. But he was awful last year and I wouldn't take the chance on him in the future. I wonder why the Giants gave up on Lincecum? Eventually, players lose their skill. Liriano needed a league change, something new.
It's a matter of consistency. Throughout his career, Liriano has been consistently inconsistent. The good far outweighed the bad until last year when at age 32 the bad that previously was on display only occasionally became more consistent than the good. Happ became consistently good after working with Searage. The Pirates put a lot of stock in Searage's ability to improve pitchers so there was no reason to believe the consistency Happ showed after being acquired was a SSS fluke, which was proven when he went 20-4 last year. Like Happ, Nova significantly improved after working with Searage (who Nova cited in his decision to re-sign). Maybe, the FO learned that they shouldn't doubt Searage and that when he substantially improves a pitcher, it doesn't suddenly go away. So they let Happ walk but kept Nova.
A year ago during free agency, I saw the offer by Toronto for Happ and I said, see you dude. I didn't trust Happ to duplicate what he did with Pittsburgh, or even come close. I hate to use the term fluke, but I thought it was. He proved me wrong this year.
This post is about having Nova or Liriano. What you don't understand is that my opinion on this poll is in the majority yet you single me out.
Yes, I do keep asking about Happ and no one is answering that question. People just answer that question with another question. The argument for Happ is the opposite to keep Liriano. Yet, mostly everyone wanted Happ based on his small sample size, but a few don't want Nova. Nova has had a better few years before joining the Pirates than Happ did.
I know what Liriano did for the Pirates. He was great. But he was awful last year and I wouldn't take the chance on him in the future. I wonder why the Giants gave up on Lincecum? Eventually, players lose their skill. Liriano needed a league change, something new.
It's a matter of consistency. Throughout his career, Liriano has been consistently inconsistent. The good far outweighed the bad until last year when at age 32 the bad that previously was on display only occasionally became more consistent than the good. Happ became consistently good after working with Searage. The Pirates put a lot of stock in Searage's ability to improve pitchers so there was no reason to believe the consistency Happ showed after being acquired was a SSS fluke, which was proven when he went 20-4 last year. Like Happ, Nova significantly improved after working with Searage (who Nova cited in his decision to re-sign). Maybe, the FO learned that they shouldn't doubt Searage and that when he substantially improves a pitcher, it doesn't suddenly go away. So they let Happ walk but kept Nova.
A year ago during free agency, I saw the offer by Toronto for Happ and I said, see you dude. I didn't trust Happ to duplicate what he did with Pittsburgh, or even come close. I hate to use the term fluke, but I thought it was. He proved me wrong this year.
Liriano or Nova?
6D7D7C4B5D5D513E0 wrote: No, I understand. I just don't agree. The Pirates signed a top free agent pitcher, but now fans are mad he was so cheap. I have said my opinion many times. I understand the Pirates plan (and they are following exactly what I have said).
This post is about having Nova or Liriano. What you don't understand is that my opinion on this poll is in the majority yet you single me out.
Yes, I do keep asking about Happ and no one is answering that question. People just answer that question with another question. The argument for Happ is the opposite to keep Liriano. Yet, mostly everyone wanted Happ based on his small sample size, but a few don't want Nova. Nova has had a better few years before joining the Pirates than Happ did.
I know what Liriano did for the Pirates. He was great. But he was awful last year and I wouldn't take the chance on him in the future. I wonder why the Giants gave up on Lincecum? Eventually, players lose their skill. Liriano needed a league change, something new.
It's a matter of consistency. Throughout his career, Liriano has been consistently inconsistent. The good far outweighed the bad until last year when at age 32 the bad that previously was on display only occasionally became more consistent than the good. Happ became consistently good after working with Searage. The Pirates put a lot of stock in Searage's ability to improve pitchers so there was no reason to believe the consistency Happ showed after being acquired was a SSS fluke, which was proven when he went 20-4 last year. Like Happ, Nova significantly improved after working with Searage (who Nova cited in his decision to re-sign). Maybe, the FO learned that they shouldn't doubt Searage and that when he substantially improves a pitcher, it doesn't suddenly go away. So they let Happ walk but kept Nova.
A year ago during free agency, I saw the offer by Toronto for Happ and I said, see you dude. I didn't trust Happ to duplicate what he did with Pittsburgh, or even come close. I hate to use the term fluke, but I thought it was. He proved me wrong this year.
I also thought that the deal Happ got with Toronto was an overpayment. I felt there was enough doubt as to whether he could continue to pitch at the level (or even close to it) he did for the Pirates that it wasn't a reasonable risk given the Pirates tight budget. What I didn't expect was that after dumping Charlie Morton's salary that the big FA signing for the rotation would be Ryan Vogelsong. At the time they signed Vogelsong I reconsidered the Happ signing and felt that it actually was well worth the risk given the resulting alternative of a washed-up 38 year old.
Dog- I don't know of anyone who is mad because Nova signed on the cheap. Maybe his agent, but no Pirate fan in their right mind would be upset by the relatively low cost of the signing.
This post is about having Nova or Liriano. What you don't understand is that my opinion on this poll is in the majority yet you single me out.
Yes, I do keep asking about Happ and no one is answering that question. People just answer that question with another question. The argument for Happ is the opposite to keep Liriano. Yet, mostly everyone wanted Happ based on his small sample size, but a few don't want Nova. Nova has had a better few years before joining the Pirates than Happ did.
I know what Liriano did for the Pirates. He was great. But he was awful last year and I wouldn't take the chance on him in the future. I wonder why the Giants gave up on Lincecum? Eventually, players lose their skill. Liriano needed a league change, something new.
It's a matter of consistency. Throughout his career, Liriano has been consistently inconsistent. The good far outweighed the bad until last year when at age 32 the bad that previously was on display only occasionally became more consistent than the good. Happ became consistently good after working with Searage. The Pirates put a lot of stock in Searage's ability to improve pitchers so there was no reason to believe the consistency Happ showed after being acquired was a SSS fluke, which was proven when he went 20-4 last year. Like Happ, Nova significantly improved after working with Searage (who Nova cited in his decision to re-sign). Maybe, the FO learned that they shouldn't doubt Searage and that when he substantially improves a pitcher, it doesn't suddenly go away. So they let Happ walk but kept Nova.
A year ago during free agency, I saw the offer by Toronto for Happ and I said, see you dude. I didn't trust Happ to duplicate what he did with Pittsburgh, or even come close. I hate to use the term fluke, but I thought it was. He proved me wrong this year.
I also thought that the deal Happ got with Toronto was an overpayment. I felt there was enough doubt as to whether he could continue to pitch at the level (or even close to it) he did for the Pirates that it wasn't a reasonable risk given the Pirates tight budget. What I didn't expect was that after dumping Charlie Morton's salary that the big FA signing for the rotation would be Ryan Vogelsong. At the time they signed Vogelsong I reconsidered the Happ signing and felt that it actually was well worth the risk given the resulting alternative of a washed-up 38 year old.
Dog- I don't know of anyone who is mad because Nova signed on the cheap. Maybe his agent, but no Pirate fan in their right mind would be upset by the relatively low cost of the signing.
Liriano or Nova?
4565766B6A040 wrote:
Thank you for proving my point that you didn't understand a single word if my previous post.
It had nothing to do with what the majority of this board wanted between Nova and Liriano. It had nothing to do with the boards' consensus regarding Happ. You're so blinded by your loyalty to this front office and quick to defend them you no longer even read what's posted. Or as I initially stated.....just not capable of understanding.
Maybe it's just me, but your posts seem to have gradually transitioned from confrontational to borderline hostile towards other mmebers. We're all on the same team here brother.
Thank you for proving my point that you didn't understand a single word if my previous post.
It had nothing to do with what the majority of this board wanted between Nova and Liriano. It had nothing to do with the boards' consensus regarding Happ. You're so blinded by your loyalty to this front office and quick to defend them you no longer even read what's posted. Or as I initially stated.....just not capable of understanding.
Maybe it's just me, but your posts seem to have gradually transitioned from confrontational to borderline hostile towards other mmebers. We're all on the same team here brother.