4348404C4948531610675E464F4848094448270 wrote: They need a starting pitcher. They said they are in talks with a bunch of them. Why don't people believe they won't sign someone? They have signed or traded for one every year going back to 2012.
Liriano is not the answer. People defend Liriano because he was dumped. He was awful last year. He needed the change to a different league. Liriano was a huge reason why the 2016 team lost.
I think the plan is pretty simple. We have seen it before. They will sign/trade for a starter. Then come Super 2 they will bring up a ready Glasnow. The weakest starter will be replaced or an injury will open up a spot. Then they will look at the trade deadline to see who they can get to help even more.
This plan has worked three out of the last four seasons. But for some reason, people are dwelling on the one season it didn't work? And people are upset that the biggest failure when it didn't work is no longer a Pirate.
Because we want a good starter, one that will make impact - not some lousy reclamation project that is on the cheap. I think most now are skeptical that we can get a good meaningful arm. The plan sucked last year. I will be surprised if its good this year.
What about the lineup?
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
Roberto218
- Posts: 257
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 5:55 pm
What about the lineup?
The key is to keep a successful turnaround...like Happ, or Nova
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
What about the lineup?
1E0E0F382E2E224D0 wrote: They need a starting pitcher. They said they are in talks with a bunch of them. Why don't people believe they won't sign someone? They have signed or traded for one every year going back to 2012.
Liriano is not the answer. People defend Liriano because he was dumped. He was awful last year. He needed the change to a different league. Liriano was a huge reason why the 2016 team lost.
I think the plan is pretty simple. We have seen it before. They will sign/trade for a starter. Then come Super 2 they will bring up a ready Glasnow. The weakest starter will be replaced or an injury will open up a spot. Then they will look at the trade deadline to see who they can get to help even more.
This plan has worked three out of the last four seasons. But for some reason, people are dwelling on the one season it didn't work? And people are upset that the biggest failure when it didn't work is no longer a Pirate.
Because we want a good starter, one that will make impact - not some lousy reclamation project that is on the cheap. I think most now are skeptical that we can get a good meaningful arm. The plan sucked last year. I will be surprised if its good this year.
That's my question. This plan has worked three out of four years, but you (and others) will be surprised if it works again? Why?
I want a top starter too. By I also give Huntington the benefit of the doubt he will bring in someone good. If the plan keeps failing, then it would be a problem. But we aren't there yet. Three out of four is a great ratio.
Liriano is not the answer. People defend Liriano because he was dumped. He was awful last year. He needed the change to a different league. Liriano was a huge reason why the 2016 team lost.
I think the plan is pretty simple. We have seen it before. They will sign/trade for a starter. Then come Super 2 they will bring up a ready Glasnow. The weakest starter will be replaced or an injury will open up a spot. Then they will look at the trade deadline to see who they can get to help even more.
This plan has worked three out of the last four seasons. But for some reason, people are dwelling on the one season it didn't work? And people are upset that the biggest failure when it didn't work is no longer a Pirate.
Because we want a good starter, one that will make impact - not some lousy reclamation project that is on the cheap. I think most now are skeptical that we can get a good meaningful arm. The plan sucked last year. I will be surprised if its good this year.
That's my question. This plan has worked three out of four years, but you (and others) will be surprised if it works again? Why?
I want a top starter too. By I also give Huntington the benefit of the doubt he will bring in someone good. If the plan keeps failing, then it would be a problem. But we aren't there yet. Three out of four is a great ratio.
-
rucker59@gmail.com
What about the lineup?
040F070B0E0F145157201901080F0F4E030F600 wrote: They need a starting pitcher. They said they are in talks with a bunch of them. Why don't people believe they won't sign someone? They have signed or traded for one every year going back to 2012.
Liriano is not the answer. People defend Liriano because he was dumped. He was awful last year. He needed the change to a different league. Liriano was a huge reason why the 2016 team lost.
I think the plan is pretty simple. We have seen it before. They will sign/trade for a starter. Then come Super 2 they will bring up a ready Glasnow. The weakest starter will be replaced or an injury will open up a spot. Then they will look at the trade deadline to see who they can get to help even more.
This plan has worked three out of the last four seasons. But for some reason, people are dwelling on the one season it didn't work? And people are upset that the biggest failure when it didn't work is no longer a Pirate.
Because we want a good starter, one that will make impact - not some lousy reclamation project that is on the cheap. I think most now are skeptical that we can get a good meaningful arm. The plan sucked last year. I will be surprised if its good this year.
That's my question. This plan has worked three out of four years, but you (and others) will be surprised if it works again? Why?
I want a top starter too. By I also give Huntington the benefit of the doubt he will bring in someone good. If the plan keeps failing, then it would be a problem. But we aren't there yet. Three out of four is a great ratio.
So what's the plan, that worked 3 out of 4 years, and is still in process this year?
Liriano is not the answer. People defend Liriano because he was dumped. He was awful last year. He needed the change to a different league. Liriano was a huge reason why the 2016 team lost.
I think the plan is pretty simple. We have seen it before. They will sign/trade for a starter. Then come Super 2 they will bring up a ready Glasnow. The weakest starter will be replaced or an injury will open up a spot. Then they will look at the trade deadline to see who they can get to help even more.
This plan has worked three out of the last four seasons. But for some reason, people are dwelling on the one season it didn't work? And people are upset that the biggest failure when it didn't work is no longer a Pirate.
Because we want a good starter, one that will make impact - not some lousy reclamation project that is on the cheap. I think most now are skeptical that we can get a good meaningful arm. The plan sucked last year. I will be surprised if its good this year.
That's my question. This plan has worked three out of four years, but you (and others) will be surprised if it works again? Why?
I want a top starter too. By I also give Huntington the benefit of the doubt he will bring in someone good. If the plan keeps failing, then it would be a problem. But we aren't there yet. Three out of four is a great ratio.
So what's the plan, that worked 3 out of 4 years, and is still in process this year?
-
rucker59@gmail.com
What about the lineup?
063B363126203B66656C540 wrote: The key is to keep a successful turnaround...like Happ, or Nova
Or SRod or Joyce.
They did keep Frankie, but that contract showed just now skittish this FO is with anything representing "big" money - trouble comes and they just bail out ASAP regardless of cost (or lost opportunity).
Or SRod or Joyce.
They did keep Frankie, but that contract showed just now skittish this FO is with anything representing "big" money - trouble comes and they just bail out ASAP regardless of cost (or lost opportunity).
-
OrlandoMerced
What about the lineup?
2720363E3027606C153238343C397B363A38550 wrote:
So what's the plan, that worked 3 out of 4 years, and is still in process this year?
To win ML games without competing for high end FA contracts.
Has it really come full circle to the point where the FO is getting attacked for not keeping SeanRod?
I definitely agree that payroll isn't growing at the rate it should. They needed to be more aggressive last year in filling out the rotation, but they were also coming off a very successful 2015 where they were able to derive pitching value without significant investment. So with the power of hindsight, not making a stronger play for Happ was a mistake, but with the power of context (Happ was basically worthless just months before that contract, they didn't think they needed to make the investment to sure up the pitching staff and this is of course before Happ was great in Toronto).
But again, the payroll show be growing faster, but the FA world is just a different animal, the rest of the payrolls in MLB are also growing, and teams are throwing money at players that provide limited returns (like Ian Kennedy). I guess this is where I disagree with people, I would rather make no FA signing than a bad expensive FA signing. Roster flexibility is a valuable commodity, why do you think the Yankees have been irrelevant for so long? They have all the money in the world but get stuck playing aging veterans because guys get locked into playing time because of their salaries. That was the main reason they dumped Liriano, they didn't want to pencil him into the 2017 rotation and have no idea what he was going to provide.
Look at what NH just did, back end bullpen depth is really valuable, and he bolstered that part of the club for a bargain price. They know what investments will actually make the team better
So what's the plan, that worked 3 out of 4 years, and is still in process this year?
To win ML games without competing for high end FA contracts.
Has it really come full circle to the point where the FO is getting attacked for not keeping SeanRod?
I definitely agree that payroll isn't growing at the rate it should. They needed to be more aggressive last year in filling out the rotation, but they were also coming off a very successful 2015 where they were able to derive pitching value without significant investment. So with the power of hindsight, not making a stronger play for Happ was a mistake, but with the power of context (Happ was basically worthless just months before that contract, they didn't think they needed to make the investment to sure up the pitching staff and this is of course before Happ was great in Toronto).
But again, the payroll show be growing faster, but the FA world is just a different animal, the rest of the payrolls in MLB are also growing, and teams are throwing money at players that provide limited returns (like Ian Kennedy). I guess this is where I disagree with people, I would rather make no FA signing than a bad expensive FA signing. Roster flexibility is a valuable commodity, why do you think the Yankees have been irrelevant for so long? They have all the money in the world but get stuck playing aging veterans because guys get locked into playing time because of their salaries. That was the main reason they dumped Liriano, they didn't want to pencil him into the 2017 rotation and have no idea what he was going to provide.
Look at what NH just did, back end bullpen depth is really valuable, and he bolstered that part of the club for a bargain price. They know what investments will actually make the team better
What about the lineup?
18253B363933381A3225343233570 wrote:
So what's the plan, that worked 3 out of 4 years, and is still in process this year?
To win ML games without competing for high end FA contracts.
Has it really come full circle to the point where the FO is getting attacked for not keeping SeanRod?
I definitely agree that payroll isn't growing at the rate it should. They needed to be more aggressive last year in filling out the rotation, but they were also coming off a very successful 2015 where they were able to derive pitching value without significant investment. So with the power of hindsight, not making a stronger play for Happ was a mistake, but with the power of context (Happ was basically worthless just months before that contract, they didn't think they needed to make the investment to sure up the pitching staff and this is of course before Happ was great in Toronto).
But again, the payroll show be growing faster, but the FA world is just a different animal, the rest of the payrolls in MLB are also growing, and teams are throwing money at players that provide limited returns (like Ian Kennedy). I guess this is where I disagree with people, I would rather make no FA signing than a bad expensive FA signing. Roster flexibility is a valuable commodity, why do you think the Yankees have been irrelevant for so long? They have all the money in the world but get stuck playing aging veterans because guys get locked into playing time because of their salaries. That was the main reason they dumped Liriano, they didn't want to pencil him into the 2017 rotation and have no idea what he was going to provide.
Look at what NH just did, back end bullpen depth is really valuable, and he bolstered that part of the club for a bargain price. They know what investments will actually make the team better
I find myself in agreement with the idea that the FA starting pitching market is something that the Pirates should not get involved in because of the inflationary salaries at that position, the mediocre talent available and the risk for a spendthrift team such as the Pirates becoming burdened with a contract that might not allow them sufficient funds to address other needs.
However if they really know what investments will actually make the team better it seems that they would have made an effort to improve their starting pitching via trade. Chris Sale was available with three years remaining on a contract that by starting pitching standards was a bargain. An investment in Sale with prospects, MLB talent or both would have made the Pirates significantly better. Their apparent lack of interest in Sale makes me question either their knowledge about what would make the team better or their priority of interest in improving the team versus other considerations.
So what's the plan, that worked 3 out of 4 years, and is still in process this year?
To win ML games without competing for high end FA contracts.
Has it really come full circle to the point where the FO is getting attacked for not keeping SeanRod?
I definitely agree that payroll isn't growing at the rate it should. They needed to be more aggressive last year in filling out the rotation, but they were also coming off a very successful 2015 where they were able to derive pitching value without significant investment. So with the power of hindsight, not making a stronger play for Happ was a mistake, but with the power of context (Happ was basically worthless just months before that contract, they didn't think they needed to make the investment to sure up the pitching staff and this is of course before Happ was great in Toronto).
But again, the payroll show be growing faster, but the FA world is just a different animal, the rest of the payrolls in MLB are also growing, and teams are throwing money at players that provide limited returns (like Ian Kennedy). I guess this is where I disagree with people, I would rather make no FA signing than a bad expensive FA signing. Roster flexibility is a valuable commodity, why do you think the Yankees have been irrelevant for so long? They have all the money in the world but get stuck playing aging veterans because guys get locked into playing time because of their salaries. That was the main reason they dumped Liriano, they didn't want to pencil him into the 2017 rotation and have no idea what he was going to provide.
Look at what NH just did, back end bullpen depth is really valuable, and he bolstered that part of the club for a bargain price. They know what investments will actually make the team better
I find myself in agreement with the idea that the FA starting pitching market is something that the Pirates should not get involved in because of the inflationary salaries at that position, the mediocre talent available and the risk for a spendthrift team such as the Pirates becoming burdened with a contract that might not allow them sufficient funds to address other needs.
However if they really know what investments will actually make the team better it seems that they would have made an effort to improve their starting pitching via trade. Chris Sale was available with three years remaining on a contract that by starting pitching standards was a bargain. An investment in Sale with prospects, MLB talent or both would have made the Pirates significantly better. Their apparent lack of interest in Sale makes me question either their knowledge about what would make the team better or their priority of interest in improving the team versus other considerations.
-
rucker59@gmail.com
What about the lineup?
7652464E4B270 wrote:
So what's the plan, that worked 3 out of 4 years, and is still in process this year?
To win ML games without competing for high end FA contracts.
Has it really come full circle to the point where the FO is getting attacked for not keeping SeanRod?
I definitely agree that payroll isn't growing at the rate it should. They needed to be more aggressive last year in filling out the rotation, but they were also coming off a very successful 2015 where they were able to derive pitching value without significant investment. So with the power of hindsight, not making a stronger play for Happ was a mistake, but with the power of context (Happ was basically worthless just months before that contract, they didn't think they needed to make the investment to sure up the pitching staff and this is of course before Happ was great in Toronto).
But again, the payroll show be growing faster, but the FA world is just a different animal, the rest of the payrolls in MLB are also growing, and teams are throwing money at players that provide limited returns (like Ian Kennedy). I guess this is where I disagree with people, I would rather make no FA signing than a bad expensive FA signing. Roster flexibility is a valuable commodity, why do you think the Yankees have been irrelevant for so long? They have all the money in the world but get stuck playing aging veterans because guys get locked into playing time because of their salaries. That was the main reason they dumped Liriano, they didn't want to pencil him into the 2017 rotation and have no idea what he was going to provide.
Look at what NH just did, back end bullpen depth is really valuable, and he bolstered that part of the club for a bargain price. They know what investments will actually make the team better
I find myself in agreement with the idea that the FA starting pitching market is something that the Pirates should not get involved in because of the inflationary salaries at that position, the mediocre talent available and the risk for a spendthrift team such as the Pirates becoming burdened with a contract that might not allow them sufficient funds to address other needs.
However if they really know what investments will actually make the team better it seems that they would have made an effort to improve their starting pitching via trade. Chris Sale was available with three years remaining on a contract that by starting pitching standards was a bargain. An investment in Sale with prospects, MLB talent or both would have made the Pirates significantly better. Their apparent lack of interest in Sale makes me question either their knowledge about what would make the team better or their priority of interest in improving the team versus other considerations.
This is pretty much my position as well - generally, there is no way the Pirates should be making big FA signing the center of their strategy. And if their strategy is to win games without free agency signings they're doing a fine job. But if their strategy is to win a World Series there has to be more to their plan to accomplish this goal.
So my real question was meant to be "what is their goal and how do they accomplish that goal"? It's one thing to try and be competitive it's another to be trying to win a penant. What is their plan to win the pennant? Or is the penant still the true goal (I know they'd very much like to win a WS, but that doesn't mean they're truly planning to field a WS team).
So what's the plan, that worked 3 out of 4 years, and is still in process this year?
To win ML games without competing for high end FA contracts.
Has it really come full circle to the point where the FO is getting attacked for not keeping SeanRod?
I definitely agree that payroll isn't growing at the rate it should. They needed to be more aggressive last year in filling out the rotation, but they were also coming off a very successful 2015 where they were able to derive pitching value without significant investment. So with the power of hindsight, not making a stronger play for Happ was a mistake, but with the power of context (Happ was basically worthless just months before that contract, they didn't think they needed to make the investment to sure up the pitching staff and this is of course before Happ was great in Toronto).
But again, the payroll show be growing faster, but the FA world is just a different animal, the rest of the payrolls in MLB are also growing, and teams are throwing money at players that provide limited returns (like Ian Kennedy). I guess this is where I disagree with people, I would rather make no FA signing than a bad expensive FA signing. Roster flexibility is a valuable commodity, why do you think the Yankees have been irrelevant for so long? They have all the money in the world but get stuck playing aging veterans because guys get locked into playing time because of their salaries. That was the main reason they dumped Liriano, they didn't want to pencil him into the 2017 rotation and have no idea what he was going to provide.
Look at what NH just did, back end bullpen depth is really valuable, and he bolstered that part of the club for a bargain price. They know what investments will actually make the team better
I find myself in agreement with the idea that the FA starting pitching market is something that the Pirates should not get involved in because of the inflationary salaries at that position, the mediocre talent available and the risk for a spendthrift team such as the Pirates becoming burdened with a contract that might not allow them sufficient funds to address other needs.
However if they really know what investments will actually make the team better it seems that they would have made an effort to improve their starting pitching via trade. Chris Sale was available with three years remaining on a contract that by starting pitching standards was a bargain. An investment in Sale with prospects, MLB talent or both would have made the Pirates significantly better. Their apparent lack of interest in Sale makes me question either their knowledge about what would make the team better or their priority of interest in improving the team versus other considerations.
This is pretty much my position as well - generally, there is no way the Pirates should be making big FA signing the center of their strategy. And if their strategy is to win games without free agency signings they're doing a fine job. But if their strategy is to win a World Series there has to be more to their plan to accomplish this goal.
So my real question was meant to be "what is their goal and how do they accomplish that goal"? It's one thing to try and be competitive it's another to be trying to win a penant. What is their plan to win the pennant? Or is the penant still the true goal (I know they'd very much like to win a WS, but that doesn't mean they're truly planning to field a WS team).
-
OrlandoMerced
What about the lineup?
I think that the deadline is the right time for the Pirates to use prospects for additions to the major league roster.
The price in prospects for controllable assets is higher in the offseason, that's why the Pirates would want to gauge McCutchen's market now as opposed to in season.
The Pirates would want to make sure that they're actually in contention when moving valuable prospects, there are so many other factors that determine if a team is competitive. They could gotten Sale this year and stunk anyway, White Sox have had Sale for a while and done nothing. If they brought in Sale and McCutchen/Cole are unproductive again, that wouldn't change anything.
I also think that the Pirates need to graduate Meadows and Glasnow before they start dealing prospects. I think teams will tend to just want your best prospects, regardless of how those prospects compare with other teams top prospects. That's how teams like the Jay, Tigers and Royals were able to add talent even after gutting their ML depth. David Price has been traded for packages headlined by Willy Adames and Daniel Norris basically because those were the Tigers/Jays top prospects at teh time.
The price in prospects for controllable assets is higher in the offseason, that's why the Pirates would want to gauge McCutchen's market now as opposed to in season.
The Pirates would want to make sure that they're actually in contention when moving valuable prospects, there are so many other factors that determine if a team is competitive. They could gotten Sale this year and stunk anyway, White Sox have had Sale for a while and done nothing. If they brought in Sale and McCutchen/Cole are unproductive again, that wouldn't change anything.
I also think that the Pirates need to graduate Meadows and Glasnow before they start dealing prospects. I think teams will tend to just want your best prospects, regardless of how those prospects compare with other teams top prospects. That's how teams like the Jay, Tigers and Royals were able to add talent even after gutting their ML depth. David Price has been traded for packages headlined by Willy Adames and Daniel Norris basically because those were the Tigers/Jays top prospects at teh time.
What about the lineup?
122F313C33393210382F3E38395D0 wrote: I think that the deadline is the right time for the Pirates to use prospects for additions to the major league roster.
The price in prospects for controllable assets is higher in the offseason, that's why the Pirates would want to gauge McCutchen's market now as opposed to in season.
The Pirates would want to make sure that they're actually in contention when moving valuable prospects, there are so many other factors that determine if a team is competitive. They could gotten Sale this year and stunk anyway, White Sox have had Sale for a while and done nothing. If they brought in Sale and McCutchen/Cole are unproductive again, that wouldn't change anything.
I also think that the Pirates need to graduate Meadows and Glasnow before they start dealing prospects. I think teams will tend to just want your best prospects, regardless of how those prospects compare with other teams top prospects. That's how teams like the Jay, Tigers and Royals were able to add talent even after gutting their ML depth. David Price has been traded for packages headlined by Willy Adames and Daniel Norris basically because those were the Tigers/Jays top prospects at teh time.
While I see the logic behind the strategy you have described I would counter that with the idea that there are times when a team can't necessarily wait for the ideal time to make a trade.
Sure, it would be great to know at the trade deadline that the Pirates are in contention for a playoff spot so they can be certain that making a trade to improve the team is the right move. However, sometimes the right piece to add to improve the team isn't available at the trade deadline but was available in the preceding off season (Chris Sale for instance). To be so risk averse at making a move to improve the team that you have to wait until you're certain that it's the right move isn't really always practical. In fact that kind of timidity can be a cause of stagnation to a franchise. There is a need for a balance between caution and boldness, and between rigid adherence and flexibility in any business.
The price in prospects for controllable assets is higher in the offseason, that's why the Pirates would want to gauge McCutchen's market now as opposed to in season.
The Pirates would want to make sure that they're actually in contention when moving valuable prospects, there are so many other factors that determine if a team is competitive. They could gotten Sale this year and stunk anyway, White Sox have had Sale for a while and done nothing. If they brought in Sale and McCutchen/Cole are unproductive again, that wouldn't change anything.
I also think that the Pirates need to graduate Meadows and Glasnow before they start dealing prospects. I think teams will tend to just want your best prospects, regardless of how those prospects compare with other teams top prospects. That's how teams like the Jay, Tigers and Royals were able to add talent even after gutting their ML depth. David Price has been traded for packages headlined by Willy Adames and Daniel Norris basically because those were the Tigers/Jays top prospects at teh time.
While I see the logic behind the strategy you have described I would counter that with the idea that there are times when a team can't necessarily wait for the ideal time to make a trade.
Sure, it would be great to know at the trade deadline that the Pirates are in contention for a playoff spot so they can be certain that making a trade to improve the team is the right move. However, sometimes the right piece to add to improve the team isn't available at the trade deadline but was available in the preceding off season (Chris Sale for instance). To be so risk averse at making a move to improve the team that you have to wait until you're certain that it's the right move isn't really always practical. In fact that kind of timidity can be a cause of stagnation to a franchise. There is a need for a balance between caution and boldness, and between rigid adherence and flexibility in any business.