Has anything really changed
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
Has anything really changed
So some of you may know for the last 10 years or so I have attended Spring Training games and visited Pirate City on numerous occasions. I had made the decision not to renew my Spring Training season tickets this year because I saw little effort by the organization to improve. Then the firings came and I decided to stick around one more year to see how Ben was going to rebuild again for the umpteen time. I thought the Pirates had a chance to be competitive by adding pitching and catching and of course that did not happen. So that leaves us with bringing in young talent who may or may not play in the Major League in three or four years. So the question is " Has anything really changed" .
-
johnfluharty
Has anything really changed
The only thing the previous group ever did was try to build a team that had a chance to be competitive. So far, it looks like this group is willing to go with a group that is not really going to be competitive without a lot of good luck. What hasn't changed is their willingness to be transparent and actually tell the fans what they are planning. If we have a $60M payroll this year does that mean they are banking the extra money to be used with future payrolls? I want to know how much that extra amount is, roughly speaking. I like the idea of trading guys that will be leaving soon for multiple lower-level higher-ceiling players, but I need to know that the extra cash will be banked and will be spent. Right now, I do not know that and I am skeptical, to say the least, that it will happen that way.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3630
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Has anything really changed
I don't think we could possibly know that answer to that yet.
-
Bobster21
Has anything really changed
The strategy has clearly not changed. They will not be shoring up weaknesses by bringing in productive free agents. Nutting won't spend. And at this point, even if he wanted to spend (not likely), what good free agent would hitch his wagon to this franchise? So the strategy remains to draft and trade for prospects, develop them internally and hope to build a strong team that way. Maybe that would have worked if they were currently getting top production from Cole, Glasnow, Morton, Meadows, if Pedro Alvarez had been more than a one dimensional player, if they hadn't saved money by drafting Tony Sanchez in the 1st round, if Kingham had developed, if someone other than Stetson Allie had been a 2nd round draft pick, if Stallings hadn't been their only useful player from the 2012 draft, if Reese McGuire hadn't been offered as a bribe to get Toronto to pay Liriano, if someone other than Connor Joe had been taken with a 2014 1st round pick and if Shane Baz was still in the system.
In other words, if the strategy was to (1) identify talent and add it to the system via the draft or trades and (2) develop those players into strong, productive assets, the Neal Huntington regime was a disaster. Some players drafted couldn't make it with the Pirates or anyone else. Others displayed the talent expected of them but only after getting to new organizations with different philosophies. Even in his best years of 2013-15, NH had the benefit of players obtained by Littlefield (Cutch, Walker, Marte) and veteran acquisitions like Martin, Burnett, Liriano, Volquez and Happ.
So the possibility exists that what might change is that the Cherington regime will be a vast improvement over the previous regime in identifying talent and developing it to build a strong roster instead of watching too many top prospects fail or have to change organizations to reach their potential. The lack of any other significant moves this off season shows the Pirates have gone all in on that approach. Only time will tell if the people now in charge are more competent and able to make it work. It's like having one team light a fire by using a lighter while another team saves money on lighters by having someone rub two sticks together. If their guy isn't good at starting a fire that way, the idea might still work if they replaced him with someone else who actually knew how to do it.
In other words, if the strategy was to (1) identify talent and add it to the system via the draft or trades and (2) develop those players into strong, productive assets, the Neal Huntington regime was a disaster. Some players drafted couldn't make it with the Pirates or anyone else. Others displayed the talent expected of them but only after getting to new organizations with different philosophies. Even in his best years of 2013-15, NH had the benefit of players obtained by Littlefield (Cutch, Walker, Marte) and veteran acquisitions like Martin, Burnett, Liriano, Volquez and Happ.
So the possibility exists that what might change is that the Cherington regime will be a vast improvement over the previous regime in identifying talent and developing it to build a strong roster instead of watching too many top prospects fail or have to change organizations to reach their potential. The lack of any other significant moves this off season shows the Pirates have gone all in on that approach. Only time will tell if the people now in charge are more competent and able to make it work. It's like having one team light a fire by using a lighter while another team saves money on lighters by having someone rub two sticks together. If their guy isn't good at starting a fire that way, the idea might still work if they replaced him with someone else who actually knew how to do it.
Has anything really changed
426B6D61630E0 wrote: So some of you may know for the last 10 years or so I have attended Spring Training games and visited Pirate City on numerous occasions. I had made the decision not to renew my Spring Training season tickets this year because I saw little effort by the organization to improve. Then the firings came and I decided to stick around one more year to see how Ben was going to rebuild again for the umpteen time. I thought the Pirates had a chance to be competitive by adding pitching and catching and of course that did not happen. So that leaves us with bringing in young talent who may or may not play in the Major League in three or four years. So the question is " Has anything really changed" .
----
I don't think anything has changed at all. They are just using the new management has to "see what they have" excuse for not spending money to improve the team. We already know what they have. A last place team in desperate need of major league ballplayers to compete with the other teams major league ballplayers. Next year, that excuse will morph into "we are a young team and we will have growing pains while we "see what the kids can do". When some of the kids show that they are good players, they will be immediately dashed off as clubhouse cancers. Another thing that will not change is Bob Nutting will get richer and richer.
----
I don't think anything has changed at all. They are just using the new management has to "see what they have" excuse for not spending money to improve the team. We already know what they have. A last place team in desperate need of major league ballplayers to compete with the other teams major league ballplayers. Next year, that excuse will morph into "we are a young team and we will have growing pains while we "see what the kids can do". When some of the kids show that they are good players, they will be immediately dashed off as clubhouse cancers. Another thing that will not change is Bob Nutting will get richer and richer.
-
ArnoldRothstein
Has anything really changed
I think that the organization was trying to build a consistent winner. I think that ultimately failed because they weren't great at development, and then teams were prohibited from spending a lot on amateur players. I think that since about 2017 they've been aiming for the middle and hoping that everyone has a good year.
Has a decision been made to tear down, and then rebuild? Was NH offered a chance to do that, and refused? Was it finally determined that NH and the people he chose were lacking in development skills? If so, is that something that Nutting just learned recently? Has the budgeting policy changed at all? I'd like to know a lot more before deciding that this teardown will look worthwhile in five years.
Has a decision been made to tear down, and then rebuild? Was NH offered a chance to do that, and refused? Was it finally determined that NH and the people he chose were lacking in development skills? If so, is that something that Nutting just learned recently? Has the budgeting policy changed at all? I'd like to know a lot more before deciding that this teardown will look worthwhile in five years.
Has anything really changed
I think the strategy is the same with different people to carry it out.
Clearly BC was not given instructions that the team should be winning in a year or two. He is building for 2023 at the earliest.
That is a tough pill for me to swallow, and I think the expectations for producing a winner should have been 2021 or 2022 at the latest. IMO, winning usually takes longer than expected with some exceptions.
Addition: It looks like Nutting is telling BC that he can start from scratch and has several years to produce a winner.
I don't think that should be the case. Nutting should be more fan oriented and realize that the team has not won since 2015 and should provide BC with resources he thinks he needs to produce a winner quicker. It looks like the plan is don't worry, we are working to build a winner even it is going to be ten years since the team last appeared in the post season.
Clearly BC was not given instructions that the team should be winning in a year or two. He is building for 2023 at the earliest.
That is a tough pill for me to swallow, and I think the expectations for producing a winner should have been 2021 or 2022 at the latest. IMO, winning usually takes longer than expected with some exceptions.
Addition: It looks like Nutting is telling BC that he can start from scratch and has several years to produce a winner.
I don't think that should be the case. Nutting should be more fan oriented and realize that the team has not won since 2015 and should provide BC with resources he thinks he needs to produce a winner quicker. It looks like the plan is don't worry, we are working to build a winner even it is going to be ten years since the team last appeared in the post season.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
Has anything really changed
424740464E445D40495A5C51280 wrote: The only thing the previous group ever did was try to build a team that had a chance to be competitive. So far, it looks like this group is willing to go with a group that is not really going to be competitive without a lot of good luck. What hasn't changed is their willingness to be transparent and actually tell the fans what they are planning. If we have a $60M payroll this year does that mean they are banking the extra money to be used with future payrolls? I want to know how much that extra amount is, roughly speaking. I like the idea of trading guys that will be leaving soon for multiple lower-level higher-ceiling players, [highlight]but I need to know that the extra cash will be banked and will be spent.[/highlight] Right now, I do not know that and I am skeptical, to say the least, that it will happen that way.
We were told on more than one occasion when Huntington was in charge that the team was saving money for the future, to be spent when the time was right. Remember, they called it "financial flexibility"? By now, there should be enough money saved to pay half the national debt. Who knows where that money has gone, but we all know it was never spent on what it was saved for. And it never will.
We were told on more than one occasion when Huntington was in charge that the team was saving money for the future, to be spent when the time was right. Remember, they called it "financial flexibility"? By now, there should be enough money saved to pay half the national debt. Who knows where that money has gone, but we all know it was never spent on what it was saved for. And it never will.
-
Bobster21
Has anything really changed
306670646B71616A677042656F636B6E2C61020 wrote: The only thing the previous group ever did was try to build a team that had a chance to be competitive. So far, it looks like this group is willing to go with a group that is not really going to be competitive without a lot of good luck. What hasn't changed is their willingness to be transparent and actually tell the fans what they are planning. If we have a $60M payroll this year does that mean they are banking the extra money to be used with future payrolls? I want to know how much that extra amount is, roughly speaking. I like the idea of trading guys that will be leaving soon for multiple lower-level higher-ceiling players, [highlight]but I need to know that the extra cash will be banked and will be spent.[/highlight] Right now, I do not know that and I am skeptical, to say the least, that it will happen that way.
We were told on more than one occasion when Huntington was in charge that the team was saving money for the future, to be spent when the time was right. Remember, they called it "financial flexibility"? By now, there should be enough money saved to pay half the national debt. Who knows where that money has gone, but we all know it was never spent on what it was saved for. And it never will.
And even prior to NH, Dave Littlefield used the "financial flexibility" line. Nutting must be wallpapering his home(s) with all that money.
We were told on more than one occasion when Huntington was in charge that the team was saving money for the future, to be spent when the time was right. Remember, they called it "financial flexibility"? By now, there should be enough money saved to pay half the national debt. Who knows where that money has gone, but we all know it was never spent on what it was saved for. And it never will.
And even prior to NH, Dave Littlefield used the "financial flexibility" line. Nutting must be wallpapering his home(s) with all that money.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3630
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Has anything really changed
4D606D7C7B6A7D3D3E0F0 wrote: The only thing the previous group ever did was try to build a team that had a chance to be competitive. So far, it looks like this group is willing to go with a group that is not really going to be competitive without a lot of good luck. What hasn't changed is their willingness to be transparent and actually tell the fans what they are planning. If we have a $60M payroll this year does that mean they are banking the extra money to be used with future payrolls? I want to know how much that extra amount is, roughly speaking. I like the idea of trading guys that will be leaving soon for multiple lower-level higher-ceiling players, [highlight]but I need to know that the extra cash will be banked and will be spent.[/highlight] Right now, I do not know that and I am skeptical, to say the least, that it will happen that way.
We were told on more than one occasion when Huntington was in charge that the team was saving money for the future, to be spent when the time was right. Remember, they called it "financial flexibility"? By now, there should be enough money saved to pay half the national debt. Who knows where that money has gone, but we all know it was never spent on what it was saved for. And it never will.
And even prior to NH, Dave Littlefield used the "financial flexibility" line. Nutting must be wallpapering his home(s) with all that money.
Yeah I seem to recall NH actively avoiding that term . . .
We were told on more than one occasion when Huntington was in charge that the team was saving money for the future, to be spent when the time was right. Remember, they called it "financial flexibility"? By now, there should be enough money saved to pay half the national debt. Who knows where that money has gone, but we all know it was never spent on what it was saved for. And it never will.
And even prior to NH, Dave Littlefield used the "financial flexibility" line. Nutting must be wallpapering his home(s) with all that money.
Yeah I seem to recall NH actively avoiding that term . . .