OnlyBucs

Now a Bucco. Minor league deal with invite to spring training!

Well, it looks the catching plan for 2020 is complete. They must not think a trade for a young catcher is feasible.

72594B715944555F5370535E533C0 wrote: Well, it looks the catching plan for 2020 is complete. They must not think a trade for a young catcher is feasible.






it makes them a little less desperate to get a catcher. They can widen the range of young catchers. Hopefully can get by in 2020 with 3 that they have now.



could trade for a cather that they don't expect to be ready until mid-season 2020 or 2021 rather than looking for someone to plug in for 2020.

042F3D072F32232925062528254A0 wrote: Well, it looks the catching plan for 2020 is complete. They must not think a trade for a young catcher is feasible.




You're probably right, but to be optimistic, it may mean that we are looking at a better prospect at a lower minor league level.

The three players they have signed this offseason are better defensive players, and are probably below average hitters. Maybe they intend to have a strong defensive team, but they need to score runs to win games.

052F241423353539560 wrote: Well, it looks the catching plan for 2020 is complete. They must not think a trade for a young catcher is feasible.




You're probably right, but to be optimistic, it may mean that we are looking at a better prospect at a lower minor league level.


That was my reaction. We still don't have much depth at C in the minors. Good to see a little activity finally.

062C27172036363A550 wrote: Well, it looks the catching plan for 2020 is complete. They must not think a trade for a young catcher is feasible.




You're probably right, but to be optimistic, it may mean that we are looking at a better prospect at a lower minor league level.
That would be good. As has been discussed the catching talent in the minor league system is not good.

Stallings, Maile and Murphy sounds like the makings of a good law firm, but not necessarily a good corps of two-way (offense and defense) catchers. That said, I do like the fact that they are targeting catchers who can help the pitching staff.



With so little activity on the Pirates' front this off-season, I can accept (although it will kill me to watch) a team that has few prospects to escape a 90+ game losing season, provided the team is identifying and securing potential building blocks for the future.



While the overall interest in Marte continues to appear light, and few teams seem willing to trade real prospects, I continue to hold out hope that Cherington can move Marte for a real starting pitching and/or catching prospect.



Continuing, Nutting really needs to look at the salaries that run of the mill ballplayers are now attracting on other teams. Bell's arbitration numbers are chump change for most teams, but on Pittsburgh's roster, he will be the 4th highest paid player behind only Marte, Archer and Polanco.



Lastly, Huntington did a lot of things wrong, but the contract that Vasquez signed was not one of them; so far below industry standards. I continue to lament that Vasquez was not traded to LA for Dustin May and another lesser prospect. Not moving Vasquez when he was a peak value was a real error in judgement.

0C20282F2403342232410 wrote: Lastly, Huntington did a lot of things wrong, but the contract that Vasquez signed was not one of them; so far below industry standards.  I continue to lament that Vasquez was not traded to LA for Dustin May and another lesser prospect.  Not moving Vasquez when he was a peak value was a real error in judgement.       


I've wished the same wish. But I have to ask, given what went down and all the stuff with Vasquez would have been prior to the trade, at his arrest would the league have nullified the trade? Would they have left the Dodgers holding the bag on his stupidity? I have no clue, but I keep wondering if we were stuck even had a trade been made at the deadline? Are there trade rules that would have covered this?

0021343D053C27342130550 wrote: Lastly, Huntington did a lot of things wrong, but the contract that Vasquez signed was not one of them; so far below industry standards.  I continue to lament that Vasquez was not traded to LA for Dustin May and another lesser prospect.  Not moving Vasquez when he was a peak value was a real error in judgement.       


I've wished the same wish. But I have to ask, given what went down and all the stuff with Vasquez would have been prior to the trade, at his arrest would the league have nullified the trade? Would they have left the Dodgers holding the bag on his stupidity? I have no clue, but I keep wondering if we were stuck even had a trade been made at the deadline? Are there trade rules that would have covered this?


I don't think so. Other than not paying him. I can't imagine there is a way they'd have gotten their prospects back.



To emphasize what Maine said, I liked NH a lot and gave him a lot of the benefit of the doubt. The inability to trade Vasquez as this past trade deadline was the absolute nail in the coffin for him in my book.