OnlyBucs

1. If we have to trade Cutch, why on earth are we not demanding starting pitching in return? With at least 1 starter who is already a MAJOR LEAGUE starting pitcher, and at least 1 big-time prospect. WE NEED STARTING PITCHING. That should be what we're asking for and in fact requiring in return.



2. This team may set a major league record next year for fewest HRs. Where is the power going to come from? We are losing Cutch's 20+, plus Joyce hit a bunch off the bench. Heck even S-Rod was hitting HRs. But we don't need any of those guys this year apparently, so let's just let them all walk away or trade them for 19-year-olds who may or may not help in a few years (and when they are ready we can trade Marte, Polanco and Bell to make room for them !!!!).



Signed,

A Frustrated Pirates Fan

6A485B46454047486B5C4A4A46290 wrote: 1. If we have to trade Cutch, why on earth are we not demanding starting pitching in return? With at least 1 starter who is already a MAJOR LEAGUE starting pitcher, and at least 1 big-time prospect. WE NEED STARTING PITCHING. That should be what we're asking for and in fact requiring in return.


This is going to be really, very difficult to pull off.  Ppl trading for 2 years of Cutch want to win NOW.  Giving up a good starting pitcher is exactly the sort of thing you DON'T do when you're trying to win NOW. 



Think about it a minute.  Would you trade Cole or Taillon for a star 1st baseman if you want to win this year?  No, because while it strengthens the team at 1st, it drastically weakens it's pitching.  No one has an excess of good or great starting pitching to trade from at the ML level.



If you insist on this, you'll likely get a mediocre starting pitcher, at best.  Do you want another Jeff Locke in return for Cutch?  No one is going to weaken their 25-man roster to trade for Cutch.  It totally defeats the REASON TO TRADE FOR Cutch, which is to make the current team stronger.



If you're willing to get a prospect that is a couple years away, you can get a starter with a much, much bigger upside, albeit one that has some risk attached.



If you want a return of ML-ready players, either you've got to find a position player that's blocked by a star with a long-term contract (not a pitcher though, because good or great pitching is NEVER blocked for long), or you have to work a multi-team trade, which I think will still end up with a mediocre ML pitcher, though probably one better than Locke.

1D363A3336376D60590 wrote: 1. If we have to trade Cutch, why on earth are we not demanding starting pitching in return? With at least 1 starter who is already a MAJOR LEAGUE starting pitcher, and at least 1 big-time prospect. WE NEED STARTING PITCHING. That should be what we're asking for and in fact requiring in return.


This is going to be really, very difficult to pull off.  Ppl trading for 2 years of Cutch want to win NOW.  Giving up a good starting pitcher is exactly the sort of thing you DON'T do when you're trying to win NOW. 



Think about it a minute.  Would you trade Cole or Taillon for a star 1st baseman if you want to win this year?  No, because while it strengthens the team at 1st, it drastically weakens it's pitching.  No one has an excess of good or great starting pitching to trade from at the ML level.



If you insist on this, you'll likely get a mediocre starting pitcher, at best.  Do you want another Jeff Locke in return for Cutch?  No one is going to weaken their 25-man roster to trade for Cutch.  It totally defeats the REASON TO TRADE FOR Cutch, which is to make the current team stronger.



If you're willing to get a prospect that is a couple years away, you can get a starter with a much, much bigger upside, albeit one that has some risk attached.



If you want a return of ML-ready players, either you've got to find a position player that's blocked by a star with a long-term contract (not a pitcher though, because good or great pitching is NEVER blocked for long), or you have to work a multi-team trade, which I think will still end up with a mediocre ML pitcher, though probably one better than Locke.




I don't share most of the angst that seems to exist here and around the city about the potential trade, but I do very much share the OP's concern about this topic. If they trade McCutchen, it has to be for a MLB ready pitcher that they can put in the rotation in April.



That's why the Nat's are a great trade partner. They have a ton of pitching. A rotation of Scherzer, Strasburg, Gonzalez, Roark, and Ross is better than most in baseball. They could trade Giolito and Lopez and still have options with Voss and Cole. They are the perfect trade partner for the Pirates right now. The Pirates are in the position of power more so than the Nats. We will see what happens.

64795D5F51340 wrote: They could trade Giolito and Lopez




sounds good to me



;)

72404C4C586A49404D484740210 wrote: They could trade Giolito and Lopez




sounds good to me



;)


Like how I did that?



That's my dream trade. It makes sense for both sides. They can keep Robles. I really like Robles, but we need pitching to win now. With Giolito, Lopez, Glasnow, and Kingham and others, you just hope for a couple to pan out and make it big.

While I know it would never happen, perhaps the Bucs acquire enough young talent through a McCutchen trade that they could turn around and offer a package to the White Sox that was headlined by Robles for Sale. And, because the Bucs had partly restocked the farm system by adding good minor league talent from the Nats, they could better absorb the hit on the farm system by dealing for Sale.



Sale, Cole, Tallion, Kuhl and ??, would be a good start to building a good rotation for 2017 and 2018.

0C113537395C0 wrote: 1. If we have to trade Cutch, why on earth are we not demanding starting pitching in return? With at least 1 starter who is already a MAJOR LEAGUE starting pitcher, and at least 1 big-time prospect. WE NEED STARTING PITCHING. That should be what we're asking for and in fact requiring in return.


This is going to be really, very difficult to pull off.  Ppl trading for 2 years of Cutch want to win NOW.  Giving up a good starting pitcher is exactly the sort of thing you DON'T do when you're trying to win NOW. 



Think about it a minute.  Would you trade Cole or Taillon for a star 1st baseman if you want to win this year?  No, because while it strengthens the team at 1st, it drastically weakens it's pitching.  No one has an excess of good or great starting pitching to trade from at the ML level.



If you insist on this, you'll likely get a mediocre starting pitcher, at best.  Do you want another Jeff Locke in return for Cutch?  No one is going to weaken their 25-man roster to trade for Cutch.  It totally defeats the REASON TO TRADE FOR Cutch, which is to make the current team stronger.



If you're willing to get a prospect that is a couple years away, you can get a starter with a much, much bigger upside, albeit one that has some risk attached.



If you want a return of ML-ready players, either you've got to find a position player that's blocked by a star with a long-term contract (not a pitcher though, because good or great pitching is NEVER blocked for long), or you have to work a multi-team trade, which I think will still end up with a mediocre ML pitcher, though probably one better than Locke.




I don't share most of the angst that seems to exist here and around the city about the potential trade, but I do very much share the OP's concern about this topic.  If they trade McCutchen, it has to be for a MLB ready pitcher that they can put in the rotation in April.



That's why the Nat's are a great trade partner.  They have a ton of pitching.  A rotation of Scherzer, Strasburg, Gonzalez, Roark, and Ross is better than most in baseball.  They could trade Giolito and Lopez and still have options with Voss and Cole.  They are the perfect trade partner for the Pirates right now.  The Pirates are in the position of power more so than the Nats.  We will see what happens.


Hey, if we can pull it off, great. I sure as heck won't complain if we can get quality ML pitching back, it's just that it seems an unlikely scenario. The Nat's may have the pitching to pull off, but it's not something you'll see too much.

0E222A2D2601362030430 wrote: While I know it would never happen, perhaps the Bucs acquire enough young talent through a McCutchen trade that they could turn around and offer a package to the White Sox that was headlined by Robles for Sale.  And, because the Bucs had partly restocked the farm system by adding good minor league talent from the Nats, they could better absorb the hit on the farm system by dealing for Sale.



Sale, Cole, Tallion, Kuhl and ??,  would be a good start to building a good rotation for 2017 and 2018.    


I really like this idea! I believe a creative minded GM could make it happen. I just wish the Pirates had one of those. Please NH surprise me!

193D292124480 wrote: While I know it would never happen, perhaps the Bucs acquire enough young talent through a McCutchen trade that they could turn around and offer a package to the White Sox that was headlined by Robles for Sale.  And, because the Bucs had partly restocked the farm system by adding good minor league talent from the Nats, they could better absorb the hit on the farm system by dealing for Sale.



Sale, Cole, Tallion, Kuhl and ??,  would be a good start to building a good rotation for 2017 and 2018.    


I really like this idea! I believe a creative minded GM could make it happen. I just wish the Pirates had one of those. Please NH surprise me! 




I like it too. That would show that team is not punting on 2017 (or 2018)

We have to realize that some good starting pitchers that teams would part with to obtain Cutch would come with salaries the Pirates would be unwilling to pay.