060D05090C0D165355221B030A0D0D4C010D620 wrote: I expect Harrison to be traded. Next year's budget will not be more than this year and likely will be less. The way NH is able to field a passable team is to cut the higher salaries (Cutch and Harrison) and replace them with cheaper options. I don't see Frazier as a starter. He works as a bench bat and utility player but the defense is too bad for day to day. I would expect to see one of the AAA infielders take over at second.
If you don't think Frazier can do the job, I get why you would think it's based solely on payroll. I think Frazier can get the job done just as well as Harrison and probably hit a little better consistently to make the move. I see Harrison as a valuable player to most teams, also why I think he might be traded as a return could be pretty good.
If Frazier can hit better than Harrison and is cheaper then why not trade Frazier and get a better return? (other than needing to cut payroll)
Frazier vs Harrison
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
Bobster21
Frazier vs Harrison
240203140212610 wrote: I expect Harrison to be traded. Next year's budget will not be more than this year and likely will be less. The way NH is able to field a passable team is to cut the higher salaries (Cutch and Harrison) and replace them with cheaper options. I don't see Frazier as a starter. He works as a bench bat and utility player but the defense is too bad for day to day. I would expect to see one of the AAA infielders take over at second.
If you don't think Frazier can do the job, I get why you would think it's based solely on payroll. I think Frazier can get the job done just as well as Harrison and probably hit a little better consistently to make the move. I see Harrison as a valuable player to most teams, also why I think he might be traded as a return could be pretty good.
If Frazier can hit better than Harrison and is cheaper then why not trade Frazier and get a better return? (other than needing to cut payroll)
The goal for an MLB franchise is (or should be) to win a championship. If Harrison and Frazier are both good players, why do they have to trade one? What's the point of always looking to trade players to restock with prospects if all they're going to do with those prospects is wait until they become good players (hopefully) and trade them for prospects to begin the process again? If you have a good core of players, you have to build around them even if it requires more than a minimal payroll. That's the reason you develop a good core in the first place---not to trade them for a rebuilding plan that will ultimately result in another trade of those same players for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects etc, etc, etc. If there's not going to be a point where they say "We have some good core players, let's add more talent" instead of "We have some good core players, what prospects can we get for them so we don't have to pay them?", then there's no point in any of it.
If you don't think Frazier can do the job, I get why you would think it's based solely on payroll. I think Frazier can get the job done just as well as Harrison and probably hit a little better consistently to make the move. I see Harrison as a valuable player to most teams, also why I think he might be traded as a return could be pretty good.
If Frazier can hit better than Harrison and is cheaper then why not trade Frazier and get a better return? (other than needing to cut payroll)
The goal for an MLB franchise is (or should be) to win a championship. If Harrison and Frazier are both good players, why do they have to trade one? What's the point of always looking to trade players to restock with prospects if all they're going to do with those prospects is wait until they become good players (hopefully) and trade them for prospects to begin the process again? If you have a good core of players, you have to build around them even if it requires more than a minimal payroll. That's the reason you develop a good core in the first place---not to trade them for a rebuilding plan that will ultimately result in another trade of those same players for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects etc, etc, etc. If there's not going to be a point where they say "We have some good core players, let's add more talent" instead of "We have some good core players, what prospects can we get for them so we don't have to pay them?", then there's no point in any of it.
Frazier vs Harrison
644944555243541417260 wrote: I expect Harrison to be traded. Next year's budget will not be more than this year and likely will be less. The way NH is able to field a passable team is to cut the higher salaries (Cutch and Harrison) and replace them with cheaper options. I don't see Frazier as a starter. He works as a bench bat and utility player but the defense is too bad for day to day. I would expect to see one of the AAA infielders take over at second.
If you don't think Frazier can do the job, I get why you would think it's based solely on payroll. I think Frazier can get the job done just as well as Harrison and probably hit a little better consistently to make the move. I see Harrison as a valuable player to most teams, also why I think he might be traded as a return could be pretty good.
If Frazier can hit better than Harrison and is cheaper then why not trade Frazier and get a better return? (other than needing to cut payroll)
The goal for an MLB franchise is (or should be) to win a championship. If Harrison and Frazier are both good players, why do they have to trade one? What's the point of always looking to trade players to restock with prospects if all they're going to do with those prospects is wait until they become good players (hopefully) and trade them for prospects to begin the process again? If you have a good core of players, you have to build around them even if it requires more than a minimal payroll. That's the reason you develop a good core in the first place---not to trade them for a rebuilding plan that will ultimately result in another trade of those same players for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects etc, etc, etc. If there's not going to be a point where they say "We have some good core players, let's add more talent" instead of "We have some good core players, what prospects can we get for them so we don't have to pay them?", then there's no point in any of it.
I agree with what Bobster writes and would hope the team will figure out how to make trades that will improve the team for 2018.
If you don't think Frazier can do the job, I get why you would think it's based solely on payroll. I think Frazier can get the job done just as well as Harrison and probably hit a little better consistently to make the move. I see Harrison as a valuable player to most teams, also why I think he might be traded as a return could be pretty good.
If Frazier can hit better than Harrison and is cheaper then why not trade Frazier and get a better return? (other than needing to cut payroll)
The goal for an MLB franchise is (or should be) to win a championship. If Harrison and Frazier are both good players, why do they have to trade one? What's the point of always looking to trade players to restock with prospects if all they're going to do with those prospects is wait until they become good players (hopefully) and trade them for prospects to begin the process again? If you have a good core of players, you have to build around them even if it requires more than a minimal payroll. That's the reason you develop a good core in the first place---not to trade them for a rebuilding plan that will ultimately result in another trade of those same players for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects etc, etc, etc. If there's not going to be a point where they say "We have some good core players, let's add more talent" instead of "We have some good core players, what prospects can we get for them so we don't have to pay them?", then there's no point in any of it.
I agree with what Bobster writes and would hope the team will figure out how to make trades that will improve the team for 2018.
Frazier vs Harrison
072A27363120377774450 wrote: I expect Harrison to be traded. Next year's budget will not be more than this year and likely will be less. The way NH is able to field a passable team is to cut the higher salaries (Cutch and Harrison) and replace them with cheaper options. I don't see Frazier as a starter. He works as a bench bat and utility player but the defense is too bad for day to day. I would expect to see one of the AAA infielders take over at second.
If you don't think Frazier can do the job, I get why you would think it's based solely on payroll. I think Frazier can get the job done just as well as Harrison and probably hit a little better consistently to make the move. I see Harrison as a valuable player to most teams, also why I think he might be traded as a return could be pretty good.
If Frazier can hit better than Harrison and is cheaper then why not trade Frazier and get a better return? (other than needing to cut payroll)
The goal for an MLB franchise is (or should be) to win a championship. If Harrison and Frazier are both good players, why do they have to trade one? What's the point of always looking to trade players to restock with prospects if all they're going to do with those prospects is wait until they become good players (hopefully) and trade them for prospects to begin the process again? If you have a good core of players, you have to build around them even if it requires more than a minimal payroll. That's the reason you develop a good core in the first place---not to trade them for a rebuilding plan that will ultimately result in another trade of those same players for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects etc, etc, etc. If there's not going to be a point where they say "We have some good core players, let's add more talent" instead of "We have some good core players, what prospects can we get for them so we don't have to pay them?", then there's no point in any of it.
There's no team in baseball looking to contend that would trade JHay and replace him with Frazier. Jhays bat and defensive ability at multiple positions makes him a valuable piece for any contender.
If you don't think Frazier can do the job, I get why you would think it's based solely on payroll. I think Frazier can get the job done just as well as Harrison and probably hit a little better consistently to make the move. I see Harrison as a valuable player to most teams, also why I think he might be traded as a return could be pretty good.
If Frazier can hit better than Harrison and is cheaper then why not trade Frazier and get a better return? (other than needing to cut payroll)
The goal for an MLB franchise is (or should be) to win a championship. If Harrison and Frazier are both good players, why do they have to trade one? What's the point of always looking to trade players to restock with prospects if all they're going to do with those prospects is wait until they become good players (hopefully) and trade them for prospects to begin the process again? If you have a good core of players, you have to build around them even if it requires more than a minimal payroll. That's the reason you develop a good core in the first place---not to trade them for a rebuilding plan that will ultimately result in another trade of those same players for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects who will then be traded for another round of prospects etc, etc, etc. If there's not going to be a point where they say "We have some good core players, let's add more talent" instead of "We have some good core players, what prospects can we get for them so we don't have to pay them?", then there's no point in any of it.
There's no team in baseball looking to contend that would trade JHay and replace him with Frazier. Jhays bat and defensive ability at multiple positions makes him a valuable piece for any contender.
-
johnfluharty
Frazier vs Harrison
I agree and don't think the two should even be compared. JHay is a well above average defender and can play multiple positions. Frazier can hit, but that's really all he can do well.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Frazier vs Harrison
Because they play the same position. Teams who are contending trade a surplus for a need. The Pirates have two second baseman that can provide the same type of play.
Teams usually trade veterans so they can keep the younger, controlled player. This happens all the time. The Pirates just traded Walker for a need because they had Harrison.
If Harrison can bring in a need, I can see that move happening due to Frazier. If you think both players are similar, of course you keep the cheaper, younger player who could still be on a rise.
If the Pirates had both Josh Bell and Carlos Santana, wouldn't you try to trade the older Santana and keep Bell? They both have similar numbers, but Bell is six years younger.
Again, I wouldn't be surprised if Harrison is traded to help fill other holes considering Frazier can probably hold down second base.
Teams usually trade veterans so they can keep the younger, controlled player. This happens all the time. The Pirates just traded Walker for a need because they had Harrison.
If Harrison can bring in a need, I can see that move happening due to Frazier. If you think both players are similar, of course you keep the cheaper, younger player who could still be on a rise.
If the Pirates had both Josh Bell and Carlos Santana, wouldn't you try to trade the older Santana and keep Bell? They both have similar numbers, but Bell is six years younger.
Again, I wouldn't be surprised if Harrison is traded to help fill other holes considering Frazier can probably hold down second base.
-
Bobster21
Frazier vs Harrison
7A71797570716A2F295E677F767171307D711E0 wrote: Because they play the same position. Teams who are contending trade a surplus for a need. The Pirates have two second baseman that can provide the same type of play.
Teams usually trade veterans so they can keep the younger, controlled player. This happens all the time. The Pirates just traded Walker for a need because they had Harrison.
If Harrison can bring in a need, I can see that move happening due to Frazier. If you think both players are similar, of course you keep the cheaper, younger player who could still be on a rise.
If the Pirates had both Josh Bell and Carlos Santana, wouldn't you try to trade the older Santana and keep Bell? They both have similar numbers, but Bell is six years younger.
Again, I wouldn't be surprised if Harrison is traded to help fill other holes considering Frazier can probably hold down second base.
I've seen no evidence of that. I like Frazier as a hitter. And he's adequate in the OF. But he's been a butcher at 2B. He's played just 40 games at 2B for 288.2 innings. Yet he is 8th in the NL for most errors by a 2Bman. He also looks bad on turning DPs. By comparison, Harrison has 7 errors in 653 innings. Daniel Murphy, who is not considered a great fielder has 1 more error than Frazier in almost 900 more innings. I really don't think Frazier has shown any ability to hold down 2B as a regular.
Teams usually trade veterans so they can keep the younger, controlled player. This happens all the time. The Pirates just traded Walker for a need because they had Harrison.
If Harrison can bring in a need, I can see that move happening due to Frazier. If you think both players are similar, of course you keep the cheaper, younger player who could still be on a rise.
If the Pirates had both Josh Bell and Carlos Santana, wouldn't you try to trade the older Santana and keep Bell? They both have similar numbers, but Bell is six years younger.
Again, I wouldn't be surprised if Harrison is traded to help fill other holes considering Frazier can probably hold down second base.
I've seen no evidence of that. I like Frazier as a hitter. And he's adequate in the OF. But he's been a butcher at 2B. He's played just 40 games at 2B for 288.2 innings. Yet he is 8th in the NL for most errors by a 2Bman. He also looks bad on turning DPs. By comparison, Harrison has 7 errors in 653 innings. Daniel Murphy, who is not considered a great fielder has 1 more error than Frazier in almost 900 more innings. I really don't think Frazier has shown any ability to hold down 2B as a regular.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Frazier vs Harrison
I did use the word "probably".
In my opinion, I think Frazier's bat plays best at 2B. Frazier is not a good defensive player at any position, but outfield is probably his best position.
Harrison is a great defender. I was very impressed with his defense once he took over second base. I think Harrison is even better at third base, but Kang's bat had to get in the line up. Harrison's bat plays better at second base too.
There would be a drop off on defense, but would the offense make up the difference? Would the return player make up the difference? Those questions would need to be addressed if Harrison is traded.
In my opinion, I think Frazier's bat plays best at 2B. Frazier is not a good defensive player at any position, but outfield is probably his best position.
Harrison is a great defender. I was very impressed with his defense once he took over second base. I think Harrison is even better at third base, but Kang's bat had to get in the line up. Harrison's bat plays better at second base too.
There would be a drop off on defense, but would the offense make up the difference? Would the return player make up the difference? Those questions would need to be addressed if Harrison is traded.
-
DemDog
Frazier vs Harrison
3F343C3035342F6A6C1B223A3334347538345B0 wrote: Because they play the same position. Teams who are contending trade a surplus for a need. The Pirates have two second baseman that can provide the same type of play.
Teams usually trade veterans so they can keep the younger, controlled player. This happens all the time. The Pirates just traded Walker for a need because they had Harrison.
If Harrison can bring in a need, I can see that move happening due to Frazier. If you think both players are similar, of course you keep the cheaper, younger player who could still be on a rise.
If the Pirates had both Josh Bell and Carlos Santana, wouldn't you try to trade the older Santana and keep Bell? They both have similar numbers, but Bell is six years younger.
Again, I wouldn't be surprised if Harrison is traded to help fill other holes considering Frazier can probably hold down second base.
Dog, I think you are talking just to hear yourself talk. Your judgement of Frazier abilities is very much a pipe dream that must have come from listening too much to the Bucco broadcasters who think he is the best thing since sliced bread. The only thing common about JHay and Frazier are the fact that they can play several positions. But so can SRod even the new kid on the block Christopher Bostic yet you do not equate them with JHay. Some times Dog you need to consider the Confucius said "man with big mouth, beware of foot!"
Teams usually trade veterans so they can keep the younger, controlled player. This happens all the time. The Pirates just traded Walker for a need because they had Harrison.
If Harrison can bring in a need, I can see that move happening due to Frazier. If you think both players are similar, of course you keep the cheaper, younger player who could still be on a rise.
If the Pirates had both Josh Bell and Carlos Santana, wouldn't you try to trade the older Santana and keep Bell? They both have similar numbers, but Bell is six years younger.
Again, I wouldn't be surprised if Harrison is traded to help fill other holes considering Frazier can probably hold down second base.
Dog, I think you are talking just to hear yourself talk. Your judgement of Frazier abilities is very much a pipe dream that must have come from listening too much to the Bucco broadcasters who think he is the best thing since sliced bread. The only thing common about JHay and Frazier are the fact that they can play several positions. But so can SRod even the new kid on the block Christopher Bostic yet you do not equate them with JHay. Some times Dog you need to consider the Confucius said "man with big mouth, beware of foot!"
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Frazier vs Harrison
Ha ha...just to hear myself talk?
162 game averages:
.288 ave, .353 obp, .410 slg, .763 ops
.281 ave, .321 obp, .414 slg, .735 ops
Which are better overall numbers? You don't see any similarities?
Rodriguez doesn't come close to either player. No way would I want him as a starter. Bostick has some nice numbers in the minors, but I don't know if they will translate to the majors. I don't know enough to compare him.
162 game averages:
.288 ave, .353 obp, .410 slg, .763 ops
.281 ave, .321 obp, .414 slg, .735 ops
Which are better overall numbers? You don't see any similarities?
Rodriguez doesn't come close to either player. No way would I want him as a starter. Bostick has some nice numbers in the minors, but I don't know if they will translate to the majors. I don't know enough to compare him.