343F373B3E3F246167102931383F3F7E333F500 wrote:
I don't criticize him at all for those years. It is for 2016 and 2017 and lack of faith in what he will do in future that worries me.
Why is there a lack of faith for the future knowing what he did two years ago?
I don't believe NH is the issue. It's Nutting. Between 2012--the last year of the 20 year losing streak and 2015--the highwater mark of 98 wins, opening day payrolls increased from 63 mil to 88 mil. And then it went down! It's certainly not that the team didn't have needs. Rather, Nutting simply chose to cut costs even though he was already among the smallest payrolls in MLB. And we've seen the predictable results. Below .500 the last 2 years. 25 GB in 2016 and 2017 GB in 2017.
Is there any rational reason to expect NH to again have the resources to build a competitive team after Nutting abruptly cut payroll for no discernible reason the last 2 years? I learned many years ago in a mgt course that "the problem you identify is the problem you solve." Which means you better identify the correct problem or else you're spinning your wheels while the real problem goes unsolved. NH is not the problem. Trying to ascertain how he can take the $2.98 budget Nutting gives him and turn the team around is not where the focus should be. The real problem is Nutting. If he doesn't stop pocketing the profits and allow NH even an average payroll to improve the team, there's nothing NH or anyone else can do.
Two years later ...
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
Two years later ...
2F242C2025243F7A7C0B322A2324246528244B0 wrote: You said future. Why do you have no faith for the future knowing Huntington turned it around once and with the Kang and Marte situations? Are you basing everything on the 2016 season?
I actually think Huntington might be a victim of his own success. The landscape has changed on many of the tactics he has used in the past.
Draft slot overpay (Josh Bell). MLB eliminated.
Aggressive defensive shifts. (Remember when Burnett complained about them on his first run?) Every team does them.
Pitch framing. All teams work on this. It's part of the reason why Russell Martin is making twenty million with the Jays.
Even an emphasis on developing young talent has been adopted by big market teams like the Dodgers, Yankees and Cubs.
Maybe management has another strategy to exploit market inefficiencies like that have previously. But is is going to be harder.
I actually think Huntington might be a victim of his own success. The landscape has changed on many of the tactics he has used in the past.
Draft slot overpay (Josh Bell). MLB eliminated.
Aggressive defensive shifts. (Remember when Burnett complained about them on his first run?) Every team does them.
Pitch framing. All teams work on this. It's part of the reason why Russell Martin is making twenty million with the Jays.
Even an emphasis on developing young talent has been adopted by big market teams like the Dodgers, Yankees and Cubs.
Maybe management has another strategy to exploit market inefficiencies like that have previously. But is is going to be harder.
Two years later ...
070C04080D0C175254231A020B0C0C4D000C630 wrote:
I don't criticize him at all for those years. It is for 2016 and 2017 and lack of faith in what he will do in future that worries me.
Why is there a lack of faith for the future knowing what he did two years ago?
Because of the moves he did and didn't make this year. Pretty simple. Not having great resources is a hinderance, but ... I have zero faith in him. He simply isn't creative at all.
I don't criticize him at all for those years. It is for 2016 and 2017 and lack of faith in what he will do in future that worries me.
Why is there a lack of faith for the future knowing what he did two years ago?
Because of the moves he did and didn't make this year. Pretty simple. Not having great resources is a hinderance, but ... I have zero faith in him. He simply isn't creative at all.
Two years later ...
He signed or traded for 3 specific players with major league pedigree and turned them around. 4 if you count Volquezs great year when he was young.
Burnett, Liriano, Martin. Volquezs had much less success and was more like Nova. Martin was a defensive wizard already and was a legit ML catcher when we signed him..
Trading a modest prospecf for Nova was using that strategy. Signing Ryan &&&&ing Vogelsong for a rotation spot was not and we haven't signed a legit starting position player a la Martin since.
Trading for Niese was not that strategy because we gave up a ton for a guy with flags all over him, he was pitching in a pitchers park and was already in the NL. Almost nothing like the old strategy.
Signing Hudson was the exact opposite of what NH did when we won. So who knows what he was doing there? Nicasio was much more like what he did when we won...cheap. live arm. Right handed. Pitching in a bad park OR the AL...and it turned out well
He hasn't used the same approach at all, so comparing what he did 3 years ago to now is apples and oranges and not just in results. His methods are not the same.
When he has stayed with the general strategies he used previously, they've arguably still worked. The problem is that he hasn't kept with the program. He's not doing what he did when we won much at all.
Why have faith in something he's not doing? What is this, a religion? I'm supposed to have faith in the MAN and not the man's actions?
Burnett, Liriano, Martin. Volquezs had much less success and was more like Nova. Martin was a defensive wizard already and was a legit ML catcher when we signed him..
Trading a modest prospecf for Nova was using that strategy. Signing Ryan &&&&ing Vogelsong for a rotation spot was not and we haven't signed a legit starting position player a la Martin since.
Trading for Niese was not that strategy because we gave up a ton for a guy with flags all over him, he was pitching in a pitchers park and was already in the NL. Almost nothing like the old strategy.
Signing Hudson was the exact opposite of what NH did when we won. So who knows what he was doing there? Nicasio was much more like what he did when we won...cheap. live arm. Right handed. Pitching in a bad park OR the AL...and it turned out well
He hasn't used the same approach at all, so comparing what he did 3 years ago to now is apples and oranges and not just in results. His methods are not the same.
When he has stayed with the general strategies he used previously, they've arguably still worked. The problem is that he hasn't kept with the program. He's not doing what he did when we won much at all.
Why have faith in something he's not doing? What is this, a religion? I'm supposed to have faith in the MAN and not the man's actions?
Two years later ...
242D25343A400 wrote: He signed or traded for 3 specific players with major league pedigree and turned them around. 4 if you count Volquezs great year when he was young.
Burnett, Liriano, Martin. Volquezs had much less success and was more like Nova. Martin was a defensive wizard already and was a legit ML catcher when we signed him..
Trading a modest prospecf for Nova was using that strategy. Signing Ryan &&&&ing Vogelsong for a rotation spot was not and we haven't signed a legit starting position player a la Martin since.
Trading for Niese was not that strategy because we gave up a ton for a guy with flags all over him, he was pitching in a pitchers park and was already in the NL. Almost nothing like the old strategy.
Signing Hudson was the exact opposite of what NH did when we won. So who knows what he was doing there? Nicasio was much more like what he did when we won...cheap. live arm. Right handed. Pitching in a bad park OR the AL...and it turned out well
He hasn't used the same approach at all, so comparing what he did 3 years ago to now is apples and oranges and not just in results. His methods are not the same.
When he has stayed with the general strategies he used previously, they've arguably still worked. The problem is that he hasn't kept with the program. He's not doing what he did when we won much at all.
Why have faith in something he's not doing? What is this, a religion? I'm supposed to have faith in the MAN and not the man's actions?
very good points.
Burnett, Liriano, Martin. Volquezs had much less success and was more like Nova. Martin was a defensive wizard already and was a legit ML catcher when we signed him..
Trading a modest prospecf for Nova was using that strategy. Signing Ryan &&&&ing Vogelsong for a rotation spot was not and we haven't signed a legit starting position player a la Martin since.
Trading for Niese was not that strategy because we gave up a ton for a guy with flags all over him, he was pitching in a pitchers park and was already in the NL. Almost nothing like the old strategy.
Signing Hudson was the exact opposite of what NH did when we won. So who knows what he was doing there? Nicasio was much more like what he did when we won...cheap. live arm. Right handed. Pitching in a bad park OR the AL...and it turned out well
He hasn't used the same approach at all, so comparing what he did 3 years ago to now is apples and oranges and not just in results. His methods are not the same.
When he has stayed with the general strategies he used previously, they've arguably still worked. The problem is that he hasn't kept with the program. He's not doing what he did when we won much at all.
Why have faith in something he's not doing? What is this, a religion? I'm supposed to have faith in the MAN and not the man's actions?
very good points.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Two years later ...
Good post by BenM and dmetz.
Good answers and you both might be right. Maybe teams did catch up to his strategy? Maybe he needs a new strategy? Very good points.
To the owner question and money, Huntington has never had the resources and succeeded. I just don't buy that payroll is the answer and the only reason teams win and lose. The Brewers (first team out of the playoffs) had the lowest payroll and the Diamondbacks, Rockies, Astros, and Indians were in the bottom half of payroll and all made the playoffs. The Tigers, Blue Jays, Giants, Rangers, Orioles were all in the top ten in payrolls and didn't have winning seasons (the Pirates had a better record). Smart money wins, not just spending in general.
Good answers and you both might be right. Maybe teams did catch up to his strategy? Maybe he needs a new strategy? Very good points.
To the owner question and money, Huntington has never had the resources and succeeded. I just don't buy that payroll is the answer and the only reason teams win and lose. The Brewers (first team out of the playoffs) had the lowest payroll and the Diamondbacks, Rockies, Astros, and Indians were in the bottom half of payroll and all made the playoffs. The Tigers, Blue Jays, Giants, Rangers, Orioles were all in the top ten in payrolls and didn't have winning seasons (the Pirates had a better record). Smart money wins, not just spending in general.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3642
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Two years later ...
It shows you the fine line in the sport IMO.
Just like it happens with hitters (what's the line in Bull Durham about how 20 hits a year is the difference between a nobody and someone ready for "the show?"), a few years ago NH hit on a few guys and looked really good. Recently he's missed and looked really bad. I don't know if he's good or not.
Just like it happens with hitters (what's the line in Bull Durham about how 20 hits a year is the difference between a nobody and someone ready for "the show?"), a few years ago NH hit on a few guys and looked really good. Recently he's missed and looked really bad. I don't know if he's good or not.
-
johnfluharty
Two years later ...
Harrison, Rodriguez, Freese, Nova, and Hudson combine for $37M of our 2018 payroll. I think that money could be better spent. Even if you keep JHay at $10.25 we still have more than $26M that could be better spent.
-
LumberCo
Two years later ...
I feel sorry for NH to a point, he is made to build a team with 30-40 million less than the average team has to work with from the get go and that is not even taking in to account what the upper crust big spenders get away with. on the other hand he keeps signing up for the challenge, makes you wander what he sees that keeps him here. Pretty sure he could double his salary in a different situation. makes you wander if the low ball budget is really his or the principle owners doing? this thing is hard to figure. Ugh, usually stinks to be a Bucco fan, yet here we are 
-
Bobster21
Two years later ...
373C34383D3C276264132A323B3C3C7D303C530 wrote: Good post by BenM and dmetz.
Good answers and you both might be right. Maybe teams did catch up to his strategy? Maybe he needs a new strategy? Very good points.
To the owner question and money, Huntington has never had the resources and succeeded. I just don't buy that payroll is the answer and the only reason teams win and lose. The Brewers (first team out of the playoffs) had the lowest payroll and the Diamondbacks, Rockies, Astros, and Indians were in the bottom half of payroll and all made the playoffs. The Tigers, Blue Jays, Giants, Rangers, Orioles were all in the top ten in payrolls and didn't have winning seasons (the Pirates had a better record). Smart money wins, not just spending in general.
That's all true. But neither can you dismiss payroll as a significant factor. After the 98-win season of 2015, Pedro was let go so they needed a better defensive 1Bman who could provide power. Instead, they settled for Jaso, an inexpensive catcher with little power who would be converted to 1B and routinely replaced for defense. The talent level of that 98-win team also diminished when Neil Walker was traded rather than letting him go to arbitration. The pitching issues of the 98-win team that needed to be addressed were that Locke and Charlie Morton were 40% of the rotation and that Burnett retired. They had Happ but chose to let him go rather than pay for a quality starter. Walker was traded to add a lackluster Jon Neise to the rotation while 38-year old, inexpensive Ryan Vogelsong was also signed to lug his 4.67 ERA from SF to round out the rotation. And the problematic Jeff Locke was retained. So instead of supplementing the 98-win team with a quality 1Bman and good starting pitchers, we got Jaso, Niese and Vogelsong.
As a result, an already low payroll with seemingly plenty of room to grow without even getting to mid-range was reduced while cheaper, less talented players were acquired to fill needs. Was the reduction in payroll merely the coincidental result of a ghastly decision by NH that the 98-win team would actually be improved with Jaso, Niese and Vogelsong and without Walker? If he actually believed that, then he has no business being a GM. Or was the addition of these less talented players the result of a mgt decision to fill holes without increasing payroll? So when a team substantially reduces its talent level while lowering payroll, it seems payroll can be a significant factor. It's hard to believe there are any Pirates now who don't realize that payroll is a major--if not the primary--reason why 3 years of winning culminating in a 98-win season has been replaced by a less talented, noncompetitive team.
Good answers and you both might be right. Maybe teams did catch up to his strategy? Maybe he needs a new strategy? Very good points.
To the owner question and money, Huntington has never had the resources and succeeded. I just don't buy that payroll is the answer and the only reason teams win and lose. The Brewers (first team out of the playoffs) had the lowest payroll and the Diamondbacks, Rockies, Astros, and Indians were in the bottom half of payroll and all made the playoffs. The Tigers, Blue Jays, Giants, Rangers, Orioles were all in the top ten in payrolls and didn't have winning seasons (the Pirates had a better record). Smart money wins, not just spending in general.
That's all true. But neither can you dismiss payroll as a significant factor. After the 98-win season of 2015, Pedro was let go so they needed a better defensive 1Bman who could provide power. Instead, they settled for Jaso, an inexpensive catcher with little power who would be converted to 1B and routinely replaced for defense. The talent level of that 98-win team also diminished when Neil Walker was traded rather than letting him go to arbitration. The pitching issues of the 98-win team that needed to be addressed were that Locke and Charlie Morton were 40% of the rotation and that Burnett retired. They had Happ but chose to let him go rather than pay for a quality starter. Walker was traded to add a lackluster Jon Neise to the rotation while 38-year old, inexpensive Ryan Vogelsong was also signed to lug his 4.67 ERA from SF to round out the rotation. And the problematic Jeff Locke was retained. So instead of supplementing the 98-win team with a quality 1Bman and good starting pitchers, we got Jaso, Niese and Vogelsong.
As a result, an already low payroll with seemingly plenty of room to grow without even getting to mid-range was reduced while cheaper, less talented players were acquired to fill needs. Was the reduction in payroll merely the coincidental result of a ghastly decision by NH that the 98-win team would actually be improved with Jaso, Niese and Vogelsong and without Walker? If he actually believed that, then he has no business being a GM. Or was the addition of these less talented players the result of a mgt decision to fill holes without increasing payroll? So when a team substantially reduces its talent level while lowering payroll, it seems payroll can be a significant factor. It's hard to believe there are any Pirates now who don't realize that payroll is a major--if not the primary--reason why 3 years of winning culminating in a 98-win season has been replaced by a less talented, noncompetitive team.