OnlyBucs

767D75797C7D662325526B737A7D7D3C717D120 wrote: Huntington doesn't get enough credit for moves he didn't make.  What if they did extend McCutchen and he got a "Joey Votto like contract"?  So many wanted this to happen, but the Pirates are too cheap.  Were they cheap or smart? 



Trading for Quintana would have been awful if his numbers were the same in the NL. 


and keeping Cutch, who's value is dropping is awesome.  Let's stop thinking NH is batting 1000%.  He has made some good shrewd moves over the year's.  He has made some very foolish moves as well.  Don't kid yourself.


I didn't say he was batting 1000%.  Overall, I do think he is doing a good job.  He has moved guys at the right time most of the time too.  You still need a trade partner.  McCutchen is a huge question mark.  Has a super star dropped off as much as he has at his age?  Not many wanted to give McCutchen away.




You defend any move NH makes or made regardless of the outcome. I wanted to give Cutch to Washington for what they were offering. It wasn't a hard choice. The flag were there that he wasn't going to return to good value. Because of this foolish move to ask for Robles, Pittsburgh's return for Cutch will be very much depreciated.



He brought in Hudson and Gosselin in the offseason along with resigning Nova. Nova was the only good move. Not a good result.

Is that really what happened with Washington or are you assuming or listening to rumors?  I would have taken that deal too, but I think (think) Huntington was down on Lucas Giolito. 



Giolito is struggling big time.  Drew Hutchison is having a better year so far (scary, huh?).  After that trade, Giolito was being reported to be over-hyped.  There are some good articles on his spin rotations and his movement in general (first I ever heard of such a thing being scouted).



So, maybe it was a good thing McCutchen wasn't dealt for Giolito?  We would be probably hating Huntington for that trade at this point of the season.   



Hudson and Nova were free agents. Hudson seems done, like Bastardo. I'd get rid of him or make him "wash-up duty" pitcher. I prefer Frank Duncan over Phil Gossilen too. I hated that trade and still do.

7378707C7978632620576E767F7878397478170 wrote: Yeah, Grilli turned from a fan favorite to a loony really quickly.  I guess I was expecting more from that deal because he has a good history with those reliever moves. 



As far as other marquee deals (us moving vets), not sure there have really been that many others, good or bad.  Looks like we might have missed the boat with dealing Cutch but it's not like I was clamoring for that. 


Agreed.  I was hoping to see how Huntington does with dealing McCutchen.  Now, he is lucky to get a player who can add anything to a team.  I just hope McCutchen's name will carry some weight.



Not sure how we are missing the boat on Polanco, Cole, or Marte.  They are all young and under contract.  They aren't at the end of their deals with replacements coming up.  They are part of the core the team will be built around. 




Missing the boat on Polanco, Marte and Cole because unless those guys are going to be part of a WS team one or two of those three need to be moved to try build a WS team.



The Cutch era is over. Build a new team. Lot of parts to work with, but the team as constructed is far from sufficient.



The biggest risk Neil has is sitting on assets too long. The great opportunity he has is to move valueable parts for new parts to 1) fill holes and 2) extend the "window".



If he sits on all three of these players then he's helping neither the present nor the future.

How long are you giving Huntington (or anyone) to rebuild?



I can see Marte being shopped, but Cole and Polanco are the type of player they should trade for. I also think Cole and Polanco would bring back the biggest return (I wish Cole would sign long term). Taillon (25) is also the same age. Would you trade him too? Bell (24)?



I don't think a big time rebuild is necessary.

I am not building around Polanco at this point. He had a nice year last year but I don't see any signs of a break out. It would be great to keep Cole but he is as good as gone.

444F474B4E4F541117605941484F4F0E434F200 wrote: How long are you giving Huntington (or anyone) to rebuild?



I can see Marte being shopped, but Cole and Polanco are the type of player they should trade for.  I also think Cole and Polanco would bring back the biggest return (I wish Cole would sign long term).  Taillon (25) is also the same age.  Would you trade him too?  Bell (24)?



I don't think a big time rebuild is necessary. 


I don;t know what Neil can shop for, but in a realistic world, we could easily have a better team in 2018 and certainly 2019 forward.



To do nothing would mean this team is good enough; it's far from good enough even with KAng and Marte.



Right now, I'd rather see a lineup for next year of:

Osuna RF

Marte CF

Meadows LF

Kang (we'll know soon) 3B

Mercer SS

Frazier or Harrison 2nd

Bell 1B



Taillon

Nova

Glasnow (I think he's going to be good by the end of this season)

Newly acquired #3 type from trade

Kuhl

(plus legitimate depth next year; I'm especially excited by Holmes).



And the above could get better through the trades especially in RF, SS, 2nd base.



The system would be infused with some high end talent.



Sure it would be better to have Cole next year, but he has tremendous value this season, much more then he'll have at the end of 2018.

101701090710575B22050F030B0E4C010D0F620 wrote: How long are you giving Huntington (or anyone) to rebuild?



I can see Marte being shopped, but Cole and Polanco are the type of player they should trade for.  I also think Cole and Polanco would bring back the biggest return (I wish Cole would sign long term).  Taillon (25) is also the same age.  Would you trade him too?  Bell (24)?



I don't think a big time rebuild is necessary. 


I don;t know what Neil can shop for, but in a realistic world, we could easily have a better team in 2018 and certainly 2019 forward.



To do nothing would mean this team is good enough; it's far from good enough even with KAng and Marte.



Right now, I'd rather see a lineup for next year of:

Osuna RF

Marte CF

Meadows LF

Kang (we'll know soon) 3B

Mercer SS

Frazier or Harrison 2nd

Bell 1B



Taillon

Nova

Glasnow (I think he's going to be good by the end of this season)

Newly acquired #3 type from trade

Kuhl

(plus legitimate depth next year; I'm especially excited by Holmes).



And the above could get better through the trades especially in RF, SS, 2nd base.



The system would be infused with some high end talent.



Sure it would be better to have Cole next year, but he has tremendous value this season, much more then he'll have at the end of 2018.




you have traded Cutch, Cole, Cervelli and Polanco. With Bastardo and Watson at least to be replaced in bullpen. That would be a big shake up and should bring some talent back.

The problem with a Cole trade this year is that his value may be too high for anyone to be willing to pay it. I remember the Red Sox had that issue once with Big Papi. They concluded they couldn't do it.

0B2D2C3B2D3D4E0 wrote: How long are you giving Huntington (or anyone) to rebuild?



I can see Marte being shopped, but Cole and Polanco are the type of player they should trade for.  I also think Cole and Polanco would bring back the biggest return (I wish Cole would sign long term).  Taillon (25) is also the same age.  Would you trade him too?  Bell (24)?



I don't think a big time rebuild is necessary. 


I don;t know what Neil can shop for, but in a realistic world, we could easily have a better team in 2018 and certainly 2019 forward.



To do nothing would mean this team is good enough; it's far from good enough even with KAng and Marte.



Right now, I'd rather see a lineup for next year of:

Osuna RF

Marte CF

Meadows LF

Kang (we'll know soon) 3B

Mercer SS

Frazier or Harrison 2nd

Bell 1B



Taillon

Nova

Glasnow (I think he's going to be good by the end of this season)

Newly acquired #3 type from trade

Kuhl

(plus legitimate depth next year; I'm especially excited by Holmes).



And the above could get better through the trades especially in RF, SS, 2nd base.



The system would be infused with some high end talent.



Sure it would be better to have Cole next year, but he has tremendous value this season, much more then he'll have at the end of 2018.




you have traded Cutch, Cole, Cervelli and Polanco.  With Bastardo and Watson at least to be replaced in bullpen.  That would be a big shake up and should bring some talent back.


Oops, I meant to show Cervelli at catcher.  Also, Harrison is a possibility.  Otherwise, you're correct. 



My lineup doesn't show any of the return players other than a middle of rotation starter.  So either the team of the system is going to get a significant boost.

797B616771140 wrote: The problem with a Cole trade this year is that his value may be too high for anyone to be willing to pay it. I remember the Red Sox had that issue once with Big Papi. They concluded they couldn't do it.


Yankees!