240203140212610 wrote: How many games of a difference do you think a full season of Kang and Marte would have made?
Does this even factor in people's reasoning? A ten game difference has them leading the division. A fifteen game difference has them amongst the best in the league. A five game difference has them a few games back.
depends, in a vacuum it may mean a few more wins, but if you give every other team a chance to get players back it may not matter much.
True, but what players on the Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals lost as many games? How many other teams lost two of their best hitters for 81 and 162 games?
It was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take that into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
Hurdle-4 more years!
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
OrlandoMerced
Hurdle-4 more years!
Bell certainly, Kingham and Glasnow were inarguably astute draft picks that would have had to have been drafted earlier in the current draft system. They were still guys that had to be identified as HS guys that were worth buying out of their college commitments.
See Mason Martin this year.
See Mason Martin this year.
Hurdle-4 more years!
3B30383431302B6E681F263E373030713C305F0 wrote: How many games of a difference do you think a full season of Kang and Marte would have made?
Does this even factor in people's reasoning? A ten game difference has them leading the division. A fifteen game difference has them amongst the best in the league. A five game difference has them a few games back.
depends, in a vacuum it may mean a few more wins, but if you give every other team a chance to get players back it may not matter much.
True, but what players on the Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals lost as many games? How many other teams lost two of their best hitters for 81 and 162 games?
It was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take that into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
The bigger question is how many teams would've sat back and not traded for help when 2 of their best hitters were gone for 80 and 162 games?
Does this even factor in people's reasoning? A ten game difference has them leading the division. A fifteen game difference has them amongst the best in the league. A five game difference has them a few games back.
depends, in a vacuum it may mean a few more wins, but if you give every other team a chance to get players back it may not matter much.
True, but what players on the Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals lost as many games? How many other teams lost two of their best hitters for 81 and 162 games?
It was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take that into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
The bigger question is how many teams would've sat back and not traded for help when 2 of their best hitters were gone for 80 and 162 games?
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Hurdle-4 more years!
6D6C7766703037030 wrote: How many games of a difference do you think a full season of Kang and Marte would have made?
Does this even factor in people's reasoning? A ten game difference has them leading the division. A fifteen game difference has them amongst the best in the league. A five game difference has them a few games back.
depends, in a vacuum it may mean a few more wins, but if you give every other team a chance to get players back it may not matter much.
True, but what players on the Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals lost as many games? How many other teams lost two of their best hitters for 81 and 162 games?
It was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take that into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
The bigger question is how many teams would've sat back and not traded for help when 2 of their best hitters were gone for 80 and 162 games?
It didn't happen to any other team, so we don't know. The Nationals didn't go out and trade for someone when they lost Adam Eaton for the season on April 28th.
Again, it was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
Does this even factor in people's reasoning? A ten game difference has them leading the division. A fifteen game difference has them amongst the best in the league. A five game difference has them a few games back.
depends, in a vacuum it may mean a few more wins, but if you give every other team a chance to get players back it may not matter much.
True, but what players on the Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals lost as many games? How many other teams lost two of their best hitters for 81 and 162 games?
It was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take that into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
The bigger question is how many teams would've sat back and not traded for help when 2 of their best hitters were gone for 80 and 162 games?
It didn't happen to any other team, so we don't know. The Nationals didn't go out and trade for someone when they lost Adam Eaton for the season on April 28th.
Again, it was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
Hurdle-4 more years!
6A61696560617A3F394E776F666161206D610E0 wrote: How many games of a difference do you think a full season of Kang and Marte would have made?
Does this even factor in people's reasoning? A ten game difference has them leading the division. A fifteen game difference has them amongst the best in the league. A five game difference has them a few games back.
depends, in a vacuum it may mean a few more wins, but if you give every other team a chance to get players back it may not matter much.
True, but what players on the Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals lost as many games? How many other teams lost two of their best hitters for 81 and 162 games?
It was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take that into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
The bigger question is how many teams would've sat back and not traded for help when 2 of their best hitters were gone for 80 and 162 games?
It didn't happen to any other team, so we don't know. The Nationals didn't go out and trade for someone when they lost Adam Eaton for the season on April 28th.
Again, it was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
Could end up with a better record? Could?
The Nats had other OF's on their roster and they did add Howie Kendrick later.
Does this even factor in people's reasoning? A ten game difference has them leading the division. A fifteen game difference has them amongst the best in the league. A five game difference has them a few games back.
depends, in a vacuum it may mean a few more wins, but if you give every other team a chance to get players back it may not matter much.
True, but what players on the Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals lost as many games? How many other teams lost two of their best hitters for 81 and 162 games?
It was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take that into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
The bigger question is how many teams would've sat back and not traded for help when 2 of their best hitters were gone for 80 and 162 games?
It didn't happen to any other team, so we don't know. The Nationals didn't go out and trade for someone when they lost Adam Eaton for the season on April 28th.
Again, it was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
Could end up with a better record? Could?
The Nats had other OF's on their roster and they did add Howie Kendrick later.-
Bobster21
Hurdle-4 more years!
4249414D4849521711665F474E4949084549260 wrote: How many games of a difference do you think a full season of Kang and Marte would have made?
Does this even factor in people's reasoning? A ten game difference has them leading the division. A fifteen game difference has them amongst the best in the league. A five game difference has them a few games back.
depends, in a vacuum it may mean a few more wins, but if you give every other team a chance to get players back it may not matter much.
True, but what players on the Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals lost as many games? How many other teams lost two of their best hitters for 81 and 162 games?
It was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take that into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
The bigger question is how many teams would've sat back and not traded for help when 2 of their best hitters were gone for 80 and 162 games?
It didn't happen to any other team, so we don't know. The Nationals didn't go out and trade for someone when they lost Adam Eaton for the season on April 28th.
Again, it was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
It happened to the Braves when they lost Freeman and added Adams.
Does this even factor in people's reasoning? A ten game difference has them leading the division. A fifteen game difference has them amongst the best in the league. A five game difference has them a few games back.
depends, in a vacuum it may mean a few more wins, but if you give every other team a chance to get players back it may not matter much.
True, but what players on the Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals lost as many games? How many other teams lost two of their best hitters for 81 and 162 games?
It was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take that into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
The bigger question is how many teams would've sat back and not traded for help when 2 of their best hitters were gone for 80 and 162 games?
It didn't happen to any other team, so we don't know. The Nationals didn't go out and trade for someone when they lost Adam Eaton for the season on April 28th.
Again, it was a significant blow for the Pirates. Do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration? The Pirates could end up with a better record than last year minus those two. Is that a sign of improvement to some?
It happened to the Braves when they lost Freeman and added Adams.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Hurdle-4 more years!
One player, not two. And Kendricks was added at the deadline, not when injury occurred.
Again, do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration?
Again, do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration?
Hurdle-4 more years!
58535B575253480D0B7C455D545353125F533C0 wrote: One player, not two. And Kendricks was added at the deadline, not when injury occurred.
Again, do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration?
How many games difference are you giving those two?
Again, do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration?
How many games difference are you giving those two?
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Hurdle-4 more years!
I think they would be in first place considering what the back ups (fill ins) did in their absence. Maybe between 10-15 game difference.
Hurdle-4 more years!
6F524C414E444F6D4552434544200 wrote: No, he (they) are being rewarded for their whole body of work. Not just the last two seasons.
Hurdle has a winning record as a Pirates manager. Even with all of these bad, cheap teams.
Why can't they do it again? Do you think the team is in worse shape now compared to when Huntington took over or when Hurdle was hired?
They need to improve for sure. Huntington needs to draft better. That's my biggest issue right now with Huntington. Hurdle needs to think out of the box some. He needs to go back to some old school managing in my opinion. They can do this. Just like they did before.
I understand that "NH needs to draft better" is a pretty unobjectionable statement. But I don't think it's a fair assessment. I think his success rate for 1st round picks is probably above average even accounting for draft position. He didn't always make the optimal pick, that's impossible, but ATM, Sanchez and McGuire are his only busts.
I wouldn't call McGuire a bust just yet. Mark Appel is a bust. We didn't get him (wasted pick) and he sucks. If you are putting McGuire down, I would counter with Victor Black. Technically he was a first round pick.
Hurdle has a winning record as a Pirates manager. Even with all of these bad, cheap teams.
Why can't they do it again? Do you think the team is in worse shape now compared to when Huntington took over or when Hurdle was hired?
They need to improve for sure. Huntington needs to draft better. That's my biggest issue right now with Huntington. Hurdle needs to think out of the box some. He needs to go back to some old school managing in my opinion. They can do this. Just like they did before.
I understand that "NH needs to draft better" is a pretty unobjectionable statement. But I don't think it's a fair assessment. I think his success rate for 1st round picks is probably above average even accounting for draft position. He didn't always make the optimal pick, that's impossible, but ATM, Sanchez and McGuire are his only busts.
I wouldn't call McGuire a bust just yet. Mark Appel is a bust. We didn't get him (wasted pick) and he sucks. If you are putting McGuire down, I would counter with Victor Black. Technically he was a first round pick.