Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Thu Dec 18, 2014 8:50 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:32 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:56 am
Posts: 24
I felt the Pirates should have re-signed both players. Maholm is/was a solid back of the rotation starter who took the ball every 5th day. He eventually signed with the Cubs for only $4.25 million (with a $6.5 million 2013 option). The Pirates decided to fill his rotation spot with the often injured Erik Bedard and it backfired badly. Maholm went 13-11 with a 3.67 era, made 31 starts and pitched great for the Braves down the stretch. He even increased his strikeout numbers this year (which couldn't have been expected).

Doumit signed with Minnesota and I thought they utilized him very well serving as the second catcher, an outfielder and mostly a DH. Doumit certainly is a butcher in the field but his offense has to make up for a good portion of that. He has a decent arm as well (and we saw this year that the stealing problems only got worse). He is injury prone as a catcher but I still think the Pirates should have paid him the $3 million he got from Minnesota. He hit .275/.320/.461 for a .781 OPS, which would have been a huge help to our lineup. The Pirates could have used a defensive replacement for him late in games and played him a bit in the outfield since Presley and Tabata had horrible years.

So with that being said, I'm very surprised that Huntington hasn't taken more abuse for letting these two guys go. I know a lot of people soured on Doumit because of his defense but Maholm deserved to stay. Now going into 2013, we once again need a new starting catcher and another starting pitcher.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 9:25 am 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:43 pm
Posts: 5012
Location: Omaha, NE via Sioux City, Kansas City, and Chicago
I will be one of the few people that will agree with you on Doumit. He would have been a huge asset to the Pirates this past season. I watched a lot of Twins games this season and they raved about him.

Now you'll get the "Yeah but..." replies from those that didn't actually watch the games...

_________________
Iowa State Cyclones (2-9) at #3 Texas Christian Horned Frogs (10-1)
Saturday, December 6, 2014 11:00 AM
Amon G. Carter Stadium, Forth Worth, TX
ABC


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:28 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:27 am
Posts: 1462
Location: Eastern Shore
I don't know about Doumit, but Maholm seems an unnecessary casualty of what I call The Any Body Fallacy. As in any body can be a 5th starter. It's been repeated here several times in the context of any body can be a short reliever, any body can be a reliever. If any body could do that, Rick van den Hurk would get 30 saves next year. Letting quality role players go in the hopes of finding someone just as good for less money is, at best, a status quo proposition. At it's worst, it contributes mightily to the kind of ball playing we got in August and September.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:30 am 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 2285
Location: Naples, FL
I thought the people that "didn't watch the games" were the ones that liked Doumit?

_________________
AAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 2285
Location: Naples, FL
But would I have liked him over Barajas? Absolutely. I mean, come on...it's Barajas.

_________________
AAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:38 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:46 am
Posts: 3706
Location: Economy, PA
The Pirates would have had to exercise a 9 million dollar option to keep Maholm. The contract he signed with the Cubs showed that his market value at the time was half that. I cannot fault them for that decision regardless of how well he pitched.

Minnesota plays beer-league softball, so Doumit fits in well with them.

While I admit I would rather have had Doumit than Barajs this year, in the big picture we have no room for position players who can't play defense.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:21 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 10:28 am
Posts: 1096
SUPERCHARGED APE wrote:
But would I have liked him over Barajas? Absolutely. I mean, come on...it's Barajas.


There is a Pirate Prospect article where Hurdle says he talked with Barajas at their exit interview for the season to feel out if he would be ok coming back as a backup catcher and only catch 60 to 80 games instead of 80 to 100. If we bring Rod Barajas back I may puke. I certainly won't be watching the Pirates cause that would mean they simply do not give a rats ass.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:50 pm
Posts: 3879
Location: Glenshaw, PA
Mister Pittsburgh wrote:
SUPERCHARGED APE wrote:
But would I have liked him over Barajas? Absolutely. I mean, come on...it's Barajas.


There is a Pirate Prospect article where Hurdle says he talked with Barajas at their exit interview for the season to feel out if he would be ok coming back as a backup catcher and only catch 60 to 80 games instead of 80 to 100. If we bring Rod Barajas back I may puke. I certainly won't be watching the Pirates cause that would mean they simply do not give a rats ass.


I can understand Hurdle wanting to bring that up early, catcher's who can't hit or catch are certain to be in high demand [#sarcasm].

With Iannetta off the market this week, I don't see a big FA upgrade out there, give Tony Sanchez a shot, at least he can play D (and he has to go on the 40 man anyway). I think the only FAs I would pursue would be former Bucco David Ross, that said he'll be 36 next year, or Russell Martin, but I doubt he'd want to come here.

_________________
Well NH did get Cutch signed, but what have you done for me lately?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:27 pm
Posts: 413
Location: Morgantown, WV, via Charleston, WV
Do you think maybe Hurdle had to ask that because our $15 million dollar, top-of-the-rotation pitcher wants him as his personal catcher???


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:42 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:21 am
Posts: 5705
Tough call on both. Both had really worn out their welcomes (at least that seemed to be the perception) and probably benefitted from the change of scenery (surely Doumit, getting to DH more).

However, it can't be overstated how much Doumit would have been an improvement over Barajas and Maholm, even at his $9 M option, probably would have produced at an even or probably better clip than Bedard. Had Paulie produced like he did for the whole year, the $9 M would have been a slight over pay, but 'worth it' as it probably would have bought the Bucs a few W's.

I'm more inclined to say that the loss of Maholm was 'worse' than the loss of Doumit.

At least with Barajas, he may have had a part in the A.J. rejuvination. Losing Maholm opened the door for a 1/2 price Bedard, which was a true stop-gap option, which ended badly.

Incidentally, unlikely as it may be, I'd like to see Maholm back in black-and-gold. He always seemed like a decent fit with this team.

_________________
Rage, rage against the regression of the light.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:47 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:21 am
Posts: 5705
Charleston_Charlies wrote:
Do you think maybe Hurdle had to ask that because our $15 million dollar, top-of-the-rotation pitcher wants him as his personal catcher???


Probably the case, but...

The Bucs can't waste a roster spot on Barajas, whether he's catching 60-80 games/year or only when A.J. pitches.

It's time to see what TS can do and if Fort really can hold his nickname down.

_________________
Rage, rage against the regression of the light.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:10 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 11:28 pm
Posts: 2170
All the dumbass members here always complained about how bad Doumit's defense was...Well look at Rod Barajas. The guy was throwing out a whole 7% of baserunners.

_________________
0 straight losing seasons


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:05 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Ryann wrote:
All the dumbass members here always complained about how bad Doumit's defense was...Well look at Rod Barajas. The guy was throwing out a whole 7% of baserunners.

I don't see anyone here claiming to be satisfied with Barajas.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:54 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm
Posts: 3364
Location: Wheeling, WV
The question here is should Malholm and Doumit still be Pirates. The answer is no. Maholm was way over his worth and last I checked, we have no DH and that makes Doumit useless to us.

_________________
2011 Will Be Our Year -- well make that 2012 (just saying) So it looks like 2013 now - how long must this go on!
THIS IS IT-- NO MORE STREAK!!! *** Finally*** Time to win it in 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 5:34 pm
Posts: 950
Location: Rochester, New York
Substitute2 wrote:
last I checked, we have no DH and that makes Doumit useless to us.


Ding, ding, ding. Doumit provides a good bat when he's healthy. He can't stay healthy playing catcher.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:31 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 11:28 pm
Posts: 2170
Willton wrote:
Ryann wrote:
All the dumbass members here always complained about how bad Doumit's defense was...Well look at Rod Barajas. The guy was throwing out a whole 7% of baserunners.

I don't see anyone here claiming to be satisfied with Barajas.

Throughout the season especially before the downturn MANY on the board were raving about how much of a better defensive player Barajas was.

_________________
0 straight losing seasons


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:54 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:21 am
Posts: 5705
Ryann wrote:
Willton wrote:
Ryann wrote:
All the dumbass members here always complained about how bad Doumit's defense was...Well look at Rod Barajas. The guy was throwing out a whole 7% of baserunners.

I don't see anyone here claiming to be satisfied with Barajas.

Throughout the season especially before the downturn MANY on the board were raving about how much of a better defensive player Barajas was.


Can't speak for everyone, but they probably meant (specifically) passed balls and/or wild pitches. Barajas had only 7 and 25 of each, respectively.

Conversely, Doumit averaged 4 and 39.5/year (and factor in injuries, shortened 'learning curb' years and/or judicious use behind the dish and those numbers would be higher than they would appear; I don't know his 162/full year average).

Granted, Barajas' dWAR was equal to Doumit's last year (-0.6), so it's a wash, but technically Barajas was better than Doumit in that respect (just as Doumit is/was clearly better at throwing out runners).

Also, FWIW, I can't find a game log of Rod's 2012 defensive stats. It would be interesting to see just how bad his SB/CS (and/or PB/WP) #'s were as the season went on. I'd take a guess that as the season unfolded his #'s got worse, due to age/injuries and general melancholy.

EDIT: Lastly 'and also', I didn't look up Rod's ERA, but again I would guess that (thanks in part to an improved pitching staff that) when he was behind the plate that the Pirates pitchers had a lower ERA than when Doumit had been. Surely someone smarter than I can look it up and prove it/otherwise.

_________________
Rage, rage against the regression of the light.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7311
Barajas sucked, but you cant fully put all the stolen bases on the catchers. Yadier Molina would have had a tough time throwing out runners if he was catching the Pirates pitching staff.

_________________
I say keep the $50 and ban him anyway...

For those jumping ship, we'll keep the bandwagon warm for you...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5558
Location: Pittsburgh
Ryann wrote:
Willton wrote:
Ryann wrote:
All the dumbass members here always complained about how bad Doumit's defense was...Well look at Rod Barajas. The guy was throwing out a whole 7% of baserunners.

I don't see anyone here claiming to be satisfied with Barajas.

Throughout the season especially before the downturn MANY on the board were raving about how much of a better defensive player Barajas was.

Before the downturn, after the downturn, and probably after he's dead and in his grave, Rod Barajas is vastly superior to Doumit defensively.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 11:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Ryann wrote:
Willton wrote:
Ryann wrote:
All the dumbass members here always complained about how bad Doumit's defense was...Well look at Rod Barajas. The guy was throwing out a whole 7% of baserunners.

I don't see anyone here claiming to be satisfied with Barajas.

Throughout the season especially before the downturn MANY on the board were raving about how much of a better defensive player Barajas was.

Being better than Doumit defensively and being an unsatisfactory catching option are not mutually exclusive.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits