Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Mon Jul 28, 2014 7:22 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 12:14 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:41 pm
Posts: 843
I was thinking about whether the Pirates would have a shot at playoff contention this year with Bay and Nady still on the team (I believe both were still under contract for 2009), especially considering they haven't gotten much production this year from the players they got in those trades. I did a quick and dirty analysis to see...

LF
Jason Bay 2009 VORP: 8.5
Nyjer Morgan 2009 VORP: 4.1

RF
Xavier Nady 2009 VORP: 0.3
Brandon Moss 2009 VORP: -0.1

The net difference is 4.8 runs, which translates to a difference of about a half a win in the standings so far using Pythagorean projections. This in turn translates to an eight win difference over the course of the season, assuming everyone stayed healthy (i.e., assuming Nady would not have broken his arm had he stayed in Pittsburgh). As a disclaimer, I'm fully aware of how small the sample size is to this point.

I don't put this out there to criticize the trades, but just to see what people think. It's still too early to decide whether the Pirates got the raw end of the deal in either trade, but with the quality of the starting pitching so far, I cannot get rid of this nagging feeling that the Pirates would have a legit shot at the NL Central were Bay and Nady still around.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 12:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 6068
Location: Keystone State
Not with the Cubs in the division. .500 would be a possibility. But if the pitching continues, it's a possibility anyway.

_________________
The Bucs are going all the way, all the way this year!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:44 pm
Posts: 10516
8 wins over this season measn the difference between 70 and 78 wins. How is that relevant to getting into the playoffs?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:29 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm
Posts: 3364
Location: Wheeling, WV
Time to let go of those trades. We gat several players in each trade, some very young and just now showing their worth in ther minors. There is no way to compare just Moss (younger then Bay was coming to the majors) and ignore the others. Nady was going to be gone anyway.

Nady was gone anyway because of Boras and ignore it all you want he broke his arm and will not hit a lick for a long time.

Noticed you fail to mention Tabata.

We've moved on and at 500 without either of them. No worse then last year at the same time. Stop the crying and be a Pirate fan.

_________________
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: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
jaybee24 wrote:
I don't put this out there to criticize the trades, but just to see what people think. It's still too early to decide whether the Pirates got the raw end of the deal in either trade, but with the quality of the starting pitching so far, I cannot get rid of this nagging feeling that the Pirates would have a legit shot at the NL Central were Bay and Nady still around.

Here's one way to get rid of that nagging feeling: consider that the Pirates did not have a legit shot at the NL Central last year when Bay and Nady were still around. Had we not traded those players, the makeup of the current team would likely be no different than the makeup of last year's team, except that everyone would be one year older. We'd still have no third baseman to speak of, our 4th and 5th starter would likely be worse than Ohlendorf and Karstens, and we'd still have the remaining flawed players that are carry-overs from last season. If we didn't have a shot with Bay and Nady last year, we certainly would not have a shot with them this year, and we'd have even less of a shot in years to come.

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


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:43 pm
Posts: 4763
Location: Omaha, NE via Sioux City, Kansas City, and Chicago
Willton wrote:
We'd still have no third baseman to speak of, our 4th and 5th starter would likely be worse than Ohlendorf and Karstens, and we'd still have the remaining flawed players that are carry-overs from last season.


We probably would have taken a chance on one or two free agent pitchers.

_________________
North Dakota State Bison (0-0) at Iowa State Cyclones (0-0)
Jack Trice Stadium
August 30, 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
IA Pirate wrote:
Willton wrote:
We'd still have no third baseman to speak of, our 4th and 5th starter would likely be worse than Ohlendorf and Karstens, and we'd still have the remaining flawed players that are carry-overs from last season.


We probably would have taken a chance on one or two free agent pitchers.

Like who?

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


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:43 pm
Posts: 4763
Location: Omaha, NE via Sioux City, Kansas City, and Chicago
No idea but the Buccos wouldn't have stood pat. Who knows, Gorzo might be with the big club.

_________________
North Dakota State Bison (0-0) at Iowa State Cyclones (0-0)
Jack Trice Stadium
August 30, 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
IA Pirate wrote:
No idea but the Buccos wouldn't have stood pat. Who knows, Gorzo might be with the big club.

Then, like I said, the 4th and 5th starters would likely be worse than Ohlendorf and Karstens.

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


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:44 pm
Posts: 10516
Willton wrote:
Here's one way to get rid of that nagging feeling: consider that the Pirates did not have a legit shot at the NL Central last year when Bay and Nady were still around. Had we not traded those players, the makeup of the current team would likely be no different than the makeup of last year's team, except that everyone would be one year older. We'd still have no third baseman to speak of, our 4th and 5th starter would likely be worse than Ohlendorf and Karstens, and we'd still have the remaining flawed players that are carry-overs from last season. If we didn't have a shot with Bay and Nady last year, we certainly would not have a shot with them this year, and we'd have even less of a shot in years to come.

Dave Littlefield thinks that would be a great plan, if we just added a vet starter like Paul Byrd and a gritty veteran like Ty Wigginton.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:08 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:22 pm
Posts: 2495
Bucfan wrote:
Willton wrote:
Here's one way to get rid of that nagging feeling: consider that the Pirates did not have a legit shot at the NL Central last year when Bay and Nady were still around. Had we not traded those players, the makeup of the current team would likely be no different than the makeup of last year's team, except that everyone would be one year older. We'd still have no third baseman to speak of, our 4th and 5th starter would likely be worse than Ohlendorf and Karstens, and we'd still have the remaining flawed players that are carry-overs from last season. If we didn't have a shot with Bay and Nady last year, we certainly would not have a shot with them this year, and we'd have even less of a shot in years to come.

Dave Littlefield thinks that would be a great plan, if we just added a vet starter like Paul Byrd and a gritty veteran like Ty Wigginton.


Man, if that weren't true, it would be funny. Fookin' Littlefield!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:44 pm
Posts: 10516
Argentum wrote:
Man, if that weren't true, it would be funny. Fookin' Littlefield!


Image
[Confused for a second ... then]
"Oh yeah, heh, I was just kidding. Yeah, that's the ticket."


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:33 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 1:30 pm
Posts: 61
Many of you may recall that I was in favor of the Nady trade but was dead-set against the Bay trade. In hindsight my argument looks stronger considering the return for Bay, but Hansen's walking everyone in the ball park last fall and the struggles of Bantam Laroche asside, doesn't even figure into my reasoning.

I maintain they should have kept Bay for the same reason we have been banging our heads against the wall for ten years. In short there is no continuity, no veteran leadership, so we just keep sending young guys out to fail, with too much pressure put on them. These guys don't know how to win, because there is no one there to help them win.

As I see it, had they kept Bay, we would be a much stronger team this year, that would probably contend for the wild card until August and would probably break the under .500 streak. It would have a much more powerful lineup and its bench would be better. Let's assume Morgan beats out Moss, who then becomes the fourth outfielder. I think a lineup of Morgan-Sanchez-McClouth-Bay-Doumit-Ad. Laroche-3rd baseman (for argument say we don't trade Bautista last year for a bucket of balls)-Jack is a much more potent line up than the one we keep rolling out this year and hope they catch fire.

If they contend with that line up we sign Bay to a 12 million/year or so deal (and give Nutting the chance to prove he is willing to spend his money) and see about getting McCutcheon some looks in the fall.

For those reasons I still maintain the Bay trade was a mistake, and, in the back of my mind, still think it was a Nutting salary dump.

As I pointed out in another post, I don't care a whit about Andrew McCutcheon like some on this board, who think he is the Messiah or something. To me he is just another Quad A rookie who has to prove himself after he gets here. I am sick of waiting for the next Ron Wright. I want to see succesful MLB now, and keeping Bay would have given us a better chance of it, than the current lineup that features Morgan, Moss and An Laroche who won't hit 25 homers between them.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 6068
Location: Keystone State
Actually, the Pirates can still sign Bay for $12 million a year if they can get him for that. He will be a free agent after this season. So really, it didn't matter that you traded him. You can still get him and have the four players you received in the trade.

But is Bay really worth $12 million a year? From initial reactions, the Red Sox don't think so.

_________________
The Bucs are going all the way, all the way this year!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:44 pm
Posts: 10516
Henry Clay Sr. wrote:
Many of you may recall that I was in favor of the Nady trade but was dead-set against the Bay trade. In hindsight my argument looks stronger considering the return for Bay, but Hansen's walking everyone in the ball park last fall and the struggles of Bantam Laroche asside, doesn't even figure into my reasoning.

I maintain they should have kept Bay for the same reason we have been banging our heads against the wall for ten years. In short there is no continuity, no veteran leadership, so we just keep sending young guys out to fail, with too much pressure put on them. These guys don't know how to win, because there is no one there to help them win.

Not clear on how keeping Bay would have helped the Pirates "learn" how to win, since they did not win with Bay in the line-up. The problem is not "learning how to win"; the problem is that the Pirates do not have the talent to compete.

The Bay trade was meant to address that. The Buccos received a very high-ceiling 3B'man, a starting OF'er, a reliever who can be unhittable if he harnesses his talent, and a starter who is a potential top of the rotation guy. Three extremely "high ceiling" players.

The Pirates have taken lower risk players for years. They have avoided high risk players - guys like Lincecum and BJ Upton. Their talent level on the major league roster and, even more so, the minors showed it.

Henry Clay Sr. wrote:
As I pointed out in another post, I don't care a whit about Andrew McCutcheon like some on this board, who think he is the Messiah or something. To me he is just another Quad A rookie who has to prove himself after he gets here. I am sick of waiting for the next Ron Wright. I want to see succesful MLB now, and keeping Bay would have given us a better chance of it, than the current lineup that features Morgan, Moss and An Laroche who won't hit 25 homers between them.


I believe that Moss and Laroche hit 35 HR's combined this year. And next year, when the Pirates would have had nothing after Bay leaves as a free agent, they combine for more than 40.

Also, McCutchen is the type of talent that will make the Pirates a contender for the divsion, and not a contender for 80 wins. His power, speed, defense, plate discipline are a combination that is extremely rare.

Putting a hitter of his quality at leadoff, and having bats like McLouth, Doumit and (later) Alvarez, Tabata, Laroche behind him is the way to win a championship.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:13 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:28 pm
Posts: 1359
Henry,,,following your logic backward, I assume you opposed the Bay/Perez for Giles trade and the Giles for Rincon trade? If I understand you correctly we should still have that veteran presense of Ricardo Rincon for the sake of continuity.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:22 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:41 pm
Posts: 843
bucco boy wrote:
Actually, the Pirates can still sign Bay for $12 million a year if they can get him for that. He will be a free agent after this season. So really, it didn't matter that you traded him. You can still get him and have the four players you received in the trade.

But is Bay really worth $12 million a year? From initial reactions, the Red Sox don't think so.


I don't know if there has been any effort so far to sign him, but my impression is that if they had a chance to do so, they would sign him at 12 mil per year in a heart beat right now, probably for the next three years, even though he's 30. The Sox organization and fans love him. He killed the ball last year in the playoffs and is continuing to do so this year (I think his OPS+ is north of 200). Also consider that Bay replaced Manny Ramirez, who was making twice as much. I think the Sox would gladly pay 12 mil a year for him. They'll probably end up paying him more.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 6068
Location: Keystone State
jaybee24 wrote:
bucco boy wrote:
Actually, the Pirates can still sign Bay for $12 million a year if they can get him for that. He will be a free agent after this season. So really, it didn't matter that you traded him. You can still get him and have the four players you received in the trade.

But is Bay really worth $12 million a year? From initial reactions, the Red Sox don't think so.


I don't know if there has been any effort so far to sign him, but my impression is that if they had a chance to do so, they would sign him at 12 mil per year in a heart beat right now, probably for the next three years, even though he's 30. The Sox organization and fans love him. He killed the ball last year in the playoffs and is continuing to do so this year (I think his OPS+ is north of 200). Also consider that Bay replaced Manny Ramirez, who was making twice as much. I think the Sox would gladly pay 12 mil a year for him. They'll probably end up paying him more.


They were in negotiations in spring training and broke them off. Doesn't mean they won't start talking again,

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1397 ... -jason-bay

_________________
The Bucs are going all the way, all the way this year!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:26 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:46 am
Posts: 3500
Location: Economy, PA
In exchange for 3 players, one of whom is out for the season, the other of whom is a mediocre middle reliever, we got two starting position players, two members of our starting rotation, a good middle reliever, and 3 solid prospects in the minors.

Bay is a great player and I wish we still had him, but weneeded these 8 players.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Hypothetical
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Henry Clay Sr. wrote:
Many of you may recall that I was in favor of the Nady trade but was dead-set against the Bay trade. In hindsight my argument looks stronger considering the return for Bay, but Hansen's walking everyone in the ball park last fall and the struggles of Bantam Laroche asside, doesn't even figure into my reasoning.

I maintain they should have kept Bay for the same reason we have been banging our heads against the wall for ten years. In short there is no continuity, no veteran leadership, so we just keep sending young guys out to fail, with too much pressure put on them. These guys don't know how to win, because there is no one there to help them win.

I don't understand how a player who has never been on a winning team can suddenly teach our current players "how to win." Besides, we've had "continuity" and "veteran leadership" (see Jason Kendall and Brian Giles) before, and it still wasn't enough to turn chicken shit into chicken soup. The team needed better ingredients.

Quote:
As I see it, had they kept Bay, we would be a much stronger team this year, that would probably contend for the wild card until August and would probably break the under .500 streak. It would have a much more powerful lineup and its bench would be better. Let's assume Morgan beats out Moss, who then becomes the fourth outfielder. I think a lineup of Morgan-Sanchez-McClouth-Bay-Doumit-Ad. Laroche-3rd baseman (for argument say we don't trade Bautista last year for a bucket of balls)-Jack is a much more potent line up than the one we keep rolling out this year and hope they catch fire.

You seem to forget that the team also has pitching woes, Duke's hot start notwithstanding, and while keeping Bay would have made the lineup undoubtedly better, it does not address the worst pitching rotation of 2008. If the Pirates could not contend with Bay last season, then I don't see how Bay could make the same team that now lacks a competent RF and 3B contend.

Further, .500 is a pretty weak goal. No one's going to throw a parade for the Pirates if they suddenly win 81 games. The team should be striving for the playoffs, and standing-pat was not going to help that cause.

Quote:
For those reasons I still maintain the Bay trade was a mistake, and, in the back of my mind, still think it was a Nutting salary dump.

What evidence do you have that says the Bay trade was a salary dump? LaRoche was one of the most highly regarded prospects in the league. Brian Morris was a 1st round draft pick. You're making your assertion based on hindsight bias, and it lacks credibility.

Quote:
As I pointed out in another post, I don't care a whit about Andrew McCutcheon like some on this board, who think he is the Messiah or something. To me he is just another Quad A rookie who has to prove himself after he gets here. I am sick of waiting for the next Ron Wright. I want to see succesful MLB now, and keeping Bay would have given us a better chance of it, than the current lineup that features Morgan, Moss and An Laroche who won't hit 25 homers between them.

Dave Littlefield, is that you?

_________________
"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  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 4 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