Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Sat Apr 19, 2014 9:38 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 3:05 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:14 pm
Posts: 176
Location: Louisiana
nad69dan wrote:
Smizik wont give it a rest...

I guess he thinks Freddy should never get a day off...

Someone needs to take his blogging privledges away from him...

Quote:
When it was broached to Pirates president Frank Coonelly this week that there was some suspicion about the Pirates decision to begin giving unusual amounts of rest to second baseman Freddy Sanchez, and that the strategy might have something to do with saving money for the franchise, Coonelly became mightily annoyed.

What he pretty much said was this: How dare anyone question the motives of the Pirates.

Coonelly is either being naïve or disingenuous. There are plenty of reasons to question the motives of the Pirates, particularly when it comes to spending money.


http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs ... nelly.aspx


I guess that you figure the rest of the blog entry was a lot of half-truths and lies, then??

Smizik...who I usually don't agree with...actually brought up some examples from THIS administration. He didn't fall back on Tracy and Littlefield. Examples like not resting LaRoche...who was in a terrible slump...to the extent Freddy has been...or constantly playing Moss who didn't hit his weight for a month. They didn't need rested or benched...but the best hitter on the team did?? Or the trade before last season of Torres to Milwaukee for 2 nobodies that were cut at the end of the season. Which saved the Pirates about $3M. Best right handed setup man we had available...and getting rid of him basically forced the Pirates into the infamous Todd Redmond for "Flood Gates" Yates trade.

I've always had a problem with the idea of a "Sunday lineup"...where you have 3 or 4 bench players all starting the same game. There is a reason they are on the bench. It's because others can out perform them. So why would you weaken yourself at 3 or 4 positions at the same time??

You would never hear the Pirates management admit that they were trying to hold Freddy's plate appearances down to save on the vesting. Why?? Because a grievance would be filed in a heartbeat. Not to mention that it would totally pollute the relationship between team and player.

[sarcasm] Nope...Pirates aren't looking to save any money...and are concerned about winning games this year. [/sarcasm]


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 3:23 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
Smizik also questions the motives behind the Bay and Nady Trades.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 3:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:11 pm
Posts: 4977
Location: 120 miles west of Iowa City
I'm getting ready to head out of the office and just read the last additions to this thread and Smizik's Blog. I'll add more later but I think that Smizik's latest entry is a perfect example of what I consider to be irresponsible writing and muckraking. When reading his entry, I simply shook my head in disgust. More to come . . .

_________________
Reflexively, obsessively and tastelessly submitted,
No. 9
Obsessive proponent of situational bunting and 2 strike hitting approaches, reflexively pro-catchers calling good games and tasteless proponent of the value of a RBI.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 4:07 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:26 pm
Posts: 3006
Rod Serling wrote:
Smizik also questions the motives behind the Bay and Nady Trades.


Yes, just like he did with the Giles trade. In fact, I remember either he or Cook writing that the Giles trade was worse than the ARam trade.

The fact is, these guys are paid to be critical, not knowledgeable.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 4:20 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
BBF wrote:
Rod Serling wrote:
Smizik also questions the motives behind the Bay and Nady Trades.


Yes, just like he did with the Giles trade. In fact, I remember either he or Cook writing that the Giles trade was worse than the ARam trade.

The fact is, these guys are paid to be critical, not knowledgeable.



Yes, but they ARE knowledgeable. They have covered Pittsburgh sports for a combined 50 plus years, are intimate with all of the people, and inner workings, of all three pro sports franchises, are respected both locally and nationally, among all media and critics alike, and give credit and superlatives when they are due, namely to the Steelers and Penguins, two franchises that DO, in fact, proudly hold the best ownership groups in their respective sports.

Jason Bay was given away to cut salary, and so was Salomon Torres: No amount of apologizing, homerism, Nutting-Worshipping, or piling on, can change that fact.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 5:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Rod Serling wrote:
BBF wrote:
Rod Serling wrote:
Smizik also questions the motives behind the Bay and Nady Trades.


Yes, just like he did with the Giles trade. In fact, I remember either he or Cook writing that the Giles trade was worse than the ARam trade.

The fact is, these guys are paid to be critical, not knowledgeable.



Yes, but they ARE knowledgeable. They have covered Pittsburgh sports for a combined 50 plus years, are intimate with all of the people, and inner workings, of all three pro sports franchises, are respected both locally and nationally, among all media and critics alike, and give credit and superlatives when they are due, namely to the Steelers and Penguins, two franchises that DO, in fact, proudly hold the best ownership groups in their respective sports.

That's not being knowledgeable; that's pandering to an audience. If Cook and Smizik were really knowledgeable about baseball, then they'd offer some critical analysis of the trades in question. Perhaps they'd actually weigh each side of the trades and offer a suggestion as to why holding on to a star outfielder with only one year left on his contract would be better for a moribund franchise than trading him for two highly regarded prospects, one 3B and one SP, over whom the Bucs would have control for 5+ years; a 4th outfielder that may be able to start regularly; and a reliever that is essentially a lottery ticket. If Smizik and Cook could offer some real analysis as to why the trade is a salary dump and be able to rebut any counter arguments against their positions, then perhaps I'd be willing to call them knowledgeable. Thus far, I have not seen one iota of such baseball knowledge coming from their opinion articles.

Quote:
Jason Bay was given away to cut salary, and so was Salomon Torres: No amount of apologizing, homerism, Nutting-Worshipping, or piling on, can change that fact.

Your "fact" lacks substance. All you're pointing to is their respective salaries and the fact that they are not here to support your argument. However, the surrounding circumstances undermine your position.

A salary dump implies that the only objective of making such a move is to lower costs. As pointed out earlier, if Nutting was intent on dumping salary, then why is Jack Wilson still on the team? Jack was making more money than Bay was, and he was providing less value than Bay was. So, if the objective was to dump salary, then why is the most highly-paid player on the 2008 Pirates still on the team in 2009? You have yet to answer that question in a way that supports your position, and until you do, your position doesn't have a leg to stand on.

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


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 7:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7104
I understand the Torres trade brought nothing in return, but what were you expecting for a 36 year old relief pitcher who A) sucked in 2007 B) was not a happy camper with the organization c) wanted to sue the team over his baseball academies?

You dont think any of those factors were involved in the trade?

_________________
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: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 7:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7104
Rod Serling wrote:
Jason Bay was given away to cut salary, and so was Salomon Torres: No amount of apologizing, homerism, Nutting-Worshipping, or piling on, can change that fact.


Still waiting for proof that Bay was a salary dump...

_________________
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: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 7:11 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:26 pm
Posts: 3006
nad69dan wrote:
I understand the Torres trade brought nothing in return, but what were you expecting for a 36 year old relief pitcher who A) sucked in 2007 B) was not a happy camper with the organization c) wanted to sue the team over his baseball academies?

You dont think any of those factors were involved in the trade?



SALARY DUMP! QUALITY DEPTH! THE TRUTH! Also, you forgot an apostrophe.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 7:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7104
BBF wrote:
nad69dan wrote:
I understand the Torres trade brought nothing in return, but what were you expecting for a 36 year old relief pitcher who A) sucked in 2007 B) was not a happy camper with the organization c) wanted to sue the team over his baseball academies?

You dont think any of those factors were involved in the trade?



SALARY DUMP! QUALITY DEPTH! THE TRUTH! Also, you forgot an apostrophe.


I dont have time for all that stuff...I gotta worship Nutting!!!

_________________
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: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 9:52 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:26 pm
Posts: 3006
nad69dan wrote:
BBF wrote:
nad69dan wrote:
I understand the Torres trade brought nothing in return, but what were you expecting for a 36 year old relief pitcher who A) sucked in 2007 B) was not a happy camper with the organization c) wanted to sue the team over his baseball academies?

You dont think any of those factors were involved in the trade?



SALARY DUMP! QUALITY DEPTH! THE TRUTH! Also, you forgot an apostrophe.


I dont have time for all that stuff...I gotta worship Nutting!!!



HA! You know what would be awesome? A Nutting bobblehead. Then we could all have Bob Nutting nodding over us as we sleep.

:lol:


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 10:27 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
BBF wrote:
[quote="

SALARY DUMP! QUALITY DEPTH! THE TRUTH! Also, you forgot an apostrophe.


I dont have time for all that stuff...I gotta worship Nutting!!![/quote]


HA! You know what would be awesome? A Nutting bobblehead. Then we could all have Bob Nutting nodding over us as we sleep.

:lol:[/quote]


And counting your money as he dumps more salaries. LOL. :lol:


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 4:43 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Rod Serling wrote:
And counting your money as he dumps more salaries. LOL. :lol:

Again, if Nutting is all about dumping salaries, then he's not very good at it: Jack Wilson and his $7.5M salary are still on the team.

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


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 1:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7104
Rod Serling,


We're still waiting for proof of a salary dump...

_________________
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: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 8:27 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
nad69dan wrote:
Rod Serling,


We're still waiting for proof of a salary dump...


I do not "need" to provide the total population of Bob Nutting Fans, namely all four of you who post incessantly on here, with any type of "proof" of a salary dump, whatsoever, in any way, shape, or form.

For quite some time now, since our third baseman was given away to the Cubs, and our setup man/closer was given away to the Brewers, and our All Star-Rookie of the year was given away to the Red Sox, and our power hitting outfielder was given away to the Yankees, it has been widely known throughout baseball that Bob Nutting, who has been the principal figure, has traded away players with large salaries, in return for players who have relatively tiny salaries. In nearly every case, the players traded away have performed at a major league level, while the players acquired in return have either been failures at the major league level, or have performed at a below average level upon arriving in Pittsburgh.

The Burden of "proof" is on the apologists who support an ownership and management who are currently at the helm of a record breaking losing franchise.

Nutting has been in pittsburgh for a long time now.

He has the third lowest payroll in Baseball.

He has a terrible franchise at all levels including most of the minor league teams.

His management is currently attempting to deflect criticism that they are deliberately holding back the at bats of its former all star second baseman, and leading hitter.

His scouting and development department are responsible for drafting failures, year after year after year after year.

His franchise is considered the joke of the major leagues, across the nation.

It's widely understood throughout baseball that the goal of the Bob Nutting owned Pittsburgh Pirates, is not to win games, but to turn a profit.


And that is not how winners run franchises. Not this year, not last year, not ever.

Mr. Nutting does not belong in the same room with Mr. Rooney, or Mr. Burkle, or Mr. Lemieux.

Mr. Nutting needs to go back to running casinos in West Virginia, and abdicate his ownership of this once proud franchise, to a responsible, passionate, and winning, ownership.

No, I will not stop, ever, until the losing, the salary dumping, the spinning, and the lying, end.

There's alot more of me, than there are of you.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 9:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 3929
Location: Zelienople, PA
My lord, what idiocy.

You simply cannot make a logical arguement. You have no facts, you can't get your timelines right (Bay as rookie of the year - how many years after?).

This is the equivalent of a 14 year old using the internet to hide behind, because he knows he will never have to make this type of "arguement" in person.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 10:42 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
ZelieMike wrote:
My lord, what idiocy.

You simply cannot make a logical arguement. You have no facts, you can't get your timelines right (Bay as rookie of the year - how many years after?).

This is the equivalent of a 14 year old using the internet to hide behind, because he knows he will never have to make this type of "arguement" in person.

ZM



Anytime, anyplace, we can have this argument. Respond, or shut up.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 10:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 3173
Location: Darlington, Pennsylvania
Rod i do agree with you to a point, but you don't make you points in the best way, and this line makes no sense to me.
Quote:
There's alot more of me, than there are of you.


How many people are you Rod?

_________________
I break more news than CIA posters break wind!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 10:59 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 384
Colin21 wrote:
Rod i do agree with you to a point, but you don't make you points in the best way, and this line makes no sense to me.
Quote:
There's alot more of me, than there are of you.


How many people are you Rod?



"Me"=People who feel Bob Nuttings' ownership is based on making money by cutting salary.

"Them"=People who support an ownership that is not interested in putting a winning product on the field.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Smizik Is At It Again
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 11:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 3173
Location: Darlington, Pennsylvania
I believe it is profit based, and we wont see us signing big name free agents until he starts losing money, but i do think we are trying to put a winner on the field the cheap way. The cheap way is drafting good players and getting players from different countries. I think last year was the first year they took a step that way. I liked Bay alot and i think we could have got something better for him, but in reality he wasn't going to re-sign with us and his career will be over before we have a winning team.


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Bucfan, Google [Bot] and 2 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