one player? there aren't even two.

by johnnycuff on Apr 25, 2008 2:15 PM EDT Comment 4 comments

This was originally going to be a reply to zogger's post but it got way out of hand so I made it a diary... err fanpost. I don't mean to pick on his premise because I know he means one player in terms of making us a better team, not necessarily a good team. It just raised a related point to me as I was writing it. Plus it's fun to argue about these things.

A whole team's problems will never be solved by the acquisition of a single player - especially this team. This is not a slow start to the season. This is how the 2008 Pittsburgh Pirates are going to play. I mean all of it, sweeping the Reds and being swept the Cubs alike. We're 9-13, on pace to win (surprise!) 66 games and we're actually overperforming our Pythagorean W/L by a game. We're just not a good baseball team.

The original question was to name one player, reality aside, that you as fictional GM would acquire to make the Pirates a better team. This is a fun question because the huge number of currently and/or permanently below average players on our team allows you to argue for improvement from just about any position on the roster.

However, being a relentless homer, I'll even spot us another player. Let's pick two, and why not the best two that I can come up with. The Pirates could acquire Johan Santana and Alex Rodriguez for zero dollars and zero prospects and we'd still have trouble winning our division.

Start with our starting pitching, which, last I checked is the worst in the league. Santana can only pitch every 5 days, so we still have to use 4 of our other starters. Let's say he replaces Matt Morris in the rotation. Easy choice. I'm going to guess and say Morris and/or his eventual replacement (JVB?) in the #5 spot on this team will win 7 games this year. Santana won between 15-20 games with a similarly anemic offense in Minnesota over the last 4 years so we'll split the difference and and give him 17. I won't even account for the differences between the Pirates bullpen and the Twins bullpens of the past, which would historically favor the Juan Rincon-Pat Neshek-Joe Nathan backend which, since this is a completely unscientific argument, we'll use to discount the AL-to-NL league switch. So that's an extra 10 wins. Since the Pirates are a virtually unchanged 68 win team, then great, we're at 78 wins. Almost to .500!

Now for Mr. Rodriguez. Jack Wilson will eventually be back at shortstop, so let's play A-Rod at third base and bat him in the cleanup spot. Since he's not a Yankee anymore, he won't see nearly as many opportunities with runners on base. Ryan Doumit is currently in the cleanup spot, hitting .344, slugging .574 and he has 8 RBIs. 8! Granted he hasn't hit there all year but he has the same amount as Cristian Guzman and Jason Kendall, neither of whom will ever sniff the middle of a lineup again. In addition, new third baseman A-Rod is going to get walked a ton. I'm talking like more than the 135 times Brian Giles did in 2002. I'm talking Barry Bonds in those terrible Giants lineups walk numbers. Still, A-Rod can fall out of bed with a sprained ankle and a tequila hangover and drive in 100 runs - even in our lineup - so let's give him that. Also due to his absurd OBP, we'd score more runs because presumably the hitters behind him will eventually start hitting and drive in some more runs. (I'm looking at you Adam "454 OPS" Laroche) So what are A-Rod's extra runs worth, another 10 wins? Let's say 15. Spectacular, we're at 93 wins! The Pirates with 93 wins? Can you imagine?

Small problem. The Cubbies are 15-7, on pace to win 110 games. Their Pythagorean puts them at 14-8, on pace for 103 wins, so their record isn't a mere illusion.

It's not just Carlos Zambrano, Alfonso Soriano (who actually can claim no responsibility for their hot start) and Derek Lee that make the Cubs great, just like it wouldn't be Johan Santana, A-Rod and ... umm... Nate McLouth? that would make these pretend Pirates great. It's Carlos Zambrano, Alfonso Soriano, Derek Lee, Aramis Ramirez, Geovanny Soto, Rich Hill, Mark Derosa, Kerry Wood, Ryan Theriot, Kosuke Fukudome, Ted Lilly, Bobby Howry, Reed Johnson, and Carlos Marmol that make them great. They're not all superstars (and some by far not) but they're above average and as a whole superior to any combination of players (including our imaginary new acquisitions) we could send out. Look at their reserves. Jon Lieber is a swing man. Felix Pie is a 23 year-old potential superstar and he's having trouble cracking the lineup. Phil Dumatrait? Nyjer Morgan?

This is my point, though it took a long time to get here, that there's no quick fix to turn the Pirates into a winning team and it has nothing to do with Alex Rodriguez and Johan Santana. My conclusion that two players (one of whom would maybe appear in 35 games) would give us an additional 25 wins is absurd. The real point is that this team as it is cannot and will not compete because it has more holes than a Barry Bonds alibi. There's a fire sale coming this summer in Pittsburgh and we can only hope that Neal Huntington is a smart dealer.

0 recs | Comment 4 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I agree!

johnnycuff,

I totally agree with you. We are more than 2 players away from being any sort of playoff team. As the game last night showed again, our starters are digging us deep into holes that our hitters (weak as they are) can’t get us out of. We are weak all around the diamond.

Now to show my age, back in the 60’s the Bucs were going thru the same thing. We won in ‘60, but then had weak teams until 1971. Even though we had Clemente and Stargell, it wasn’t until our ptiching (Blass and others) improved and we got hitters (Oliver, Hebner, etc.) did we contend. It was not adding superstars, but getting above average players to surround the stars that made the difference. Right now we have no stars and few even average players.

It’s going to be a long time and require alot of good decisions to get us back competitive again. Even if the Nuttings open their wallets to buy 1 or 2 free agents, it won’t be the solution. We need to build a core so then we can be 1 or 2 free agent signing away from glory.

by zogger on Apr 26, 2008 9:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Of course you're probably right.

But wouldn’t you love to root for a team that wins 93 games. Wouldn’t it excite you to go to the Park and watch Santana and A-Rod. Plus 93 wins could get you the wild card spot. If magic could happen we could be World Champs with this team.

Zogger – I don’t know how old you are, but the teams of the sixties, while never winning a title, were much better than mediocre. In the ten year period 1961 -1970 they were 71 games above .500 and on at least three occasions were in the race deep in to the season. And that includes one 74-88 season they came in last. I remember those teams fondly. I was a teenager growing up in South Jersey and can remember getting under my blanket late at night and listening to the immortal Bob Prince doing the west coast games.
You are right that we were dreadfully short on pitchers, but we did have Bob Veale, Alvin O’Neal McBean, Don Cardwell, Woody Fryman, the aging combo of Bob Friend and Vern Law for half the decade, and in the latter half the young Steve Blass, Bob Moose, and Dock Ellis. Jim Bunning and Wilbur Wood made brief appearance, and like his compatriots Friend and Law, Elroy Face pitched well into the sixties. These are not great, but I challange you to say they were not servicable, competant major leaguers.
As for hitters you would of course start with Roberto, followed by Willie (my all time favorite, whose face smiles back at me every time I turn on my computer). But the Pirates also had Donn Clendenon, Gene Alley (a player on his way to greatness until beaned – the Herb Score of shortstops), the pesky Matty Alou – Manny Mota combo, an aging but still effective Maury Wills, and as mentioned the young Richie Hebner, Bob Robertson, Al Oliver, and Manny Sanguillen who were alll significant contributors by 1969.
And to top it off almost every day in the 60’s the greatest 2nd baseman to every step on a field patrolled his area better than anyone before of since.

Have some respect for the group – I grew up with them and loved them all. Consider what we have now.

by meandterry on Apr 28, 2008 10:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

No Disrespect to the 60's teams intended

I am 56 and I recall many of the players you mentioned very fondly. Maz is (ofcourse) simply the best.

Yes, the 60’s team had better records than the present team, but they still didn’t win until the starting pitchers bloomed and we got the good young players who you mentioned. To win you need some superstars with better than average players around them. Plus leadership. The 60’s team had alot of leadership-which is lacking in the present team. By 1970-1972 the Bucs were a powerhouse. Remember the first 6 hitters in the lineup who all had averages >.300?

We are lacking in talent and desire. Hopefully the new regime can fix this.

by zogger on Apr 28, 2008 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You reached the right conclusion but for the wrong reason. It is very unlikely that the Cubs will win 100+ games this season. Somewhere in the low to mid 90s is much more realistic. Alas, adding Santana and A-Rod would probably not be nearly enough to bring the current Pirate team to that level.

by WestCoastBuc on Apr 29, 2008 1:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs