Why Andy LaRoche Should Get Playing Time, and Delwyn Young Shouldn't
by Charlie Wilmoth on May 7, 2009 6:00 PM EDT
Email
PrintFrom the Post-Gazette's Q+A today:
A final point: [Delwyn] Young is about the same age as Moss and [Andy] LaRoche, so it might be seen as thoroughly puzzling that management is not giving this player the same chance. (His start last night was his first.) He has quite the pedigree as a hitter, and he has done nothing to dispel that in his severely limited opportunities with the Pirates.
Although the Dodgers' management team isn't exactly the sharpest in the shed, why would even they have traded a player with such a "pedigree" for players to be named later, which usually roughly translates as "bupkis"? The answer is that Young just doesn't have "quite the pedigree" if you understand things like minor league statistics, park effects, and age relative to league. It's no accident that LaRoche cost much more to acquire and has been all over top prospect lists for years, while Young barely rated a mention. Young has not received the same chance as LaRoche and Moss, and this is as it should be.
First, Young isn't about the same age as Moss and LaRoche. He's over a year older, which doesn't sound like a lot but makes a big difference in baseball terms. Young was humming along decently as a prospect until he played his first full season in Las Vegas as a 24-year-old and hit .273/.326/.457, which is terrible. Rule of thumb: offensive stats in any minor league park in the desert or the mountain West have to be viewed carefully. Las Vegas is one of the best places to hit in all of professional baseball, and Young's .783 OPS that year placed him behind such luminaries as Jeff Duncan and Joel Guzman. (LaRoche, in comparison, had a .950 OPS at Las Vegas that year despite being younger and not having played at that level before.)
Since then, Young has received most of his at bats at Las Vegas, and while he's hit well, a guy in his mid-20s who doesn't field and is repeating a level at one of the best places to hit in the minors had better hit, or he's not even going to have a job in the minors for long. Young was probably a hair more interesting than the typical overaged minor league slugger, but only a hair.
Not only did LaRoche hit better than Young in the minors, and at younger ages, but LaRoche has been a favorite of prospect hounds and scouts for years, and he's a credible defensive third baseman. And beyond just OPSes, his statistical profile is more interesting than Young's. Young is a well-rounded hitter, but he doesn't have any exceptional skills--he has a little bit of power, his batting averages have been decent but not great, and he draws a few walks. LaRoche, on the other hand, showed exceptional control of the strike zone in the minors, walking almost as often as he struck out, which suggests that if given time, he has a better chance of developing his other skills (power, contact) as time goes on.
Think of Jason Giambi, who broke into the big leagues rather late and didn't hit a ton of homers in the minors but became a monster hitter when he got to the majors (with the aid of performance enhancers, but still). GIambi showed great control of the strike zone in the minors. Brian GIles' career started in a similar way. Just to be clear, those aren't terribly likely outcomes for LaRoche, and I'm not saying he'll turn into the next Giambi or Giles. But there's still the possibility that he'll be a lite version of those hitters, which would still be extremely valuable. Which is why PECOTA (subscription required), for example, compares LaRoche to Giambi and sees a meaningful chance that LaRoche will develop into a superstar, and almost no chance that Young will. LaRoche and Young are apples and oranges.
Young is a lot more similar to Moss, since Moss also lacks one outstanding skill as a hitter, but this is a case where little things matter. Moss is over a year younger, he's probably a better defensive outfielder, and while his AAA stats superficially look less impressive than Young's, he posted them in a park and league where it's much more difficult to hit. Moss' power potential is thus better than Young's, so there's a much better chance he'll break out and emerge as a solid regular or even a minor star. I'm not saying it's a particularly good chance, just that it's much better than Young's.
I like Young just fine, by the way. Although I thought the Pirates' obvious crush on him was a little bit weird, he's a nifty bench player to have around. But that's all he is. Suggesting his "pedigree" is anything like LaRoche's is absurd, and he's not nearly as interesting as Moss either. If the two of them weren't around, sure, there would be no harm in giving Young some playing time to make sure he's just a bench player, and he probably wouldn't embarrass himself. But he doesn't have the upside that LaRoche or Moss have, and it would be a mistake to play him in front of either of them.
78 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No, he doesn't.
But since you’ve never bothered to respond to the park/league issue any of the other times it was raised, I won’t bother repeating it now.
I think Dodgers might just like Young back today
Seeing as they got a BIG HOLE in LF for the next 50 games.
The Blue Crew just recalled Xavier Paul, 24 YO, who’s line last year in Vegas was .316, .378, .463. His .841 in AAA last year has led him back to AAA for 2009. BP ranked him the Dodgers 11th best prospect last winter.
The Dodgers only other OF backup is Nyjer Morgan’s role model, Juan Pierre. Our old friend Eye Chart went on the DL for 3 months with a shoulder the week after PBC got Young.
As for me, I’ve never compared Young to Luigi (two totally different things), but have compared him to Moss despite the 1 year age difference. I still believe that’s a legitimate comparison, except that the PBC has way more invested in Moss because of the whole Jason Bay thing. Counter that with Huntington trying for a year to spring Young to PBC for Wilson.
I’m sure if it were just Young for Wilson, the Dodgers would have done that in a heartbeat. The Pirates would have wanted more than that. Still, it was bizarre how much Young’s name came up in trade rumors.
And I don’t think the way the two players were acquired is that important. What’s relevant is the REASONS they cost what they did. Moss couldn’t have come on a waiver claim, because he was too good for the Red Sox to waive.
by Charlie Wilmoth on May 7, 2009 7:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I was short cutting, Charlie
The deal was reportedly Wilson for Delwyn Young and shortstop Chin-Lung Hu.
But no one ever really thought Hu was worth a damn. Last year, his 24 YO-year in Las Vegas, Hu’s OPS was .708. With the Dodgers in 2008 he hit .181 w/ a .485 OPS in 116 AB’s.
I’ve only seen Hu play a few times, but at least at one time he was supposed to be one of the best defensive players in all the minor leagues. He was really bad last year, but I wouldn’t dismiss him as nothing. Not much of a player, maybe, but not nothing.
Anyway, if it were just Young and Hu, I can’t believe the Dodgers wouldn’t have jumped at that deal. You’re actually STILL shortcutting—the rumored trade was Young, Hu and a third player, whose name never came out. My guess is that the third player was the hang-up.
26-year-olds who don’t beat out Doug Mientkiewicz for a bench job don’t have a lot of trade value.
by Charlie Wilmoth on May 7, 2009 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Dunno about a 3rd player, Charlie
I know Van Slyke thought there was one, but no one in LA ever reported that. Nor did the Trib in their report on Wilson from the winter meetings.
Out here, the story was the deal fell apart because the Dodgers weren’t willing to take on anywhere close to 100% of Wilson’s salary, and the PBC wanted the payroll relief. No one in LA actually thought much of Wilson’s skills, and said he was injury prone to boot.
And I assume the Dodgers had to have Minky in 2009 cause he can play so many positions, is such a gamer, and is a positive influence in the clubhouse. :)
No, that's wrong.
The P-G explicitly reported that management was willing to pick up a large chunk of Wilson’s deal if it meant better prospects back in return. The hangup was that nobody was willing to pull the trigger on high-level talent, even if they got him nearly for free.
Some articles, such as this one, mentioned James McDonald as a guy who was in the discussions. If you want a “third player” for Charlie’s scenario, he’s a good candidate.
The Pirates’ desire for a third player was reported by Ken Rosenthal and repeated by Dejan.
by Charlie Wilmoth on May 8, 2009 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Hu was bad last year in part...
…because he had some kind of mysterious eye problem. Blurred vision, maybe as a result of a circulatory issue. Hard to hit when you can’t see the ball. They never really figured out what was causing it, so it’s still kind of a red flag with him.
Coming into last season, Hu was generally regarded as one of the best shortstop prospects in baseball. BA had him ranked as the Dodgers’ #2 prospect, and he made BA’s list of the top 100 overall at #55.
Potentially, yes.
But my point is that he was not regarded as a future utilityman by the scouting community at the time when he was being mentioned in the Jack talks.
lumberco
SInce you disagree with Charlie, tell us why, instead of just saying so.
Naw, I don’t think so. No matter what I say, most people on here aren’t going to agree with it. Moss’ play speaks for itself. I’m just gonna say that Young deserves the same chance as Moss. I’ll leave it at that.
I'll try
It basically boils down to you want to win games right now, doesn’t it?
The rest of us want to win pennants in three years.
I’m not OPPOSED to winning games now, but to do that with guys who have next to no chance of helping win those theoretical pennants down the road is what got us into this mess.
Given the track records of Moss and Young, one of those guys has a much clearer chance of being a player who can help win a pennant in three years than the other. Charlie laid out the reasoning for you at exhaustive length. You choose to support your reasoning with … nothing, except that Moss is hitting .200 a month into the season.
I don’t know whether you care, but you strain your credibility with every word you write here. You obviously have a right to your opinion, and you’ve stated that same opinion every day for what seems like a month now. I know it’ll feel good to be right and you can gloat in September, when Young owns the RF job and is batting .310 with 20 HRs and 80 RBIs and Moss has been released, and we’ll all bow to your superior knowledge and hand over the keys to the kingdom to you.
Until then, how about giving it a freakin’ rest.
I think I just want the Pirates not to be a punch line.
Yeah, I’ll start with that.
by WTM on May 7, 2009 9:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Shouldn't position weigh in?
Great article. While I agree that based on all indicators Moss will likely be a better offensive player in the majors than Young, doesn’t that ignore that Moss will be playing in RF, where you’d expect significant offense, while Young may be able to be developed at 2B, where he may be above average offensively? I actually think if we move Sanchez Young is likely to take over. Ford may not be ready, or healthy.
I do like your plan, except that according to the scouting reports Young cannot regularly handle 2B defensively. I haven’t watched the last few games so I don’t know how accurate that assessment is, but I have to think the Dodgers would have brought him up for good much sooner.
You can give Young credit for playing 2B if you want.
Personally, I don’t think he could handle it if you gave him four bionic limbs and a helper monkey, so I don’t project him as anything but an OF. Perry Hill is good, but this is water-into-wine kind of stuff.
I have a simple approach.
Play players that may be part of the future success. Monroe…Hinske and Vasquez do not fit that. That means players like Moss, Bixler, Andy LaRoche and Young must be a higher priority to play than the 1st three. Yet…Monroe…Hinske and Vasquez have about 150 PA between them…contributing next to nothing outside of 1 game of 2 hr and 6 rbi by monroe.
If any or all of the younger group cannot contribute…then we need to find those that can. Whether Cutch or Pearce can contribute is yet unknown…as they have not had a significant chance to succeed at the major league level. Yes, they are scuffling right now at AAA. If any of the under 30 crowd fail…so be it…but we need to find out…instead of guess.
by Thunder on May 7, 2009 8:43 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
The rest of us want to win pennants in three years.
Hahahahaha. You expect the Pirates to be in contention for a pennant in three years?!?! You have your own opinion, but that’s all I needed to read. Haha…I can’t quit laughin’.
Dude, get real! “want”. “expect”. who cares? The Pirates won’t be winning anything anytime soon!
by thelumberco. on May 7, 2009 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions
In that case, why do you even care? I understand where you’re coming from in general, but you really confuse me sometimes.
I just do man. I’m a fan, and I want to do this team do well. But at the same time, I’m realistic about the whole situation. We’re probably at least 4-5 years away from seriously competing, but the selfishness in me wants them to win right now.
So you’re saying that when you suggest moves that will help us win now at the expense of a few years down the road, you know you’re not being rational about it? Good thing I don’t try to convince you of anything too often. :)
Butthead Checking In
The Pirate front office has absolutely no idea what it is doing.
Charlie, to hold out hope for Lil LaRoche is a big mistake. He is going to put up very average numbers in the major leagues, regardless of what you think about his numbers in Las Vegas and previous stops.
You all seem to think that Team Coonington is on the right track.
Just keep watchin … not just the performance of the “major league” club representing
Pittsburgh, but of the entire operation, most importantly the ability to EVALUATE, SIGN and DEVELOP talent that can actually produce some semblance of a competitive 25 man roster.
most of us here have been watching the organization – with special focus to the areas you pointed out – evaluating, signing, and developing (presumably) young talent. So I really don’t see the point of the last comment.
Also, since the FO has no idea what they are doing, why don’t you elucidate how you would go about evaluating and signing players. Its easy to sit back and rip on broad, vague concepts without having any plans of their own or ways to turn it around.
by richmondpirate on May 8, 2009 2:22 AM EDT up reply actions
whoa, whoa
You trying to get gunner to unleash his secret plan??? Fat chance!
Look, it’s way too early to grade the new FO at this point. I can tell you this: this new management is on a lot better track than laughingstock Littlefield (of course, I guess it doesn’t take much to be better than him). I do like the fact that they don’t shy away from the draft who have agents that are going to be asking for A LOT of money (Alvarez). It looks like we are actually going to start drafting the best available players now and not worry about the money. Who knows who we would’ve taken last year with the #2 pick if Littlefield has still been GM. It wouldn’t have been Alvarez. Also, I’ve got a feeling that the trade with the Yankees last summer is going to work out good for us. The Boston trade? Not looking great yet, BUT we’ll see. They’ve also built the brand new baseball facility in the Dominican Republic. So the new FO is doing some good things, but we’ll see what happens down the road. It’s too early to judge the new FO right now.
"the ability to EVALUATE, SIGN and DEVELOP talent"
It’s still very early, but some of the guys they took last year are doing quite well. Grossman, D’Arnaud, Calvin Anderson, Mike Colla, etc. And if Jarek Cunningham’s rehab goes well, he was one of the steals of the draft.
On LaRoche
Since his bad start to the season, Andy LaRoche has gotten on base in 20 consecutive games. He’s walked 10 times while striking out 11. In other words, he’s starting to do everything he did in the minors except hit for power. Even then, he’s hitting a lot of doubles, which have a tendency to turn into homers when a player gets older. He probably “only” has a 20-25 HR ceiling (which is pretty good in the post steroid era), but he’s clearly developing into the valuable player all the scouts thought he would be. I’m not sure what your beef with him is. Even if he’s only an average 3B player his entire career, that’s still a better position than a lot of teams are in.
Your mistake is assuming that average is bad. Average isn’t bad; average is average. A team made up entirely of average players is probably an 86 win team. Having an average player at 3B is by no means a bad thing, especially if we can have players ranging from above average to great in Pedro Alvarez, Andrew McCutchen, etc. filling the other positions.
And for what it’s worth, I don’t think Andy will be an average player; I think he’ll play a little above average. He can probably OPS+ around 115 every year and provide an average glove. I’ll take that.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on May 8, 2009 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I believe the post-steroid era is now. Not that players aren’t still using them, but I don’t think they’re as rampant as they were before stricter testing took place. 40+ HR is more of a rarity now. Even 30+ HR isn’t as commonplace as it was.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on May 8, 2009 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Steroids don't correlate only to HR.
That’s why Olympic sprinters take them. No-power fast guys get just as much of a boost from steroids as big sluggers.
This article was bad
Who is comparing Young and AnLaRoche? That Andy was mentioned by a Q&A entry doesn’t warrant this much ink.
The issue is Moss versus Young.
thelumberco
I believe that some of the people that are mocking or not understanding thelumberco could be forgetting what is the Pirates MO. Some fans seem to think that the Pirates will keep the current best players/pitchers the next few seasons while adding the “great” ones that are coming from the minors. Think better! It could be that the Pirates will get rid of Nate, Ryan, Paul, etc (due to financial reasons…) before or by the time the “great” ones play for the Pirates. Taking the Pirates will contend shortly because of one good draft and a couple of acceptable trades, is indeed ABSURD.
Most players on the Pirates roster are so mediocre, that the manager should try to play them to see if they can produce when/if given the chance. That’s what they should be doing with Young, in my opinion. Sorry if I was a little bit too assertive.
by Pirate in Montana on May 8, 2009 10:52 AM EDT reply actions
I think a lot of Pirates fans have trouble separating new management from old management and it’s find to skeptical of the new management but I’m not sure we have good reason to. They have spent a lot of money in the draft and in player development (the new DR facility) and seem to be paying more attention to minor league coaching and teaching young players in general (Kerrigan).
I think that it is possible Doumit, McLouth or Maholm will be traded before a potential Pirates playoff team comes about but hopefully those are deals that send those three players to playoff teams with immediate needs and that the Pirates bring back prospects who have high upsides or are near major league ready. There is no indication as of right now that any trades will be made for financial reasons as the Pirates have spent money in recent years.
Believing that the Pirates will contend is another thing. I think that most Pirates fans would agree that the Pirates are on the right track and probably will contend at some point if they continue developing good minor league talent. And if you think the Pirates will never contend then I’m not sure why you are still a Pirates fan (the “you” is not intended for Pirate in Montana or lumberco for that matter).
I made most of my life decisions at a Foghat concert... I stand by them.
by Chester J Lampwick on May 8, 2009 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Chester, There Are A Lot Of "Ifs" In Your Above Post
The secret is NOT in spending a lot of money in the draft or in player development.
The secret is in spending the money wisely.
I complimented Joe Kerrigan recently on the early season pitching performances. However, while I have not looked at the statistics, I am under the impression that the 2009 Pirates have probably as many walks and hit batsmen as the staff did in 2008.
Sustaining and maintaining consistent performance is critical. It appears to me that the early season rah-rah pep talks and gimmicks may be wearing off.
The Pirates don’t have a lot of talent on the 25 man roster. Still, that does not mean that they cannot play winning baseball if they are given the proper leadership and if the players are self-motivated.
I am a Pittsburgh native who has followed Pirate baseball for many years. I am a student of “the business of baseball” and I do not see any evidence (other than the same talk that I heard from Littlefield) that the Pirates are turning things around. The front office is talking a good game, but I have seen very little that can support the talk.
When Jack Z took over the Mariners, he made wholesale changes immediately. While the Mariners may well drop out of contention in the AL West, they are certainly causing some excitement.
On another unrelated subject, does anyone know how our Indian pitching phenoms are doing in Bradenton?
We’ve danced this danced a few times before gunner and never gotten anywhere but here goes again.
The problem that we always run into is that you never say what evidence you have. Tell me where the Pirates are “talking a good game but not living up to that talk.” If you have examples then we can discuss the merits of those arguments but otherwise I’m not quite sure this debate is worth our energy.
I made most of my life decisions at a Foghat concert... I stand by them.
by Chester J Lampwick on May 8, 2009 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions
The best evidence...
…is that some of the players we drafted last year are playing well and looking like legitimate prospects. That was never the case with Creech’s drafts. You had guys who were taken in the first ten rounds getting released at the end of their first full season.
Rinku and Dinesh are pitching in extended spring training, pending assignment. According to their blog, both had the flu as of last week.
Also, this:
Seattle Mariners, 2009: scored 120 runs, allowed 126 runs.
Pittsburgh Pirates, 2009: scored 122 runs, allowed 114 runs.
Guess the Mariners are more exciting in some people’s eyes, though.
The Pirates played well below their pythag last year, too, iirc. Maybe a problem with the manager . . . ?
by WTM on May 8, 2009 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions
And They Have A Better Record And Are More Competitive!
Just show me the W-L record!
Future W-L record...
…tracks runs scored/allowed better than past W-L record.
But you already knew that, didn’t you?
Gunner’s opinions count for more because he uses exclamation points!! and you just use facts!!
by WTM on May 8, 2009 8:50 PM EDT up reply actions
First post...
… first mistake. “Thinking the Pirates will contend…”
by Pirate in Montana on May 8, 2009 10:54 AM EDT reply actions
I LOVE Delwyn Young
I think he is an extremely talented bench player. He’s fun to watch, and he brings a little something to every aspect of the game. I have made my affection for him quite clear on here more than a few times.
That being said, I do NOT think he should be playing over Laroche even the slightest bit. And I think him and Moss should maybe split time a little more in rightfield, but I would still play Moss more than Young. At least for now.
I GOT MY STREET BUZZ BEFORE I GOT MY PEACH FUZZ
Vlad, is this the BP pitching article you were referring to in the Snell thread?
I remember havin read it as well:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1477
Nope, another different one.
Pretty sure mine wasn’t BPro. As long as it’s been, though, I might not recognize it even if I saw it.
This one
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/what-pitch-counts-hath-wrought/
I’m pretty sure no, but I like re(-re)ading these pitching articles.
thelumberco.
Thanks for your reply, Chester.
I want to say one more thing. In my opinion, the new Pirates management has already shown some of the “old” moves. Different GM, etc., same owner. The current front office can talk and double talk very well. Much better than previous ones. At this time, I just pay attention to their actions as they relate to signings (or the lack thereof), trades, salary dumps, etc. than believing what they say. Anyway, the first month of the season was fun [sigh…]
by Pirate in Montana on May 8, 2009 3:20 PM EDT reply actions
Yeah I agree with Vlad, what moves are you referring to that remind you of the old management?
I made most of my life decisions at a Foghat concert... I stand by them.
by Chester J Lampwick on May 8, 2009 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Pirate in Montana
I’ll certainly agree that the new front office is made up of fantastic spin doctors. However, unlike the old front office, there is a good foundation going on. The old front office’s spin was always about hope for the future as they mortgaged their future in futile attempts to win 82 games.
In contrast, the new front office’s spin is mostly about “we see definite hope of competing soon.” They talk big games about how Ohlendorf is having a strong year, how Maholm is a great pitcher, how Nate McLouth has the ability to carry this team to contention, how Jack Wilson is a very valuable player, how Brian Bixler has an every-day future, etc. All the while, their real interest lies in building up the minor league talent pool at the expense of winning 82 games this season. They’re more or less the anti-Littlefield.
In reality, this FO knows full well that Maholm is an average pitcher and probably a #3 starter on a good team. They know that Ohlendorf’s success probably won’t last. They know that Jack Wilson was an average player in his prime and remains an average player who’s best days are likely behind him. They know that Bixler won’t be able to replace him. They know that Nate McLouth is good, but not good enough to carry an entire team. Hell, Jason Bay was better and he couldn’t do it when he was here.
However, they need to say these things, and not just to placate the fans. True, saying some of these things will keep fans in the seats and stop them from being TOO outraged when players like Wilson or Maholm are traded, but the other functional purpose it shows is to not tip their hand to other GMs. If they avoid saying they want to trade Wilson or Maholm or McLouth or whoever all season, and that they would only move them if a deal blows them away, it gives the illusion to other GMs that the Pirates have real confidence in these players as cornerstones. As a result, they’re likely to make better offers than they would if the FO just came out and said “yeah, these guys aren’t that great. Hope that draft works out.” The FO NEEDS to spin. It’s part of their job. They still probably won’t get top prospects for Maholm, Wilson, et al (maybe one and a mid-range prospect or two for McLouth). Baseball GMs are smarter than that. But it gives them a better chance of snagging either more mid-range prospects or better prospects than if they just threw their hands up and said “these guys suck.” And with the Pirates where they are currently, they need to value several average minor leaguers over one average major leaguer. The eventual goal is to be in a position where that isn’t the case.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on May 8, 2009 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
A rock and a hard place
I was as hard on anyone on the old regime, on Nutting and, in the beginning, on the new regime. These guys left me cold in the beginning, but I have no doubt now that they’re smart, they care and they are trying. As far as spin goes, you said it yourself in the last paragraph. Sort of like the banks. The Administration can’t talk them down, or the stock price plummets and you’ve just devalued your own property. The reality is that they were left a decade and a half of detritus and disaster, at every level, and that isn’t going to get fixed overnight. One can quible about the return on Nady and on Bay, but everyone was clamboring for them to do something, and they did it. Not sure who else they could have dislodged in those deals, and in any case, teams are holding on to prospects for dear life. The best indication of their success or failure is the cumulative effect of several (not two) years of drafts. At that point, some criticism might be fair. The first couple of years is backfill, by necessity. This is going to take a while, and I’m prepared to give them far more time than they have had before throwing rocks.
Old moves
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain. I will give it a try.
1- Getting rid of some of their best players for a few marginal players and a few dreams;
2- I mean, giving away Nady, Bay, and Marte “to make the team better;”
3- They have not given away Jack Wilson yet, but have tried a few times already, “to make the team better;”
4- Signing players like Craig Monroe, a cheap free agent like many others in the past, “to make the team better;” instead of signing believable free agents that will actually improve the team;
5- Telling the fans that the budget will stay the same, but “keeping our eyes open for opportunities to improve the team;”
6- In my opinion, “to make the team better” means to save money and keep the budget low at the cost of making the team worse.
Maybe I have been “hardened” or have become cynical after all these years of losing. However, I hope you can see why I describe them as old moves. I believe there’s a few good players in the future (i.e., Alvarez and Lincoln), but I can also see some of the remaining few good ones being given away “to make the team better.” That would just continue the cycle the Pirates have been in for quite a long time now. Sorry for making this post so long.
Now, I can say…
Incoming,
Run for cover Pirate in Montana,
Retreat!
[smile]
by Pirate in Montana on May 8, 2009 5:06 PM EDT reply actions
Fair enough, thanks for giving me your evidence. Needless to say I strongly disagree with you.
1- Getting rid of some of their best players for a few marginal players and a few dreams;
2- I mean, giving away Nady, Bay, and Marte "to make the team better;"
I have no problem trading the current best players. These players would not guide the Pirates to the playoffs or even to .500. The future is the key right now. Trading Nady, Bay, Marte for prospects is fine by me as those prospects may actually play for a good Pirates team. And I think it’s inaccurate to dismiss the returns on the trades (although I think you could launch a somewhat effective argument). Andy LaRoche was a gem of the Dodgers minor league system and Tabata was a well-regarded Yankees prospect. Dan McCutchen is also a solid prospect as is Bryan Morris. I don’t think you can dismiss these trades as the key players have no yet done anything and are still developing.
In addition it’s important to remember that Bay only had one year left on his contract after 2008 (as did Marte?) and I highly doubt the Pirates would be able to resign him.
I think it’s also important to mention that without Karstens and Ohlendorf, the Pirates would be in quite a bind for starting pitching this year.
The trades of the past summer are not like the trades of the DL era with Ramirez going for Hill. The Pirates got genuine prospects this time.
3- They have not given away Jack Wilson yet, but have tried a few times already, "to make the team better;"
In terms of Jack Wilson, I hope the Pirates do trade him away but none of the return has been good enough to warrant it. The Pirates shouldn’t trade away players for a few bats but when their value is highest for the best deals possible.
4- Signing players like Craig Monroe, a cheap free agent like many others in the past, "to make the team better;" instead of signing believable free agents that will actually improve the team;
I’m not a big Craig Monroe fan either but he’s a bench player on a noncontending team. No free agents would made the Pirates contenders this year. I’d prefer to see that money going to drafts or player development and Pittsburgh isn’t exactly the destination of choice for baseball free agents so the Pirates might end up overpaying.
5- Telling the fans that the budget will stay the same, but "keeping our eyes open for opportunities to improve the team;"
As long as the Pirates keep spending money in the draft and in player development I’m perfectly happy and when those players are ready to play in the bigs, I hope the Pirates will spend the money to bring in free agents to help that team.
6- In my opinion, "to make the team better" means to save money and keep the budget low at the cost of making the team worse.
The payroll on the field might be low but the money is going elsewhere for the future. In the draft (see Pedro’s contract and the money offered to some of the high school players to get them to come to the Pirates) and to other player development (the awesome new facility in the DR).
I think that basically you are looking at the present far too much and the awful Pirates team on the field. It’s not the current management’s fault that there were no major-league ready players in the minors to fill in the gaps. The management is spending money to try to guarantee a playoff team a few years from now and not trying to put makeup on a pig and make a .500 team for a year that will then implode and leave the Pirates worse than when they started.
I made most of my life decisions at a Foghat concert... I stand by them.
by Chester J Lampwick on May 8, 2009 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions
My retort.
Those are some interesting points, however I’d like to make a few counters.
1 – Yes, they got rid of their best players. However, unlike when we got rid of Ramirez, these players were not young enough to potentially be starters on a winning Pirates team. As someone else already pointed out, their contracts were all expiring (save Bay, who had one more year) and the Pirates wouldn’t have been able to keep them all after the career year Nady had.
2 – The return for the Bay trade is still a question mark. I’m a believer in Andy LaRoche, and I think if he and Bryan Morris work out, we won the trade. If Moss ends up as a good 4th outfielder and Craig Hansen learns to find the strike zone (he looked much improved before his injury this year), so much the better.
The return for the Nady and Marte trade, on the other hand – I believe we fleeced the Yankees there. Tabata will be a better outfielder than Nady ever was when he’s ready, McCutchen has good potential as a third starter (which would make him an ace on our current team), Ohlendorf probably can’t sustain what he’s done but will at the very least provide a good bullpen pitcher/spot starter, and Karstens…well, Karstens is poo.
In contrast, Nady and Marte have both been worthless since going to New York.
3 – I’d like to see Jack traded because I think his best years are behind him. However, none of the offers are intriguing, and I also wouldn’t be opposed to signing him to a cheap deal if we can’t find a suitor that will offer us at least fair value.
4 – If you recall, we went after intriguing players like Rocco Baldelli, and they weren’t interested. Craig Monroe is a scrapheap player for a scrapheap team. It wasn’t like the signings of Burnitz and Randa, which were made to give the illusion of contention. The Pirates signed those players to start over more promising players like Freddy Sanchez and Craig Wilson. They signed Monroe to sit on the bench and spot more promising players. Before free agents will want to play for us, we’ll have to show them we can win.
5 – Like someone else said, I’m fine with them not spending right now. Even if we throw large chunks of money at free agents, they aren’t interested because of our reputation for losing. Not only that, but that money is better spent the way it’s being spent now – developing a new Latin America complex and signing the best amateur players available to us. When we’re in contention, the budget will shift to signing free agents who are suddenly interested in us.
6 – You’re entitled to your opinion, but I hope it’s wrong.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on May 8, 2009 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions
A few observations
in response, to each point individually:
1-Some may disagree, but I don’t think we ever would have received what we would like for Bay because he was more valuable to us than many other teams, he would have been a free agent fairly soon and teams were holding back top-tier prospects far more than had been the case in the past. As far as the Nady deal is concerned, I think we won that one already.
2-They traded two guys who would have left for some guys with upside, and they took some chances, which is what many wanted Littlefield to do.
3-If they can make the team better, they should give up Jack Wilson.
4-Monroe is irrelevant roster filler. He is neither here nor there as part of the long-term discussion, nor does he in any way impede the signing or acquisition via trade of someone better. We don’t have any real targets, and our minor leaguers aren’t ready. If Monroe was starting, or was in some way viewed as an important element of a winning team, I might agree. But no one, including management, is saying that.
5-What is wrong with that? If and when they use budget as an excuse to avoid spending when a few million would mean the playoffs, I’ll get frustrated. For now, there is no reason to spend. Last time they did that, we got Matt Morris.
6-Making the team better means smarter drafting, trading the right players at the right time for as much in return as can be had, scouring the wires for waiver drops and Rule 5 guys and, at the proper time, a startegic deadline acquisition or free agent. Did I mention smart drafting, at all rounds?
Just one man’s opinion.
They traded two guys who would have left
It’d sure be nice to see this point sink in now and then. They didn’t trade Bay and Nady, they traded a year and two months of Bay and Nady. (If you think Marte was a big loss, Brian Cashman laughs ruefully at your silliness.) If you think wondrous things were going to happen during that year and two months, fine, although it’s a pretty ludicrous viewpoint considering that the team was losing with Bay and Nady. If you think they could have extended those two (I can’t imagine anybody thinks it would have been a rational move to extend Nady, but whatever), just two little factoids should suffice to puncture your delusions: Nady is a Boras client, and the Red Sox have gotten nowhere in their efforts to extend Bay.
Just once in a while I’d like to see somebody judge these transactions by taking all the relevant circumstances into account. You know, like a real GM has to do. The way these trades are typically judged is like criticizing somebody for selling a Mercedes for scrap just because it’s a Mercedes, without taking into account the fact that the car had been totaled in a wreck.
by WTM on May 8, 2009 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Back and forth...
Thanks for sharing your opinions. It’s been nice to exchange opinions with you. I hope the cycle of losing ends soon. I am one of those people that would gladly say “I was wrong” if/when proven wrong and the team I follow becomes a respectful team once again. Win a penant or not, I just want to see a team that actually has a chance.
It’s almost time to go home. I may join a future conversation as I see this group as having great knowledge of the Pirates while “listening” to the opinions of others.
Yes, I have been reading this site for quite some time. I also read Pat’s site.
by Pirate in Montana on May 8, 2009 5:44 PM EDT reply actions
Good to have you
The folks here are as knowledgeable as any you’ll come across. I’m a reformed ranter, having learned much here and finally also having reconciled myself to the reality that this will take a long time to fix.
Oh, be nice
I was getting tired of hearing myself whine. Can’t imagine how tiresome it must have been on the other end. That said, I reserve the right to complain about Tyler Yates. My wife is a Braves fan, and she still says "better you than us’’ every time he comes in. And does anyone have any idea just what Brandon Moss was trying to accomplish on that ball Murphy hit in the bottom of the 8th? He looked more like Morgan…
by RichieHebner on May 8, 2009 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions
An interesting comment on the LaRoche trade from late last year
Originally found at Dodger Thoughts:
I had the pleasure of attending the Dodger Adult Baseball Camp in January and one of the great things it afforded me was one on one access with a number of the Dodger minor league managers and instructors. These guys are great to hang out with and love to talk anything and everything baseball. Late one afternoon, I was soaking in a tub of ice sucking down my 2nd or 3rd postgame beer when one prominent minor league instructors (who shall otherwise remain nameless) crawls into the whirlpool next to me and pops open a cold one for himself and starts complimenting me on my last at bat against the team he was coaching. GREAT STUFF, YOU CANT IMAGINE, sorry I digress. Anyway we started talking about this and that and the conversation turned to third base for the Dodgers 2008. This the spot I was waiting for and I jump in hard, talking him up and down how the future is now and the now is Andy LaRoche. He told me that he thought that Andy was going to get his chance this spring, but there were many in the organization, including himself, who didn’t think that Andy’s body would hold up enough to reach his potential as a player. Fast forward to spring training and Andy gets hurt on that %$#@%ing freak play. I knew in my gut that Andy would likely never get the shot he deserved again…
Witty .sig goes here.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bucs Dugout
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Pitcher Clayton Richard gets key pinch single in 13th after coming in 0 for 16
- Livan Hernandez welcomes ball boy to the bigs with shower of sunflower seeds (VIDEO)
- Man beaten by four others in Dodger Stadium parking lot
- Lance Berkman’s knee injury creates a lot of questions for Cards but also his career
- Next generation: Scott Van Slyke, son of Andy Van Slyke, hits first career homer
