More Thoughts on the Nate McLouth Trade
Please use this thread to continue discussion of the Nate McLouth deal; the last one is getting pretty unwieldy.
-P- The more I think about this trade, the more I like it (although I still wouldn't say I love it). The Pirates are finally developing a farm system that befits a team in their position, and there's a chance it could be one of the best in the majors once this draft and Latin American signing season are over. None of the players the Bucs acquired--Jeff Locke, Gorkys Hernandez and Charlie Morton--are world-beaters yet, but all three have considerable upside.
-P- I will miss McLouth, though. He battled for playing time against Dave Littlefield and Jim Tracy, who were totally indifferent to his talents, and played a well-rounded, intelligent brand of baseball that was just totally different from the kind most of his teammates played during his time in Pittsburgh. There are big portions of the years he was here that I just remember as one stupid, bungled play after another. Whatever his shortcomings, McLouth was involved in very few of those plays. The 2009 Pirates are actually pretty low on the groan meter, but McLouth was one of only a few players from the '06-'08 editions who kept the needle from breaking.
-P- Based on what I've read so far, there seem to be two main criticisms of this trade. One is that the Pirates didn't get enough for McLouth. That, to me, is a perfectly legitimate criticism and an area where reasonable people can disagree. The other expresses outrage about the constant cycle of trading star players for prospects.
A few points here: first, I strongly suspect a lot of people who are now furious about this trade are the same ones who were furious at the Pirates' management for giving McLouth playing time over Nyjer Morgan last year anyway. Second: there will always be roster turnover. Good teams and bad ones watch stars leave all the time. That's just the nature of the game. Third, for a team in the Pirates' situation, getting angry about trading veterans for prospects is like getting angry at doctors for giving you shots because every time they've ever given you a shot, you were sick. These sorts of trades are medicine, not the disease.
Whether they're effective medicine is the issue here. But there's no doubt that the Pirates need it, and that McLouth, at age 27, probably wasn't going to be part of the next great Pirates team.
-P- It's a shame that Andrew McCutchen will have to begin his major league career as the stand-in for a beloved player who was dealt in a move that, judging from what I've seen so far, the fans don't exactly love. McCutchen deserves better. And actually, McLouth's loss might not be felt much. McCutchen isn't yet McLouth's equal with the bat, but he should be far better defensively, and it isn't much of a stretch to think that the Pirates could have the best outfield defense in baseball for the rest of the year, even with Brandon Moss in right. (UZR rates Moss as a good defender; all I can really say is that I think he's better than Xavier Nady, and that's not saying much.) Someone like Jeff Karstens, who gives up a bunch of fly balls, could suddenly look like a much better pitcher.
-P- As for Gorkys Hernandez, I think a lot depends on him developing some power. I've seen descriptions of him as a leadoff-type prospect, and that's a prospect class I'm generally very bearish on, because that sort of description is usually a way of saying that a prospect is like a leadoff guy from the 1980s, or something. Most good leadoff hitters today--Nate (despite his not being a leadoff hitter this year), Curtis Granderson, Jose Reyes, Brian Roberts, Derek Jeter--do have some power. Hernandez needs to develop his power, even if it's only gap power.
-P- I'm kind of psyched to have a Pirate pitcher named "Charlie." Welcome aboard, Mr. Morton.
UPDATE: I may have undersold Hernandez a little; Baseball Prospectus had him in their preseason top prospects list at #78, ahead of Jose Tabata. Baseball America ranked Hernandez #62, also ahead of Tabata. Hernandez had a hamstring injury that may have supressed his numbers a little bit last season. I suppose the reason I'm less high on him than most is that, again, I'm skeptical of these speedy centerfield prospects who don't have power. Lefty starters who can throw gas like Locke, on the other hand, are a rare breed, which is why I described Locke as the top player in the deal. The Pirates obviously don't see it that way, and now that I've studied the situation more, I suppose I can see why. If Hernandez develops any power, he's probably going to be very good, because he'll hit for a high average and his defense is potentially spectacular. I'm just skeptical that he'll develop much power, he's, say, Jacoby Ellsbury minus a few homers and steals. Which is fine, but nothing special.
0 recs |
206 comments
|
Comments
You Know How I Know The Trade Was Good?
Steve Phillips thought the Braves got the better end of the deal — and he’s never right. Enough said, good job Pirates.
by Slizeezyc on Jun 3, 2009 10:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hahaha
I thought the exact same thing when I was watching that
by Jett on Jun 3, 2009 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you’re referring to what he said on Baseball Tonight, I couldn’t have agreed with him more. Now, I don’t know what other teams were offering for McLouth and frankly, the Braves might have been the only team inquiring about him right now because it is very early in the process. But I think the Pirates could have gotten more for him had they waited a month or so closer to the trade deadline. From what Steve said, most of the GMs of the other teams love Nate McLouth and rightfully so. I just think if the Pirates were a little bit more patient, other teams would have, should I say, overpaid for him? Anyhow, we probably would’ve gotten some better offers from other teams if we had waited until July. I, like most fans on here, am not crazy about what we received in return, but I do think that Morton could be a good middle-of-the-rotation guy with a little work with Joe Kerrigan. Kerrigan could transform him into a good major league pitcher. He is doing very well in Triple-A with an ERA of 2.52. Time will tell. I’m not really upset we traded McLouth, but I didn’t like that the Pirates traded him so early. If we had waited to make the trade closer to the deadline, maybe some contenders that needed a CF would get a little desperate and offer us some big-time prospects or big-time players.
by mspirate on Jun 4, 2009 12:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then again maybe he breaks a leg, and is out for the season. We get nothing and his value decreases to the point no one wants him, ever, because he can never be the same player again.
The value was there, an the FO made the right move.
by BSpar on Jun 4, 2009 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
PI’m kind of psyched to have a Pirate pitcher named “Charlie.” Welcome aboard, Mr. Morton.
And I’m excited to have a player named Gorkys! In fact, I’m now in the process of legally changing my name!
I'm droppin' flava, my behavior is hereditary--but my technique is very necessary.
by phillybucco on Jun 3, 2009 10:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m kind of psyched to have a Pirate pitcher named "Charlie."
You can’t do better than to share a first name with The Emperor Chas Noll.
by WstCstBucco on Jun 3, 2009 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Im going to sleep. I was pumped to watch USA, the team that cant trade anyone and they are getting waxed by Costa Rica.
McLouth is The Trouth
by GTrain on Jun 3, 2009 11:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
bastard.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
are peewee and meat being assigned to Altoona?
RIP NATE. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN...MISTER TONY PLUSH!
by GTrain on Jun 3, 2009 11:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Morton to Indy, Hernandez to Altoona, Locke to Lynchburg.
by Charlie on Jun 3, 2009 11:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
All seems logical.
Does Ian have an option left? Wonder how long before Morton sees time for the Buccos.
by Brakeman8 on Jun 3, 2009 11:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Holy Guacamole!
323 posts on the other thread. Good thing there was a rain out tonight.
I’m afraid all the pundits will take the position that the PBC was snookered. Every other GM will say — “I would have offered more.” That way they are protected from their owners when they ask “why didn’t you get McLouth?”
The paradigm of the bumbling Pirates, trading gold for straw, is too well ingrained in minds of baseball pundits to change for a while. Like every article I see calls him “All Star Nate McLouth” without mentioning that he’d have been an all star for something like 5 teams last year.
I love McLouth, btw, and am not trying to put him down. But it’s not like the PBC just traded Albert Pujols (or even Jason Bay) for a bunch of no name prospects.
by WstCstBucco on Jun 3, 2009 11:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Nice summary, Charlie. Hopefully things will settle down here soon.
charity standing orders
by BadMaafala on Jun 3, 2009 11:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Will PNC
eventually be re-named “Gorkys Park?”
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
see my response.
grrrr.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comedy is all about . . . . .
. . ;. . timing.
by WstCstBucco on Jun 3, 2009 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was
taking aq roast chicken out of the oven – timing IS everything…
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha, gotta love the humor to lighten the mood, i know its making me feel better… Gorkys Park hahahahahaha
by PensRock1 on Jun 3, 2009 11:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I see my suggestion of “Maxim” went over like a lead balloon.
Well, good night Irene.
by WstCstBucco on Jun 3, 2009 11:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t get all poopy.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If nothing else, I get the feeling Frank, Neil and JR just yanked hard on Ian Snell’s leash.
by Brakeman8 on Jun 3, 2009 11:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
um...
…how, “shape up or we’ll trade you to a good team”? Sorry, I don’t mean to be snide, but he’s our problem now for a good long time. JR can yank his leash until it breaks. What can he threaten him with? It’s not that I think Snell is a complacent human or player; I just think if it was gonna happen, it would have happened by now. And we’re not trading him for half of what Nate fetched.
by KPatrick on Jun 4, 2009 12:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is...
We didn’t have any pitchers at AAA that were seen as big-league ready before. D. McCutchen was the closest, and his HR issues are of major concern at the moment. Now we have someone to actually wave in front of Snell. “Shape up, this guy’s almost ready. He’s getting called up, and you’re the weakest link in the rotation right now.” It should at least encourage him to out-pitch Jeff Karstens to keep his ML job.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How much value can a no-power outfielder have?
The baseball prospectus comps are a mixed bag, with everything from Carlos Gomez to…Luis Rivas. I thought that was hilarious.
by ddff22 on Jun 3, 2009 11:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How much value can a no-power outfielder have?
PBC is the expert on answering this question. NyMo has less power than any other OF in MLB.
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
by WstCstBucco on Jun 3, 2009 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We got three solid prospects and....
two or three picks higher in next years draft!!! Come on guys….it was a great trade! I love it.
by RetireNutting on Jun 3, 2009 11:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Cutch
Whether you like the deal or not, now we get to see what Cutch can do (finally!).
by SpacePirate on Jun 3, 2009 11:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yoo-hoo! IPF! Where did ya go?
Don’t be upset cause Charlie shut down your fanpost bout the Pirates, the KC Royals, Starbucks, Seinfeld/Kramer and whatever the hell else you were tryin to say.
Here’s my take on what you were asking there:
Nady/Marte for Ohlendorf, Karstens, D. McCutchen and Tabata: So far, so good from the Pirates’ perspective.
Bay for Andy LaRoche, Moss, Hansen and Bryan Morris: Andy is developing into a real nice player, but the jury is still out at the MLB level on Moss and Hansen, and we’ll need a good bit more time to grade what Morris can/can’t do.
McLouth for the 3 prospects today from the Braves: What I’m reading has me pleased so far in the return for Nate.
“I’m sure the Braves were ready to announce their offer of an additional impact player when NH jumped up and accepted the three stiffs we got without giving the Braves a chance to finish their sentence.”
Bullsh*t.
I like what “Team Coonington” has been doing since they took over late in ’07. Why not try to get with the program and give them support?
by patthatt on Jun 3, 2009 11:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
too much losing
For some it is hard to not see the FO as nothing but a big blur for the past 17 years. This team was once again going no where and shooting for 82 does nothing. It’s a stupid record. I’ll take another year of losing in order to fix the disaster DL left NH. These trades are bringing back quality prospects in return. Now whether or not they pan out that is to be seen, but we are not picking up Bobby Hills or Jose Hernandez’s in these trades.
by BattlinBucs on Jun 3, 2009 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
For what it’s worth, I shut it down because there are already two threads to discuss exactly what his fanpost was about. He can repost here if he wants.
by Charlie on Jun 3, 2009 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, Charlie...
But I don’t understand why you had to shut down my post just because you may not have agreed with what I said. If people didn’t want to read it they would simply have ignored it and I would have been fine with that. I just don’t understand why you have to make decisions like this on the fly without any warning and then expect me to re-post the damn thing. If you don’t want my opinion because it doesn’t conform to the company line just tell me so and I’ll politely find another blog on which to post but don’t arbitrarily erase the damn thing. I put a lot of thought into that and I don’t have a copy of it.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Jun 4, 2009 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t remove it because I disagreed with it, I removed it because there were already two threads on exactly the subject you were writing about and it would have been confusing for everyone if the conversation had splintered in a bunch of different directions. If you wanted to comment on the McLouth deal you could have done so in the discussion thread, and it wasn’t clear to me why you wrote a FanPost when that didn’t occur to any of the other 100 or 200 people who have commented on the deal so far. In general, please don’t start FanPosts on things people are already discussing elsewhere.
I am, however, sorry I erased it rather than hiding it or emailing you the text first. Then you could have reposted it in the discussion thread. It was right after the trade and I was scrambling to get information and get it on the site. Sorry about that.
by Charlie on Jun 4, 2009 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Charlie: your logic makes no sense...
There is still another new post about the trade and you allowed it to remain on the board. So how did you come to the conclusion to erase mine and leave this one? I’m not sure you’re being totally honest with me on this subject and I know you sure-as-hell weren’t fair. I’m disappointed with you.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Jun 4, 2009 12:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, that’s your perogative. I left the other one up because it was posted before my first thread and thus was not duplicating a thread elsewhere. I made my first post around the time that first fanpost went up and kept mine on the front page because it was the best way to get all the information out there as it happened without my editing the fanpost and making it appear that my work was written by someone else.
by Charlie on Jun 4, 2009 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"I’m sure the Braves were ready to announce their offer of an additional impact player when NH jumped up and accepted the three stiffs we got without giving the Braves a chance to finish their sentence."
That’s every episode of Seinfeld guest starring “Jackie Chiles” as Kramer’s lawyer.
“I didn’t tell you to put the balm on, who told you to put the balm on?”
by WstCstBucco on Jun 3, 2009 11:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
WstCstBucco:
“This trade is the most public of all NH’s humiliations, yet.” —Jackie Childs
At least Kramer got all the free cafe’ lattes he wanted. NH didn’t even get that!
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Jun 4, 2009 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
bigtime
i go to college in altoona but just missed seeing him play. im excited to see him play
by JR89 on Jun 3, 2009 11:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How about a new cocktail?
The Gorky Hernandez: Shot of vodka, shot of tequila, dash of bitters.
by houksyndrome on Jun 3, 2009 11:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
...
that shot would taste horrible houk. how about a 6 count of decent whiskey, 1 count of amaretto, 2 dashes of bitters, and a stiff splash of cointreau?
by RetireNutting on Jun 3, 2009 11:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it isn’t much of a stretch to think that the Pirates could have the best outfield defense in baseball for the rest of the year, even with Brandon Moss in right.
Don’t most metrics actually show Moss as a pretty good defender?
Maybe this will free up Nyjer Morgan to not play in left-center every AB now. That would be cool.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 3, 2009 11:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Huh, no kidding. He’s well above average by UZR this year. I have to say, that surprises me.
by Charlie on Jun 3, 2009 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, I just don’t see it. None of the prospects involved are that good. If we’re talking Medlen or Freeman or someone on that level, I can see it, but none of the three players are really good bets to do much in the majors. A leadoff prospect with a translation in the .600 OPS range? An A-ball pitcher with command issues? A difficult starter with an ERA of 6 in the majors that one of the best coaching staffs around has given up on dealing with?
What’s being ignored is the tremendous value that McLouth’s contract brings. The Braves aren’t just acquiring McLouth, they’re acquiring good, though non-star, production for less than half of what it would cost them on the open market. McLouth signed for $11 million for 2010 and 2011 makes him a much more valuable asset.
Arguing that “McLouth wasn’t a star” completely ignores opportunity cost. The Pirates do not have many tradeable assets that can conservatively be worth in the $12-$15 million range. To give that away and not got anything that’s better than a very tentative maybe to be worth anything? It’s a bad use of resources.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 3, 2009 11:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
McLouth is not going to bring back a top 3 prospect. He just is not that good. He appears good because he had a breakout first half on last years losing team. I was surprised we got the 4th and 7th prospects in their system
by BattlinBucs on Jun 3, 2009 11:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't understand how so many fans..
have more confidence in their own ability as talent evaluators than they do for NH’s and co’s abilities …
well, i guess i do – his name is dave littlefield …or maybe ed creech. but those guys aren’t here anymore. relax.
by RetireNutting on Jun 3, 2009 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dan actually isn’t just “a fan.” He’s a respected analyst in his own right, whose ZiPS projection system we’ve been using at Bucs Dugout for years. I don’t really agree with him here, but he knows what he’s talking about.
by Charlie on Jun 3, 2009 11:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
totally respect that Charlie...
and I appreciate whatever contributions Dan and others may have made to the site … I enjoy BD. Still, I feel like NH hasn’t given us any major reasons to doubt his (and his staff’s) talent evaluation as of yet … until he does, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt on moves like this. Sure, Ida like to have netted Hanson and a few of these guys instead of Morton … but this deal is all relative to what you think NATE actually is … and what you think of the prospects. Fans here are upset because they’re giving Nate some hometown love and overvaluing him, his weak arm, his poor routes (at times), his lead BA, and his middling-below average power for his true position (a corner). They know Nate and have emotionally connected to plays he’s made on the PBC … they don’t know these guys. I’m happy with the trade.
by RetireNutting on Jun 3, 2009 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dan, I think you underrate Gorkys as a prospect. But even if you’re correct, I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Pirates trade him this summer for a prosect or two. He seems redundant with McCutchen.
by bolton on Jun 3, 2009 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What do you see? Could he be better than a Carlos Gomez, Willy Taveras type?
by ddff22 on Jun 3, 2009 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sure the Taveras comp is accurate, really. Taveras has almost no power and there’s at least the potential that Hernandez will have some.
by Charlie on Jun 3, 2009 11:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As of right now, my comps list for Hernandez is:
Javon Moran
Austin Jackson
Carlos Gomez
Torii Hunter
Choo Freeman
Greg Golson
Tim Raines Jr.
Javier Herrera
Mike Sansoe
Jose Duarte
249/298/312 projection for 2010. 0.3% of reaching middle quintile of centerfielders offensively. Assuming +10 defensive runs, a 2.9% chance of being a league-average centerfielder overall.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 3, 2009 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again, respectfully,
crunching numbers is all well and good, and there are those who subscribe to them.
But they still have to play the games, and there are always surprises.
Ah, baseball!
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
With all due respect, cocktailsfor2, Dan has been doing this, and doing this well, for years. Let’s try to respond to specific points and not have this devolve into a debate about the merit of “crunching numbers.”
by Charlie on Jun 4, 2009 12:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Charlie,
I was responding to this point:
249/298/312 projection for 2010. 0.3% of reaching middle quintile of centerfielders offensively. Assuming +10 defensive runs, a 2.9% chance of being a league-average centerfielder overall.
I’m saying yes, here’s the projection, but the games still have to be played, and players often surprise us.
Wasn’t trying to dismiss projection / number crunching in toto.
I was not disparaging what Dan was done, nor insinuating that he was wrong.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 4, 2009 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course, the fact that there are surprises shouldn’t prevent someone from using all the facts available, or there’s no purpose in making choices.
I’m hardly saying all of this capriciously. I have to make a lot of predictions and If I’m wrong too much, my professional reputation suffers and my contractual opportunities and $$$ dry up considerably.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 4, 2009 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well let's hope......
this one egregious error doesn’t kill your street cred.
by dtoddwin on Jun 4, 2009 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dan,
I’m not trying to dismiss what you’ve said. You’ve obviously got a job to do, and there are those who pay you for your thoughts and opinions.
Nor would I assume that you would try to tell me how to sell vacuum cleaners, since that is my job.
I’m just saying that there are surprises. As a Pirates fan, I hope that the players we’ve acquired surprise all the “experts.”
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 4, 2009 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks. Three of the top four players on that list are pretty interesting. And the other one, Moran, was playing his age-21 season in the Sally League. Some of the other comps below that are more dubious, true.
As for 2010, Hernandez is 21. I don’t think the fact that he’d be a bad player in 2010 really matters much.
by Charlie on Jun 3, 2009 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
CarGo is pretty much my nightmare scenario here.
Also, guys: Don’t be too hard on Dan. He’s a really sharp guy, and I’d like to have him keep coming back to share his stuff with us, y’know?
ZiPS isn’t perfect, but it’s useful, and if it doesn’t like Gorkys then that’s a black mark against him.
by Vlad on Jun 4, 2009 8:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gorkys is also striking out a quarter of the time in AA, leading to a .401 BABIP, which is, of course, completely unsustainable. Hernandez isn’t remotely the prospect McCutchen is. He could certainly pan out, of course, but the odds are very much against it.
I just think you guys are underestimating how valuable McLouth’s contract is. At an extremely conservative $3 million per marginal win (a number which hasn’t been justified in almost a decade), the Braves likely net $13 million in value for 8 wins from McLouth through 2011. And even that is also conservative when it comes to perceived value as the 8 wins assumes that McLouth’s defense is like the numbers says rather than his reputation.
I can tell you, from calling around, there’s at least one front office who would have done better.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 3, 2009 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As well may be,
but we don’t know if any other GM’s were offering, and even NH said he wasn’t shopping Nate in the first place.
Respectfully, we just don’t know.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How is McLouth's contract a concern of ours?
You’ve called around and found one FO that would have done better? So? Your wording implies that “at least one” FO would not have. Trading doesn’t strike me as easy as 29 teams telling you straight out what their best offer is. I highly doubt the Pirates FO turned down a better offer, or even got one, but highly presume they sought one.
Can you briefly explain this:
A leadoff prospect with a translation in the .600 OPS range
Is that like and MLE? How reliable could a translation be for a 21yo playing at a level appropriate for 23yo, who is at least five years away from full development? It just seems silly on its face to note it.
by azibuck on Jun 3, 2009 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Essentially. However, people vastly overrate the odds that a 21-year-old will improve. Hernandez is young, but he’s not alarmingly so and he’s not exactly setting the league on fire.
I have him translated at 261/293/308, Davenport has him at 250/277/324 and Smith has him at 264/300/315.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 4, 2009 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree there’s a good chance he won’t improve. But almost all players are inadequate when they’re 21. Focusing on his 2009 translations seems like an odd way of articulating the problem you seem to have. One of his top comps, Hunter, is a star, and Austin Jackson seems to have a pretty good chance of becoming one. I’d be much more interested in hearing what you have to say about the chances he’ll get better than about how bad he’d be right now.
by Charlie on Jun 4, 2009 12:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also....
think the economic environment is changing much more quickly than most people realize. We are going to see the cumulative payroll of major league teams go down significantly over the next two years in my opinion. In that environment McLouth’s contract isn’t such a bargain. I’ll bet even money that he is not paid more per year in his next contract than he is for this one.
by dtoddwin on Jun 3, 2009 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As such, I made a very conservative estimate of his marginal value. I don’t believe it’s true, however – a great deal of MLB’s money is already “in the bag” so to speak and the odds of very high inflation are pretty decent. If I was going by 2007-2008 estimates of marginal value for a win, McLouth would be underpaid more in the neighborhood of $30 million than $13 million.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 3, 2009 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't disagree with you completely...
however I think you are severly undersestimating the value of Morton and Locke. Morton has put up solid numbers in the minors and has all of 70 plus innings in the majors. That’s not nearly a large enough sample size to write him off as a 6.00 plus ERA guy. Locke hs been a highly touted prospect by such publications as BA and has had solid peripherals ever year except this year where he has run into some control issues. He still has a very high ceiling if we can’t right the ship. You are focussing on Gorky’s as the main trade chip when I believe it is the pitchers we were trying to obtain.
by Slick1 on Jun 3, 2009 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure....
but it isn’t 2007-2008, which I know you recognize. Inflation, while taking the nominal number higher, will lead to lower numbers in real dollars.
by dtoddwin on Jun 3, 2009 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
However, McLouth is already locked in at $11 million for 2010 and 2011. The weaker the currency, the more valuable he becomes to the team controlling his contract.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 3, 2009 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
True,
but it’s not a USD issue it’s an inflation issue. And I don’t see the much higher rates until the very end of Nate’s contract. He only has two years and an option left (so effectively three if you believe in skyrocketing inflation).
by dtoddwin on Jun 4, 2009 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t subscribe to the notion that skyrocketing inflation is likely, but I do think it will be reasonable and will serve, along with other factors, from keeping the marginal revenue of wins from falling very much.
National TV contracts are locked up. Most teams already have their local TV deals more or less worked out. Attendance is down, but not that much (and it’s not like teams are slashing their prices). Unless the economy truly craters, I don’t see a scenario in which a win costs anywhere McLouth’s contract isn’t an incredible bargain, assuming he plays about the same or a little worse.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 4, 2009 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understand what......
you are saying. But, that marginal win is worth much more to the Braves at this point than it is to the Pirates. So I guess the debate is did we maximize the return on our asset, correct?
by dtoddwin on Jun 4, 2009 12:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 4, 2009 12:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, that was a little more curt than I am prone to (this thread has very high velocity).
I absolutely approve of the idea of trading McLouth, I’m just not crazy with the exact players the Pirates got and I’m not talking about an unrealistic scenario of Heyward or Hanson.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 4, 2009 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dan
“Sorry, I just don’t see it. None of the prospects involved are that good.”
You may think none of the prospects is that good and write off the trade as “a bad use of resources,” but I heard essentially the same thing last year from others with the big trades last year, but I’m liking more and more how those moves are looking for the PBC.
I’ll take the judgment of Neal Huntington and Frank Coonelly over yours any day.
“What’s being ignored is the tremendous value that McLouth’s contract brings. The Braves aren’t just acquiring McLouth, they’re acquiring good, though non-star, production for less than half of what it would cost them on the open market. McLouth signed for $11 million for 2010 and 2011 makes him a much more valuable asset.”
A good point, but I bet it’s not news for most of us.
All in all, though, we’ll have to come back to this in a few years to see who was right and who was wrong, now won’t we?
by patthatt on Jun 3, 2009 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No.
Judge the move based on what is currently known. Nate might fall over dead tomorrow and the move will look great for Pittsburgh, but this would say nothing about NH’s ability to properly value his talent. Maybe there is something we don’t know, but with the current info available, Dan is making a great point that no one has countered very well yet.
by uneasy rider on Jun 4, 2009 12:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I think.....
the marginal win for the Pirates isn’t as meaningful to the Pirates as it is to the Braves over the next 2-3 years. And in that case we are just debating whether we got fair/good value for our asset and we realistically won’t know that for 3-5 years.
by dtoddwin on Jun 4, 2009 12:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's evaluating everything by his numbers,
uneasy rider, but I’m rather uneasy about a strict adherence to something like that from people who are not a part of the game as it is played on the field.
The game is played by people: living, breathing humans. The numbers do not take into the account all the variables that such a simple fact clearly presents.
Dan may well be adept at what he does, and I’m not saying there is no value to his work, quite the contrary.
But I’ll still take the judgment of Neal Huntington and Frank Coonelly over anybody here.
by patthatt on Jun 4, 2009 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then why debate any point? Just go full-blown with the argumentative fallacy of an appeal to authority and pick the better resumé.
Of course, the Atlanta Braves have a longer track record of competence than the Pirates do, so by your standards for arguing, their judgment would clearly be superior and thus, it would therefore be a bad trade for the Pirates.
Or, we could simply try to develop the best argument based on the facts, which strikes me as significantly more productive.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 4, 2009 12:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Since Charlie has a lot of respect for your work,
I’ll take him at his word because I have a lot of respect for what he does on BD.
I’ll leave you to your numbers, Dan. They explain everything.
Good night.
by patthatt on Jun 4, 2009 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also should note that I am not responsible for what others said to you last year. That people made a similar argument about the trades last year does not, in and of itself, make last year’s evaluations correct or this year’s evaluations incorrect.
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 4, 2009 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I never said you did.
And I never said it does.
by patthatt on Jun 4, 2009 12:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dan, I have nothing but respect for you and the ZIPS projection system. Really, I use it quite frequently when I’m evaluating player potential.
My main question is, does it take into account things like age relative to level? Gorkys is a pretty young player for AA, and younger players tend to be harder to project anyway. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with your system, but sometimes I question the validity of any projection system when it comes to minor league players with small sample sizes. Gorkys is nowhere near old enough to consider him even close to reaching his potential yet, and a lot of the hype around him comes from him being a toolsy outfielder.
I understand that he’s nowhere near the prospect McCutchen is, and that’s fine, but I think when you take a look at purely numbers when it comes to young, undeveloped hitters, especially ones signed out of high school, it’s not necessarily going to be an accurate prediction of what they’re likely to do in the future.
I feel basically the same way about Locke…at this point, he’s just to young for us to know.
At any rate, I don’t see him as the most important part of this deal. What does ZIPS say about Morton? He has certainly put up impressive minor league numbers, and I think he’s old enough that a projection would probably be pretty valuable.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I haven’t found being young for the level doesn’t really make a difference in translations – it simply provides more time for improvements to happen.
Actually, I’m surprised ZiPS likes Morton so much. Prelim 2010 projection in Pitt is 8-10, 4.57. If ZiPS is onto something, the trade’s much better than I feel it is, though still not quite as good as a few here are hoping. Though I guess I can understand the feeling – even if the trade itself isn’t good, it’s done based on the right idea which is a big improvement after 15 years (and I can sympathize as an Oriole fan).
--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimer.com
by D.Szymborski on Jun 4, 2009 1:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You could have seen discussion similiar to this over at Camden Chat in '07
Trading Tejada and Bedard worked out for them, although the haul was far more impressive.
Unfortunately for the Bucs, Bill Bavasi is out of a job and Ed Wade is out of prospects, so NH has to settle for somewhat more balanced trades.
by uneasy rider on Jun 4, 2009 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha, yeah…the one bad thing about Littlefield being fired when he was is that all the other bad GMs are gone too.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’ve been a pirate fan my whole life, and i’ve stuck by them through all of these losing seasons. But it’s getting near impossible to feel that way. This time last year, we had the best hitting outfield in the majors, and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM is gone. Neal Huntington said in one of the article that this was the toughest decision he’s had to make and that “tough decisions will need to be made as we build and sustain a championship-caliber organization.” you can’t make a championship caliber team if you’re trading everyone away for so-so prospects who may or may not make it to the big leagues and be succesful. And as for mccutchen, i’m not doubting he will be a very good baseball player, but when that time comes, are we going to trade him away like we’ve done with everyone else? Who’s next to go? Doumit as soon as he returns from the DL? We were SUPPOSED to be building the organization around him and mclouth. Can’t do that now neil huntington, can you? And the pirates wonder why their attendance keeps going down. there’s barely anyone left to cheer for! all our big names and talent are gone! who’s left? wilson and sanchez? with the way the pirates are going, they will be gone by winter because their contracts are up and there isnt enough room in our miniscule salary. I’m boycotting the pirates for the time being. Enough is enough. Stop trading away players for nothing.
by Meghan P on Jun 3, 2009 11:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i'm sure i'm not the only fan who's thinking that.
by Meghan P on Jun 3, 2009 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No one really thinks the PBC is building around Doumit — he’s too fragile.
And like I said in the other thread — NH would have been happy to build around McLouth but has a huge obligation to listen to offers from other GMs. He’d be crazy to consider any PBC starter as untouchable.
As Mr. Rickey reportedly told Ralph Kiner — “We finished last with you and we can finish last without you.”
by WstCstBucco on Jun 3, 2009 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea.....
We trade two good players and an average one and got back ELEVEN players!! And who thinks Bay was resigning with the Bucs after this sesason? Meghan, your line of thinking really perplexes me. If we have that outfield this year who is pitching? I’m not a Karstens fan, but two of the ELEVEN are make up 40% of our rotation and that is likely to be 60% or 3/5 in a month when Morton is called up.
by dtoddwin on Jun 3, 2009 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who said we were "SUPPOSED to be building around (Doumit) and McLouth"?
Who? Do you have a link to the FO stating that? That may have been what you thought, but that was never a publicly stated plan. And McLouth had one error.
No one left to cheer for? How about, I don’t know, the other 24 players?
by azibuck on Jun 3, 2009 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We may have had the best offensive outfield last year, but it was also one of the worst defensive outfields. This year we have one of the best, and it just got better with the addition of McCutchen. Consequently, the pitching has greatly improved.
Pittsburgh Lumber Co.
http://mvn.com/pittsburghlumberco
by MBandi on Jun 4, 2009 9:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and as for peole saying mclouth isn’t any good? have you ever watched him play?!? He was a gold glove winner last year! the first one we’ve had in years! He had ZERO errors..how many did the rest of the team have? Just because his numbers were slightly down this year doesn’t mean he’s having a bad year. Who knows, maybe he would have had tremendous numbers the second half of the season. Guess we’ll never know now. And he’s only been in the big leagues for a couple full seasons. that’s not enough time to reach your full potential.
by Meghan P on Jun 3, 2009 11:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Gold Gloves.....
You realize that this is generally considered a laughable award, right? By most metrics McLouth is considered a below average defensive outfielder. I love the guy, but let’s get some perspective.
by dtoddwin on Jun 3, 2009 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meghan:
As I asked someone in the other thread -
Did you join BD just to post this? That you give up on the Pirates?
If so, hello. And goodbye.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No one...
is saying McClouth isn’t a good player. He is a “good” player and that’s all he is. In a refreshing trend by the current front office we sold high on a good player putting up better than good numbers in order to maximize our return. This is exactly what a team in our position should do. You can argue that the return was not enough, however we will not know the answer to that for a few years, but it makes littel sense to argue the notion that we should be selling high on players who are not likely to contribute to the next winning team. That logic is what put us in this position in the 1st place. Thankfully Neil Huntignton recognizes that fact where as Dave Littlebrain did not!
by Slick1 on Jun 3, 2009 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think i speak for a lot of people saying that i am not all that mad that we traded mcLouth, because we have mccuthchen, however i am dissapointed in what we recieved for him. Gorkys is supposed to be the key to the deal, and he is a light hitting OF which we have plenty of. i think we cldve gotten more for mclouth nearer to the dead line
by PensRock1 on Jun 3, 2009 11:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Locke is the key...
Hard throwing lefty with a plus curve is hard to find and he’s really young too as he was drafted outta HS … could be a solid #2 type or better if he turns out. You gotta take risks to get guys like that in the system outside of the draft.
by RetireNutting on Jun 3, 2009 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Locke and Morton are the keys.
Gorky’s was a nice “like-to-have.”
by Slick1 on Jun 3, 2009 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
gorkys was their number 4 prospect though…. I guess locke was the key but he was their number 7 prospect….
by PensRock1 on Jun 3, 2009 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We need pitching...
Locke and Morton were the keys. The fact that we fot Gorky’s is what makes this a good trade. People don’t just give away pitcing prospects.
by Slick1 on Jun 3, 2009 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Morton is actually projected as a mid-rotation starter, not a back-end one.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Brass ones.....
Huntington went on a local sports talk show in Pittsburgh. Bob Pompeani (sp?) hosted. Pompeani was absolutely apoplectic and was ripping the trade and the organization. Made no distinction between the 15 years before the current FO and the guys running the team now. Totally unprofessional.
Huntington explained his rationale beautifully. When asked how he would explain it to the guys in the clubhouse, he reiterated that he was trying to build a long-term winning organization. He was then asked what if the guys in the clubhouse quit on the team. Classic response. “Then we have some other players who won’t be here much longer as well.”
Strongly suggested that Morton would be in the rotation “soon.” Gotta think Snell is gonna follow Gorzo’s career path from last year.
Ron Cook was also on the show. First time I think he has been coherent in thoughtful in my life. He didn’t endorse the trade, but he gave the FO great credit for not accepting mediocrity and making a bold decision. Thought he was right on point.
The callers and e-mailers were almost unanimously negative with many using the tired line that they’ll never go to a game again.
p.s. I’ll be in PNC tomorrow for Cutch’s debut. Can’t wait. A Pens win will top a great day.
by dtoddwin on Jun 3, 2009 11:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
"Then we have some other players who won’t be here much longer as well."
That’s a good line.
by Charlie on Jun 3, 2009 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Charlie-
please see my above comment re address.
Thanks.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gracias a todos.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great line.
Wasn’t that why Brown got rid of Geroge Hendrick in 85?
by IAPiratesFan on Jun 3, 2009 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
dtoddwin:
Please don’t be too quick to give NH credit for making this deal and then trying to explain his rationale because that’s what he’s paid to do. The sad fact is that in a few months his second full season will be completed and he will have nothing to show for it other than some players with “potential”. There is no reason we should be expected to accept the low caliber of players he continues to run out on the field when experience demonstrates that a new GM can turn around a team in a much shorter time than NH will have taken. NH took an excellent OF from last year’s team and traded the entire bunch for a collection of stiffs most of who lack Class AAA talent. NH’s appearance on this talk show only demonstrated that he has more balls than brains and that is nothing about which to be proud.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Jun 4, 2009 12:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great point. Just think how much closer we would be to winning and competing if we still had the outfield of Bay, Nady and McLouth. I know Nady is hurt this year, but if he doesn’t go to NY, who knows. That would be the best outfield in Major League Baseball by far, as it was last year. Look, I understand that we need players in our farm system. It’s very thin because of the debacle that was Dave Littlefield. But what’s going to happen when McCutchen and Alvarez and these young players establish themselves as good players in the majors? Are we going to trade them? Lord, I hope not. It just seems like anytime we get good players that establish themselves, we trade them for prospects! And yes, I know it’s to rebuild the farm system, but how much longer do we have to build the farm system? It’s been 17 years of building!! But once again, NH and the new front office never make this trade or last year’s trades if weren’t for Littlefield and his pathetic drafts and trades!! If he had actually drafted good pitchers and known what he was doing, we would’ve had pitching and wouldn’t have needed to trade our good players to get it. It makes me mad to see our best players leave, but in fairness to NH, Littlefield’s regime has him handcuffed. Littlefield left the cupboard extremely bare, and NH is trying to restock it.
by mspirate on Jun 4, 2009 1:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We wouldn't be any closer to contending.
We’d have a starting rotation of Maholm, Duke, Snell, Jason Davis, and Yoslan Herrera, along with a terrible defense, and we’d be giving up six runs a game.
by Vlad on Jun 4, 2009 8:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This makes no sense.....
If you are going to trade for prospects with “potential” and high ceiling players who are you going to trade for? I didn’t give NH any credit for explaining his rationale. I give him great credit for making a deal that I think he believes greatly improves the organization, while knowing it will be wildly unpopular with the fan base and fans like you. You clamor for trades and then rip them all the time. I have no idea what you would like to happen. You are way overvaluing Nate. I love the guy, but he isn’t a great player.
We acquired 11 “stiffs” for our three fantastic, best-in-the-world superstars. I’m glad you are so good at talent evaluation. Maybe someday you can do it for a living.
And please enlighten me as to the GMs who have turned around an organization as barren as the Pirates’ was in 1.5 years. One example please. Your comments lack substance and are the typical rants of an uninformed fan. There are arguments to be made against this trade. You didn’t make any of them.
Take a read of the Keith Olberman article linked further down the page.
by dtoddwin on Jun 4, 2009 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Correction....
above should read….. “If you AREN’T going to trade….”
by dtoddwin on Jun 4, 2009 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Snell follows Gorzo's lead...
will that mean that Maholm will balls it up later this season and suck next season?
(the last 3 opening day starters)
by BlindSquirrel on Jun 4, 2009 2:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
my two cents
almost literally..well ok it’s borrowed wisdom, but then again what isn’t. steve phillips is a moron, but his main criticism was that an active shopping of mcclouth could have yielded more. technically, he’s right – but my friend illustrated a good scenario that lays this trade out pretty well:
i have $1. I’m well aware that it’s only worth $1, but my job is to convince another GM that either a) it’s actually worth more than $1, or b) it will be in short order.
if someone comes up to me, of their own volition, and says “i’ll give you $3 for that dollar”….well hell, ok, i’ll do that.
i certainly could bide my time and see if anyone would be willing to give me more than $3 for my dollar, but then i would run just as much risk of everybody offering me less than $3 for it. we got what we could while we could.
by geeves on Jun 3, 2009 11:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I also assume.....
the Braves said take it or leave it. The need an outfielder now and if they didn’t get McLouth they were gonna get someone else, probably today. I’m guessing we didn’t have the option to wait and shop Nate. It was now or never for this deal.
by dtoddwin on Jun 3, 2009 11:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not only that, they'd probably get a better one.
I’m sure Adam Dunn isn’t part of the long-term plans in Washington…
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Assume too much
There is no long term plan in DC. They just signed Dunn to lead them to glory. He’s not going anywhere until their front office is blown up and a competent GM is put in place. Even then, they’d have to eat a lot of his contract.
by uneasy rider on Jun 4, 2009 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well dang, they can have Dunn IF they aren’t offering what we think is fair in return! If you don’t get quality of players that you think is fair in return, don’t make the trade! I just don’t think they got enough for McLouth!
by mspirate on Jun 4, 2009 1:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ummmm....
Don’t you think they DID think the return was more than fair? I doubt they would have pulled the trigger otherwise.
So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded!? Yea, totally. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets do a sample. There are 4 of us and you're retarded. Thats 25 percent. -South Park; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce.
by gorillakilla34 on Jun 4, 2009 2:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure that the move was motivated in part...
…by a desire for Atlanta to have some good news to cancel out the bad PR they’d get from releasing Glavine. As such, I doubt they were willing to sit on this very long.
by Vlad on Jun 4, 2009 8:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
According to the Braves GM on Baseball Tonight that had nothing to do with it. The timing was just coincidence. Make of that what you will.
I made most of my life decisions at a Foghat concert... I stand by them.
by Chester J Lampwick on Jun 4, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you believe that...
I’ve got a bridge I want to sell you.
by Thunder on Jun 4, 2009 6:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shocked!
He was a lot of fun to watch the last two years. Trades like this can never be judged at this point. We’ll know in a couple years. I will still rock my Nate t-shirt.
by jonoz13 on Jun 3, 2009 11:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
OK so I've cooled off a bit
Not happy to see our best player go, especially so early before the trade deadline, but as most people have said, his long-term prospects with Pirates was limited.
Still wonder why they said they were building a nucleus when they signed him?
Morton makes the #A teams pitching 4 SP’s deep. That’s enough to compensate for Snell and Karstens, and maybe even build up the BP, too.
Gorkys, is the new 3A CF since Tabata’s injured. Maybe some compitition will get him healthy quicker?
That leaves Locke, who’s 3 years away from Pro. A quick look at Lynchburg suggest they have room for him. Likely to see Uviedo move up to fill Lincoln’s spot? Makes sense to me, since they’re both ready, and the Bucs will likely be purging the 3A pitching soon enough to rectify Snell and possibly Karstens (althjough the latter IMO is less likely – saddly)
Overall a good trade, but still leaves a big hole for power on the MLB squad. Alvarez can’t hit all the hiomers for the Pirates. They need to get some better power prospects.
Last note. By picking up these pitchers do the Bucs change their draft choices? Maybe a switch to more hitters instead? Don’t know. They may be too high on those guys from MO and Vandy.
Still gonna root for the Bucs, but looks like it’ll be a long dry summer.
by Pensburgh Pirates on Jun 3, 2009 11:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
"Still wonder why they said they were building a nucleus when they signed him?"
Because, at the time, they were.
Otherwise, agreed on your other points.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 3, 2009 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree on the power bats
But then again, teams are generally weary of trading away players with power potential. It’s the hardest commodity to come by with a bat. I doubt we would get two good pitching prospects AND a power hitting prospect.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 12:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because, at the time, they were.
Still … seems to cheapen the thing. Not sure if anyone on the team is safe now.
I mean why bother making a statement like that and turn 180 on it 9 months later? Why should I believe anything they say anymore? I think instaed of saying they were building a nucleus they could have said that at the time it was the fiscally smart thing to do, because had they not signed him to that contract they may have lost him, and all his prospect pulling worth.
I guess I just wish that this team would give us the fans something to hang on to. By endlessly trading fan favorites away we’re left wondering why we bother.
It’s clear that all the PBC does now is for financial reasons. I will not be fooled again (at least by the current group).
by Pensburgh Pirates on Jun 4, 2009 12:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The message that it sends...
is that on one is untouchable. You need to continue to peform at the levels that led to the big contract you signed…se Snell, McClouth, Doumit, Maholm, Sanchez, Wilson, etc.
by Slick1 on Jun 4, 2009 12:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
so I guess we are on our way back to celler because the future is just a few more trades away nevermind that as we trade away all the talent attendance figures will plument and there is no longer a face to the franchise but it will al be good once we trade away everyone that actually makes money. But the future is almost here I can tell and then it will be traded so will be losing for about 25ish years. The franchise may MOVE before they start winning again.
by WVPiratesfan on Jun 4, 2009 12:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think it is safe to say that...
Andrew McCutchen is now the face of the franchise. The attendance figures won’t plummet. We are already last in the league. They can’t go any lower. And we are not on our way back to the cellar; we haven’t left the cellar. That is why this trade was made. This organization lacks talent so when you have an opportunity to acquire three talented players for the price of one you do it. Those are the kinds of decisions that succesful organizations make…see Billy Beane Okland A’s.
by Slick1 on Jun 4, 2009 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Slick1
There is not enough Accutain in the world to clear up the complexion of the face of our franchise. Billy Beane would never have made the ridiculous trandes we’ve seen come out of NH’s office and the A’s will never have consecutive seasons of less than 70 wins under Beane’s leadership.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Jun 4, 2009 12:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
These trades are very similar, at least in their outline, to the Mark Mulder and Tim Hudson trades that infuriated fans, and also similar in goals to the Haren and Swisher deals that came later, by which point fans had figured out Beane knew what he was doing. And no, Oakland will probably never have consecutive sub-70-win seasons under Beane… because Beane inherited a ton more talent than Huntington did (Giambi, Tejada, Chavez, etc.). The situations the two GMs inherited were apples and oranges.
by Charlie on Jun 4, 2009 1:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please represent WV in a better manner from a writing skills perspective…
by God Loves on Jun 4, 2009 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gold.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The face of the franchise......
for at least the next six years makes his debut tomorrow. Buckle up.
by dtoddwin on Jun 4, 2009 12:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sure. If Cutch tears it up his first 10 games or so with the Pirates, he could be on the trading block!
by mspirate on Jun 4, 2009 12:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
we re gonna trade a 22 year old. you sound like a yahoo poster. building up for the mccutcheon/alvarez era its that simple. whew thisll be a crazy year haha
by JR89 on Jun 4, 2009 12:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I was bein’ sarcastic, but if Cutch turns into an All-Star in a couple of years, we could trade him. WITH THE PIRATES, YOU JUST NEVER KNOW!
I bet you never thought we would trade Aramis Ramirez either, did you? Haha.
by mspirate on Jun 4, 2009 1:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
...
mspirate, didn’t you say earlier you were done with this team?
by BlindSquirrel on Jun 4, 2009 2:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yet again. Different FO.
So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded!? Yea, totally. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets do a sample. There are 4 of us and you're retarded. Thats 25 percent. -South Park; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce.
by gorillakilla34 on Jun 4, 2009 2:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Crossroads
This could be a defining moment in the Coonington era. It’s one thing to trade away guys who are approaching 30 or past it and have one year on their contract, if that. It’s another thing entirely to trade a solid player for hope and promises. Which, at this point, is all Hernandez, Lock and Morton are.
I think Huntington and, to a lesser extent, Coonnelly have laid their credibility on the line here — their credibility on the “financial flexibility” issue (which I think is a red herring, but I’m in a minority in the public at large, and we just got more financially flexible) and their credibility on the “having a solid plan” issue. Not only did they just get prospects back — they got them for a guy who’s 27, and even if this is as good as Nate gets, this is pretty good. Any team in the league would love to pencil in his present production for awhile.
I realize this isn’t a championship team as assembled, but I don’t know if we got a hell of a lot closer to that with this trade. If that isn’t the result, this is going to be perceived as “same old Pirates, trading away stars for magic beans.” And while I don’t particularly care about that, I do care about the possibility that it’s Same Old Pirates, Lousy Talent Evaluators. There’s just no reason to trade Nate for Projects; that’s ok with Bay and Nady, but not here.
by KPatrick on Jun 4, 2009 1:08 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Great point, KPatrick
I think management has the plan down pat … what I’m concerned about is the execution.
Trading for prospects won’t do a thing if you’re acquiring the wrong ones.
by woobie on Jun 4, 2009 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Several of my Yankee friends are saying that the Bucs could have gotten Phil Hughes and Melky Cabrera in the offseason for him, but then McLouth was “untouchable”. I don’t know. I just hope that Huntington knows what he is doing. Unlike with the Bay and Nady trades, which I supported, I’m skeptical of this package’s value.
But then, I’m just a fan. I may envision a slappy hitter, Bucs management may see Carl Crawford or Torii Hunter.
by ddff22 on Jun 4, 2009 1:21 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Except....
Melky isn’t very good and has very little upside. Hughes is a wild card. IMO the deal we made with Atlanta is better than the Yanks deal.
by dtoddwin on Jun 4, 2009 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Austin Jackson
will be starting in center next year and Melky will again be a fourth outfielder on a team that isn’t exactly loaded with OF talent.
by dtoddwin on Jun 4, 2009 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah.
If you offered me the Atlanta package or that NY deal, I’d take the Atlanta one.
Not a Melky fan.
by Vlad on Jun 4, 2009 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just like we took the Atlanta deal
for Adam LaRoche when we traded Mike Gonzalez, instead of acquiring Melky Cabrera.
by patthatt on Jun 4, 2009 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ditto.
Hughes looks pretty good, but Melky is garbage. I’d rather have two solid starters and a solid OF that one good starter and a garbage OF.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The good news? McCutchen makes his MLB debut in less than 12 hours.
Oh, and I’m calling it now: Huntingdon is out as Pittsburghs’ GM by the end of the 2012 season or earlier.
by mspirate on Jun 4, 2009 1:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I actually think I’m going to be writing a fanpost about this in a few days when the fallout from this trade and Cutch’s debut dies down.
I hope you’re wrong though.
I made most of my life decisions at a Foghat concert... I stand by them.
by Chester J Lampwick on Jun 4, 2009 1:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two Sides
I keep flopping between two sides for the argument of this trade.
The side that wants the Pirates to win a championship says this trade makes sense because that wasnt going to happen when McLouth was in his prime
But the fan inside me hates this trade because I loved Nate McLouth on and off the field. This one hurts because I never saw this one coming, I dont think any of us did. Like KPatrick said, this trade is different because Nate is only 27 and was under contract for multiple years and all we got were prospects
We’ll all just have to wait and see
by Jett on Jun 4, 2009 1:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The 5 year plan is working
First and foremost, best to Nate. My second favorite Pirate next to JBay. IMO, the reason Nate’s numbers are down this year is the fact that he did not have that 1st half of the year with 2 of the hottest hitters in the majors (Nady and Bay) in the lineup. Players having that kind of a year will make average to good player stats better. Nate is JBay, 2 years removed on a good team. The Pirates lineup has many holes. The Braves have hitters and I really feel that Nate’s numbers will be as good as last year or better over the next 2 years. Having said that, I feel like many others that no one should be off limits to a good trade. I have said this before that you can have all the great hitters you want, but without good pitching you will not win championships. The Pirates received 2 pitchers out of this deal and time will tell if they are good. Until the minor league black hole is filled from “Littlebrain’s” failures, these kind of trades must be done, no matter how unpopular they will be. This is year 2 of the 5 year plan and if this draft is like last year’s and if we get some top notch players from the DR, we are making huge progress. I have been a Pirate fan since the 70’s and it has been hard to see the Buccos hit bottom and I enjoy seeing the passion on this blog and know that we all do care about having that winning team back in Pittsburgh. I think this path is the correct one. Tough times require tough decisions and the FO is giving it a shot. Good luck and may a pennant belong to the Bucs in 2012.
by long4willie on Jun 4, 2009 1:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
As sad as it is...
as soon as I heard the news at work, I couldn’t wait to get here to read the responce. (I know, I have NO life.) I decided to read every comment first as to not repeat things already said, which some new people should also have done. I personally love the trade. I liked Nate and definetly wish him well but who was to say last year wouldn’t have been his best year with the Pirates? He played less than 2 seasons worth of games. In return we get more promising prospects which excites me (I’m also a gambling man). I say good deal and good job Team Coonington. Also I loved the mspirate=lumberco comparison.
So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded!? Yea, totally. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets do a sample. There are 4 of us and you're retarded. Thats 25 percent. -South Park; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce.
by gorillakilla34 on Jun 4, 2009 2:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't think that's likely to happen.
JVB was not ever particularly successful in the upper minors. Morton’s AAA numbers in ’07 and ’08 are miles ahead of anything JVB ever did at that level.
The question then becomes whether those numbers are reflective of his true ability or not, of course.
by Vlad on Jun 4, 2009 8:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plus to my knowledge Morton was never a top hitting prospect that was inexplicably converted to a pitcher.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm...
10-7 with a 2.56 ERA at Indy in 2007 isn’t successful?? Since when?? JVB has a career ERA in the minors of 3.60, Morton 4.33. WHIP of 1.316 for JVB, Morton 1.493.
Morton has had the equivalent of ONE good season in the minors…140 innings at AAA in 2007 and 2008…along with a train wreck during that time in Atlanta. He MAY be turning the corner…but we thought that at one time with JVB.
by Thunder on Jun 4, 2009 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keith Olbermann
Makes some nice points here:
Did the Pirates Upgrade in Center?
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 4, 2009 8:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Smizik
Wrote that the team has abandoned the present with this trade. As Olbermann suggests, that isn’t necessarily true.
It seems to me that there is a legitimate school of thought that last year was a career year for Nate and that his usual offensive production will be a bit less than in ‘08. If that’s the case, Cutch might be an upgrade and you’d be trading a commodity at high value to address the glaring need to stock the system. Put another way, I’m not sure that there will be a significant drop off (a drop off this year probably isn’t significant since it won’t be the difference between contention or even .500).
Now, the better question is whether the big league team would’ve been improved by playing both Cutch & Nate. Surely it would have, but that needs to be weighed against the option of adding prospects.
Again, I love the theory. We need to trust that the baseball evaluation of the players involved was accurate.
Good day.
by Uncle Nate on Jun 4, 2009 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm surprised by the number of people...
…who seem to be pencilling Morton into Snell’s rotation spot. If anyone got the boot, I’d expect it to be Karstens.
by Vlad on Jun 4, 2009 8:48 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Karstens....
Is clearly the least talented of our five starters, but I view management as wanting to find a way for Snell to improve. Just running him out there every five days doesn’t seem to be working. I really think he may end up as a setup guy or a closer.
by dtoddwin on Jun 4, 2009 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd think so too
But Karstens is keeping his head above water this year. With an insustainable BABIP, but he’s still getting it done. Snell has NOTHING going for him.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the trade
Before everybody jumps on the bandwagon with all the other ignorant disgruntled fans, let’s look at this trade holistically. Nate McClouth, although an All-Star and a solid member of our lineup, is not by any means tearing it up. The Pira tes goals in the trade was clearly to get some pitching prospects ,(which they need badly) and to move McCutchen up to the majors. In my opinion, McCutchen has five to ten times the potential that McClouth has, and it was time that they gave the savior of the franchise his chance. OK, maybe his batting average isn’t that impressive, but he has like 30 RBIs and we all know the Pirates need clutch hitting and more speed. It will be quite a while before we see if these three prospects pan out but it is easily conceivable that Hernandez and Morton will. As for the other guy, he is somewhat comparable to garbage. I hope you all watch the game today, or at least the highlights. A new era in Pirates baseball has begun.
by Ariba!#21 on Jun 4, 2009 8:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Gimme a Break
A team like the Pirates can only get talent by trading for it or drafting it, some of you act like we can trade our crap for other teams best players and have turned this team around in a hurry. it doesn’t work like that. What was our record last year with the best hitting outfield in the league? Crap, and they were either going to leave or get old before we had anything coming up behind them. This is team is a long way off from winning, it takes so much to win consistently, even when your top prospects make it, you have to have even more behind them for injuries to fill holes and keep moving, we had nothing, NOTHING in the minors to build with in the future, So we traded Nate, he’s an average player and we got 3 prospects for him just because every team had to have an all-star and he was ours. We stink and moves like this have to be made, trade everyone you can get something for, we still need a lot more talent in the organization and are a long way off from winning, don’t be mad or sad, be glad our FO is not sitting their like DL and thinking we have what it takes to put a winning team out there, they realize we are far off and are doing what they think needs to be done, it’s more than what has happened the past 15 years and I, for one, am glad to see moves like this realized.
by SteelCity G on Jun 4, 2009 9:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I was always afraid of this
I have to say as mad as I was to see him traded, I was always afraid this would happen. He’s worth much more to the Pirates than anyone else. As much as we can post about trading Jack or Adam L to a team with a hole at those positions, nobody wants our crappy rent-a-players. They want our good players that are under contract, and that was always Nate. Also, CF is the one position where we have a real replacement knocking down the door at AAA, so while I don’t think the lineup Friday is as good as the one Monday, it isn’t as huge a drop off as one would like to think. We just really have NO power as opposed to very little power. I wouldn’t be shocked to see Duke go too but who knows. It really sucks right now but objectively it was probably the right move to trade him, I’m just not positive that this was the trade to make. I guess only time will tell.
RIP NATE. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN...MISTER TONY PLUSH!
by GTrain on Jun 4, 2009 9:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is a fairly reasonable take on things.
As a fan, I hate to see Nate go.
As an analyst, I understand and largely agree with the general mentality and intent behind the trade. There are both good and bad points about the specific players we got back in return, so there are scenarios where it will work out, and scenarios where it will not.
by Vlad on Jun 4, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The talent was not there even with Nate McLouth
and a healthy Ryan Doumit to win this year, and very probably for a couple more, so continuing to build an organization deep in talent at all positions is essential to getting this team back on top and win a World Series.
Stick to the status quo and pursue the Drive For 75 this year, and perhaps .500 in 2010.
Why settle for the above? We should be striving to have the best team in a few years in MLB.
I think we made significant strides last year with the first good draft in years-how good remains to be seen of course-the renewed interest in pursuing talent in Latin America, and a commitment to having everyone on the same page in the organization in terms of player development.
I certainly hope that we add a bunch more high-end talent through the draft next week and Latin America signings later in the summer.
Neal Huntington and Frank Coonelly have done nothing so far to give me the impression they are not committed to winning. They inherited an organization in ruins, and it will take more than another year or two to truly rebuild it for a sustained run of success.
I’m sorry to see Nate McLouth go to Atlanta. I really am. I thought he was a better player for the PBC the past few years than the numbers say. I think Atlanta fans will be happy with him at the plate and in the field, not to mention his outstanding baserunning.
As for the return the Pirates got for Nate, I’ll say it again: Throw around whatever numbers you like to “prove” one way or the other whether it was a good deal or not. But all I know is that, with two of the guys at least a couple of years removed from even appearing in the bigs, we will probably have to wait til at least 2011 to start finding out what we really got and who the “winner” of the deal is. (The same holds true for the big trades last summer. We don’t know how good Tabata, D. Cutch, and Bryan Morris will be, and we’re just starting to reap the rewards of what Ohlendorf, Karstens, Moss, and Andy LaRoche can do. Of course Hansen doesn’t look promising at all anymore.)
I look forward to Andrew McCutchen’s debut in Pittsburgh and will cheer for Nate McLouth in Atlanta as long as we’re not playing them.
by patthatt on Jun 4, 2009 10:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
New GM - Same Story
This trade may work out, but when will the cycle end? At what point do you stop trading your best talent and go after it with the guys you got? The Buccos are 24-28 without their swtich-hitting clean-up catcher. They’re battling. But they won’t any more. It’s tank city from here on out. No one in that clubhouse feels safe.
I remember a 25 (25!) year old slugging 3rd baseman who got traded to the Cubbies in 2003 for…wait for it…Jose Hernandez, Matt Bruback, and Bobby Hill. Who? Oh yeah, they are all out of the Pirates’ organization. I suffered through Joe Randa at 3rd when the Buccos could have had Aramis Ramirez. And guess what the then GM said (it sounds similar to what you’re hearing now) – “We need more players. We need prospects. We need some flexibility.” I also remember our current GM stating that Nate was part of our core when he signed him to a contract extension. Really? There’s a vote of confidence for all of the other players.
It’s the same old story. Get some prospects that cost less, and if they ever develop, trade them for more prospects. Some say that the Pirates are suckers, but the real suckers are us – the fans. We keep supporting this club, hoping the years of futility will end, but it won’t. If you can make money putting a sub-par team on the field – why not do it? Why cut into your profits just to win a few more games?
I’m excited that Cutch is up – I live in Indy and see him regularly – and he is the real deal. But when his contract is up in a few years, don’t think for an instant the Pirates won’t trade him for Johnny Flashinthepan, Javier Nobody, and a schmuck to be named later.
by SteelonIce on Jun 4, 2009 10:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
There are major differences between now and Ramirez.
Firstly, the Pirates didn’t bring McLouth up way before his time and stunt his development so we got his worst years, not his best.
Secondly, the Pirates traded Ramirez for what everyone knew from the start was a shoddy package. Bobby Hill was the centerpiece of the deal, and he was a utility infielder. That trade was garbage from the start.
This trade, we got prospects who actually have a chance. I can’t say enough what a difference that makes.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 4, 2009 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Completely Different...
Aramis Ramirez was traded by Dave Littlefield, a man so inept that he couldn’t organize an orgy for a group of nymphomaniacs, because the team was not going to make payroll unless they dealt either Ramirez or Kris Benson, and Benson just happened to be hurt. Littlefield did not maximize the return on Ramirez, partly because he sucked at his job and partly because he had no leverage; the Cubs knew that he had to make the deal and they took advantage of that fact.
Fast forward to 2009. Neal Huntington dealt away a decent player (not a star like Pittsburghers are claiming) because he could get a decent package of prospects in return and because there was an immediate replacement, one with higher upside, in the minor leagues ready to be recalled.
The people bitching and moaning about this trade are taking a short-term, “we must win now” view. The Pirates’ ORGANIZATION was in shambles when Coonelly and Huntington took over, because of crap trades like Ramirez, crap drafting for JVB and Bullington and crap free-agent signings like Joe Randa and Jeromy Burnitz. Continuing to try to placate the fanbase by stop-gap measures and hoping against hope that every player on the roster was going to have a career year and they maybe, just maybe, could eke out 82 wins was not the strategy they chose to undertake; they are blowing this mess up and giving the organization a definitive direction.
Is it easy to swallow? No, but the point is that the organization was not in a position for long-term sustained success due to the previous regime’s missteps, but now there is hope for that, although it is painful in the present. When those guys took over, the top two prospects in the organization were McCutchen and Neil Walker; today, Neil Walker isn’t in the top-10 and probably not even the top-15. Will all of those guys acquired by Huntington pan out and become stars? No, but isn’t it worth rolling the dice if 60% of them do, because the team will be that much better off and will be able to have a string of years where they win more than they lose.
Does that mean they will stop trading players once they get good? No, they’ll continue to churn talent, but in baseball, unless a team has deep pockets and can survive mistakes (Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Dodgers, Angels), that is what has to be done. Does anyone think the Giants did not do irreversible harm to their long-range success by hamstringing themselves with Barry Zito’s ridiculous contract?
The Pirates MLB team is probably no worse than it was yesterday. The Pirates organization is better than it was yesterday. I can live with that and applaud Neal Huntington for having the grapefruits to make a move that would be publicly unpopular.
by Bishop1973 on Jun 4, 2009 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You stop the cycle...
…when you’ve traded for enough prospects to have a huge wad of young talent all hit the major leagues at the same time. Bonifay and Littlefield were not good at selecting young talent to acquire, so they never accomplished this (and Littlefield mostly seemed to hate and fear young talent anyway).
by Vlad on Jun 4, 2009 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 4, 2009 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I give up....
I’m just tired of asinine comments like this. You are an idiot. I can’t take it anymore. There is no thought or insight in your comments. Please stop.
by dtoddwin on Jun 5, 2009 1:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
to me, the trade felt like being punched in the stomach.
my first reaction was surprise and shock, more from the unexpectedness of who was traded and the timing of the trade. (to make matters worse, my home computer is so old and slow that sites like the post-gazette.com and bucsdugout and whygavs won’t work on it, so all I had was Yahoo! news to “comfort” me.)
I had expected the Pirates to make some major trades this year — Adam Laroche and John Grabow are almost certainly gone at the deadline, with Jack likely staying put unless a big-market playoff team loses their starting SS and is willing to overpay in a trade. but I never expected Nate McLouth to be the first to leave.
I understand Atlanta was desperate for a CF with power, and that the Pirates probably traded McLouth at or near peak value. but it seemed far more likely in my mind that Morgan or Moss would be traded to make room for McCutchen, not McLouth.
I can’t imagine what it must feel like in the Pirates’ locker room right now. I would feel more than a littlebetrayed that the Pirates front office has given up so early in the season. and even though McCutchen has certainly earned his way to the majors, that was probably the worst way to promote your top prospect, from a PR perspective. I predict Indianapolis will match the Pirates in attendance for the rest of the year.
by humbucker on Jun 4, 2009 10:56 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes.....
It is a PR nightmare for the front office because the fans overvalue their own players, as they do in every city. At the time of the trade Nate was second on the Pirates in OPS. He WAS 90TH IN MLB. He isn’t a great player. I like that you like him. I like him. But if you are going to rail against the trade please make the two or three arguments that make sense rather than the I like Nate argument.
by dtoddwin on Jun 5, 2009 1:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A little harsh, there, amigo.
We all have our favorites, and it gets difficult when we invest emotionally.
At least he’s not championing the “Move Doumit to 1B” or “Freddy’s getting dicked by mgmt so his contract won’t vest.”
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 5, 2009 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gorkys...
According to Seth Smith at baseballprojection.com has Gorkys rated as the second best defensive OF in all levels of the minor leagues in 2008 using his TotalZone+ system. He is considered ML ready defensively.
Having looked at his hitting stats, it seems to me that he has been instructed to try and leg balls out hit on the ground, ala Jim Tracy to Chris Duffy. This is a major blunder by both the Tigers and Braves. The numbers to me point a much better line drive hitter, than thought. They also point to more power potential, than he is being given credit for at least in gap power. Hopefully NH and company have picked up on this and can quickly act on correcting this. It would also hopefully, allow Gorkys to gain some additional patience at the plate against RHP.
If this is in deed the scenario, it becomes a steal.
by BSpar on Jun 4, 2009 12:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
HAYES!
What’s with this longball bullshit?! With your speed you should be hitting em on the ground and legging em out. For every ball you hit in the air, I want 10 push ups.
I think between 1 and 2 there might be a Major League scene for every baseball scenario.
RIP NATE. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN...MISTER TONY PLUSH!
by GTrain on Jun 4, 2009 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One great side effect
Pretty soon, i won’t have to read “McClouth” every f@#$ing day.
by azibuck on Jun 4, 2009 12:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but...
…you’ll see a corresponding increase in McCutcheon mentions.
by Vlad on Jun 4, 2009 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have faith Pirates fans
My family is from Pittsburgh so I root for the Pirates when they aren’t playing my home town Nats, and I’ll tell you I like this deal for them. I think McLouth is a great complimentary player but he’s not a star. This isn’t like they traded away a David Wright or an Evan Longoria. McLouth is 27 he’s not really gonna get much better and in fact will probably fall more in the .825 OPS range. Also remember he would have had to move to the corner spot decreasing some of his value.
I think the Pirates got some legitimate prospects. Two top 10 guys from the Braves isn’t nothing. Plus Charlie Morton can help the team now. Anyways you guys can check out the rest of my thoughts at http://steveospeak.blogspot.com/
by Steveo26 on Jun 4, 2009 1:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
for whoever asked where I got that the pirates were building the franchise around McLouth and Doumit, I was right when I said that. I remember hearing that when the pirates signed both of them in the off-season, and It was said again in this article from the Trib, posted this afternoon
by Meghan P on Jun 4, 2009 4:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
To those against the deal...
You got two of Atlanta’s Top 10 prospects for McLouth.
Atlanta has one of the deeper farm systems in baseball, yet the Buccos were able to pry two of their better prospects away in this deal.
Yes, McLouth is relatively young and on the cheap. He’s also reached his ceiling in terms of talent and isn’t going to get much better than he already is. As is, he’s a good #2-#3 OF. Not exactly a guy you build around.
The Pirates made out fairly well in this deal, in my opinion.
As for Bay, you faced one of three options..
A) Trade him while his value was high
B) Wait until the following season and hope that he can command more then (considering what Atlanta traded to recieve Mark Teixeria and what they got in return when they traded him to the Angels, that’s not likely)
C) Keep him and lose him in two years for nothing.
It’s never fun to trade your best player. However, when you get a decent haul in return, the deal is easier to stomach.
by Dodger Jay on Jun 4, 2009 7:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Keith Law
ESPN Chat with Keith Law
Jim (CT): I know you are going to talk draft, but can you give us a quick opinion on the McLouth to Atlanta deal?
Keith Law: (1:09 PM ET ) Like it a lot for Pittsburgh – Morton could go right in their rotation, Gorkys is a ++ defender with a chance to hit (he hasn’t been good this year but he’s also 21 in AA), Locke is a high-upside LHP with three pitches who has shown good feel and command in the past. That’s a lot of talent – and difficult-to-get talent, since players up the middle and LHP are hard to acquire in trade or free agency – for a guy who is, what, an average outfielder? Fringe-average? Since 6/1/08 McLouth has hit .256/.327/.447 if you exclude his 7 IBB, and he’s not good in CF.
by ILLZ on Jun 4, 2009 8:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Morton
For what it’s worth, since my wife is a lifelong Braves fan (though to her credit the Pirates are her second team), I’ve watched them closely for four seasons now. Charlie Morton was brought up prematurely owing to injuries to their starters. When he was on, though, he had some electric stuff. Hard sink and fine movement. If Kerrigan can build on the confidence he appears to have gained in AAA, this could be a real good deal. I agree with Law’s assessment in general. As much as I’ve grown to like McLouth, I am not blind to his limitations. He will have less help to his left in Atlanta, especially if Diaz is in that spot. Offensively, some of those home runs at PNC will become long outs in Turner Field. We won’t know how this projects for a while, but at this point I am optimistic. McCutchen’s start today didn’t hurt, to be sure. This is a long road back, and we are two more drafts and a few trades away from getting a sense of whether this organization will take five or ten more years to be restored to competitiveness. We have lost with all of these guys, and we’ll lose some more without them. For a while yet.
by RichieHebner on Jun 5, 2009 12:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
McLouth
McLouth was the face of the sad Pittsburgh franchise. I have followed this team for forty-six years, but the last sixteen have been quite disgusting. McLouth was a home grown product who out worked all who stood in his path until he made the starting lineup for good. His struggles personify the city itself. No one cares about the Pirates. They are the butt of ridicule year-in and year-out. They are mostly ignored unless some sarcastic comments are tossed their way by the snide national media when they are not beating us over the head with the Red Sox Nation or A-Rod or Manny ad nauseum. If we Bucco fans choose to mourn the “passing” of McLouth, please respect that right. We have almost no good news to revel in, so when the best player we had is given away it is understandable that we are deeply hurt.
by ZSauce on Jun 5, 2009 11:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 














