Jayson Stark: Pirates Could Shoot For .500 This Year
With the draft coming up here in a few days, it seems like we've seen more unsourced reporting about the Pirates than at any time since I've started blogging, and I hate to keep guessing whether these writers with their deliberately-vague reports might actually know something. But Jayson Stark's recent note about the Pirates is, at least, interesting, so I'll run with it.
So do they dangle a potentially attractive veteran arm like Kevin Correia at the trading deadline? Or do they hang on to their current group and make a run at ending their deadly streak of 18 losing seasons?
They're not making any announcements yet, obviously. But increasingly, there are signs they could prioritize a run at .500 over collecting prospects, much like the Brewers did in 2005 after 12 straight losing seasons. And one NL assistant GM tells Rumblings he would do the same thing if he ran the Pirates.
"I know it's important to think long-haul, but part of the long-haul thought process is getting rid of that losing tradition," he said
I'm not sure what these "signs" would be, particularly since the Pirates' front office has repeatedly and consistently said that they won't prioritize a run at .500. There's no doubt that a .500 season would temporarily smooth things over with some fans. But their rise in confidence would likely be temporary unless the Pirates could sustain their winning ways. For example, the Royals came out of nowhere to win 83 games in 2003, then went right back into the toilet, winning 58, 56 and 62 games the next three years, finishing 13th of 14 American League teams in attendance in each season. The value of getting to .500 one time is greatly overstated.
I do think the Pirates will be less likely to trade veterans this year, though. With Ryan Doumit on the DL, they really only have two veterans to trade, Correia and Paul Maholm. Well, and possibly someone like Jose Veras, who might actually bring back a pretty decent return. Lyle Overbay and Matt Diaz have no value. Joel Hanrahan is under team control for a couple more seasons. And even in the cases of Correia and Maholm, the Pirates can keep them next year if they like.
In addition, like I mentioned in my top 30 prospects list a couple weeks ago, there's a ton of depth in the minor leagues. What the Bucs' minor league teams lack is star power, and they're not very likely to get that by trading Paul Maholm. Instead, they'll get more guys like Nathan Adcock - guys who play reasonably well, but not brilliantly, and then cause the Pirates problems when they have to be added to the 40-man roster. The Pirates needed players like Adcock a couple years ago when the farm system was barren, and certainly it's always nice to have more players like Adcock. But now the Pirates don't need such players nearly as badly. This is particularly true given the 40-man roster crunch that will ensue after the 2011 season.
Now, if the Pirates get offered a great prospect for someone like Hanrahan or Maholm, that's obviously a different story. But if we're talking about trades like the Jack Wilson / Ian Snell deal that brought Adcock, or the Adam LaRoche deal that brought Hunter Strickland and Argenis Diaz, there's little reason for the Pirates to consider deals like that.
If the Pirates make fewer veterans-for-prospects trades this year, I think those are likely to be the main reasons why. I don't think the Pirates will finish with a winning record this season, but if not trading veterans helps them back into one, that's great. But based on everything the Pirates' front office has said - over and over again - I don't think that will be their goal.
25 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Could be
a chance to play for it through mid July and decide then if 500 if possible; if not start shopping.
Tom Specht
Surplus C level prospects
I don’t think it would be abandoning the program to package a couple of those mid-level prospects that they weren’t going to protect from Rule 5 in order to get someone who can actually hit to play first base or maybe right field. The guys with the team now wont bring the elite prospects and that’s what we need. Unfortunately, it seems like the only way to acquire those, barring another GM getting seriously stupid, is via the draft and Latin America.
I honestly will be...
shocked if one of Hanrahan, Veras, Meek or Resop isn’t moved. 4 power arms under control. I think I have them ranked in order of the return they would bring, but that could change if Meek pitches well for the next two months.
And (don’t crucify please) Tim Wood and Chris Leroux, post new delivery, have been pitching very well in Indy. IF they can get equal value, huge caveat, for Hanrahan you have to move him, but I think Veras is the mostly likely as Charlie mentioned.
The Hammer Speaks
Extra Innings
Twitter: @DTonPirates and @hammerspeaks
If the choice is
Break .500 with what they have or trading away the veterans that would get them there for a knock your socks off prospect then forget .500. But since that is a very unlikely scenerio I’d say let it ride and get the monkey off their back.
About the 4 power arms,
the Pirates have in recent years done just that, so you’re probably right.
Tom Specht
First you have to not get swept by Philly.
Six games under would be a pain to recover from.
by Adam Reynolds on Jun 3, 2011 5:24 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Indeed
then Dbacks, Mets, Astros, Indians, Orioles, Red Sox & Blue Jays are coming next to complete this month
"I'm gonna go get the papers, get the papers." - Jimmy Two Times
by Elektrostal_Kid on Jun 3, 2011 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions
My thought on it:
I think that they should be willing to hold on to what they got. Unless they’re getting something ridiculous for the veterans. I don’t have a problem with having a bad second half if it means the Pirates get something awesome that can help long term. Like James McDonald and Andrew Lambo.
There is no love in the World. There's only pain.
Isn't there value in getting compensation picks
I thought maybe we could get one or two if we hold on to Maholm, Yes?
I think we'd have to decline his option but still offer abitration...
… and Maholm would also have to decline arbitration.
Even then, it’s not clear Maholm will be worth any compensation picks. As of May 30, he won’t even be a type B free agent.
Can't pass up opportunity to end streak
Would agree June will tell us if this club can really make a run at ending this horrible streak, it’s possible the Bucs could be 7-10 games under .500 by the time the trading deadline nears. In that worst case scenario, and a team offers a great deal, I would be inclined to accept it and move on.
However, if the club is treading water, and close to the .500 mark by the end of the month, I don’t want the team downgraded. And if the record is in the vicinity of a wildcard berth, the organization better upgrade. Everyone here wants a long term winning team, but we can’t underestimate the significance of ending the streak, if the opportunity presents itself. When was the last time the Pirates were mentioned without that horrible record? The Phillies had a one winning season in 30 years back in the day, before any of us were born.
I would gladly take a 82-80 this year, and a 76-886 mark in 2012, if the club is still in the upward mode. This happened with the Pirates in the late 80s, sometimes teams fall back a little after a huge improvement. Even if the team ultimately fell short this season, the excitement at PNC Park and the City would be something to behold. With NH in his contract year, a colossal improvement would assure a extension, so that figures into all of this.
Bottom line, this streak has been a monkey on the back of this storied franchise, and I think the Bucs have a responsibility to end it, if at all possible. Not just for the team, but the fans, too.
It would require quite an expansion of the schedule as well.
I don’t think the players will allow the game extending into winter and playing quadruple-headers every day in the next CBA.
www.stealingfirstbase.com
by Stealing First Base on Jun 3, 2011 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Well said, Charlie. I agree.
There’s nothing I wish to refute in this post.
No jinx no jinx no jinx.
Getting to .500 is important
Why? Because it means the team is WINNING. The players are learning how to win and compete at the major league level. One example, the Royals, is not evidence that you shouldn’t go for .500 because you might just drop back down the next few years. We have a young team – that is unlikely, barring unforeseen injuries or collapses.
Young prospects in return for veterans? The probability of a good haul is unlikely, so I’d rather go for the Type A/B and get a pick. This team needs to experience winning – that is the most important thing over the long-term. And that’s the main route, combined with continued player development and progression, that the team is going to make the playoffs.
As said before, this team is not going .500
Jason Stark is a comedian.
Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?
http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained
but if the Pirates do finish .500, you should be forced to do something to make up for that bold, pessimistic statement
hmmmmmmm, whatever should that be???
The LaRoche trade
is a good point. The D-backs got the 43rd or 44th pick for letting him walk. I’d rather have that then Diaz and Strickland.
For the record
That 2003 Royals team greatly and i mean GREATLY overachieved. they were also VERY and i mean VERY lucky. just take a look at their team and the roster. btw look at their SP stat lines, i have no idea how they won 83 games….
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/KCR/2003.shtml
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend!

by 



















