SB Nation Pittsburgh Editor's Pick
Three Years
by epoc on Sep 10, 2011 10:45 AM EDT
Email
Print
I started writing this as a response to Charlie's article about the rumored Huntington extension, but I decided it was interesting/important enough to get its own FanShot. Forgive the conceit, please.
I think Charlie's article was very good, and my thoughts are very similar to his. However, unlike Charlie, I do think the length of this extension is worth worrying/complaining about, so I'm going to complain about it here.
A three year extension at this point is basically an endorsement of NH. If ownership were still unconvinced he was the right guy for the team right now, the extension would have been for one or two years. Going to three years on it (and of course, three years is just a rumor at this point) would be an indication that ownership is completely satisfied with the job NH has done and completely convinced that he can build a winner going forward.
The reason I think this is worth worrying about is that it changes the tone of the next few years. It essentially means that NH is under no pressure in the next couple of years to actually build a contender. He's got ownership's endorsement of his plan to sign crappy stopgaps with $45M budgets until his draft picks mature and make the team a winner. I don't think that's the right plan, and I don't think that's a good message to send to NH. We're already past the point where NH should have been making some creative moves to really improve the ML team, and giving him the mandate to avoid doing this for a few more years does not seem like the right move to me.
Just for example, there were a lot of SS available last offseason, and even though the best one, J.J. Hardy, was available for a very reasonable price, NH didn't upgrade there. He decided to stick with Ronny Cedeno. Whatever you think of Cedeno, Hardy is clearly an upgrade. But NH, for whatever reason, didn't think the Pirates should make the upgrade. Maybe there were good reasons for that, but it's also part of a pattern. NH hasn't done anything to really upgrade the ML team other than sign amateur talent and wait for it to get to Pittsburgh.
Basically, what I think is worth worrying about is that a three-year extension is a sign that the Pirates' agree with the BD posters who say that NH couldn't possibly have done anything to avert 90 loss seasons in his first four years on the job and it is impossible to build a contender in Pittsburgh before 2014 and Cedeno for $3M is a good option for the 2012 starting SS gig. That's a very pessimistic attitude, and it seems like the Pirates themselves are actively endorsing it.
I don't really think this extension is an occasion for evaluating NH so much as it's an occasion for evaluating the attitude and expectations of the organization. And it seems like the organization doesn't think there's anything they can do to build a winner other than throw a lot of money at amateur players and wait for them to develop into the 2008 Rays. That might work eventually, but it's an incredibly passive and uncreative strategy. That's not how Friedman or Anthopolous or Epstein or Beane would approach things.
Maybe Huntington does have the creativity and talent-evaluation skills and intelligence to build a competitive team, but he hasn't shown any of those things so far, and a three-year extension is a complete endorsement of what Huntington has done so far. I think that is worth worrying about (assuming you're the kind of person who thinks anything about a ball game is worth worrying about in the first place).
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.
174 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"Just for example, there were a lot of SS available last offseason, and even though the best one, J.J. Hardy, was available for a very reasonable price, NH didn't upgrade there."
I’ve said this before, but I don’t think anybody knows whether NH did or didn’t make an offer for Hardy
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
Regardless
Baltimore’s offer wasn’t all that impressive. Given our pressing need at SS, Neal should have been able to top it. This isn’t just hindsight, I said the same thing at the time.
NOT regardless.
You don’t (nor does anyone else) know if NH made a “topping” offer, or was even allowed to make one.
But yes, it would have been nice to get Hardy. And I do remember you saying what you said.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 10, 2011 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions
theres no guarantee that Hardy puts up his O's numbers while with the Bucs either.
yes, hes better than Cedeno.
Regardless, Baltimore’s offer wasn’t all that impressive.
Wasn’t that impressive to us, sure, but who knows what the Twins thought of it? Not every team sees equivalent players as equivalent. As two scouts about a given player, and you’ll get three opinions…
I think this is a point that’s sometimes lost when talking about trades. Unless there’s a published report that includes an actual offer, any guess as to what a team was asking for in a deal is going to have a huge error bar on it, even if it’s derived from a proposal or actual deal involving a third team.
Hardy is clearly an upgrade. But NH, for whatever reason, didn’t think the Pirates should make the upgrade.
You should take that show on the road, the whole “I know what other people are thinking” thing. I bet you could get rich off of that.
what I think is worth worrying about is that a three-year extension is a sign that the Pirates’ agree with the BD posters who say…Cedeno for $3M is a good option for the 2012 starting SS gig.
Ronny Cedeno has been worth 2.0 WAR this season, and as 1 WAR is worth approximately $5MM on the open market, yes, getting 2 WAR for $3MM is a good option.
It's just my two cents. Could be worth more, could be worth nothing.
yeah
It doesn’t take a clairvoyant to understand that a guy who doesn’t make upgrades is either a) uninterested in making upgrades or b) incapable of making upgrades. Like I said, there may be a good reason for that in the Cedeno case (maybe the asking price for Hardy was too high), but as I also said, it’s only one part of a suspicious pattern.
Unfortunately, the Pirates 2012 option on Cedeno doesn’t guarantee a repeat of his 2011 performance, and his true talent is nowhere near 2 WAR. But I do think you’re right that one of Huntington’s failings is a strict insistence on value, such that he’ll field a worse player if it’s a better deal. That’s another one of those things that he might get better at if he were actually trying to field a good ML team, but it’s also one of the things that worries me about the Pirates’ endorsement of how he’s done things so far.
Hardy was the only available clear upgrade
You’re leaning pretty heavily on the case of Hardy. But of the available SS, Hardy was the only one who was clearly an upgrade over Cedeno (Ryan was appalling with the bat in 2010, and Bartlett was mediocre and has the reputation of a bad defensive SS), and he was only available for a trade. How do we know that the Twins GM would’ve done a reasonable deal with Huntington? Maybe he looked at Ronny and tried to hold NH up for Hardy, the way the Angels tried to pawn Jeff Mathis on us for Garrett Jones when all our catchers went down.
I also thought we should’ve been able to top Baltimore’s offer. But I’m not going to say I have any insights into NH’s thinking based on it, when we basically have no idea why that didn’t happen. (It’s also possible that the Twins overrated the relievers they got; they’ve coughMattCapps been known to overrate relievers before.)
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Sep 10, 2011 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions
god
I’m absolutely not leaning heavily on the case of Hardy. I’m making one example to illustrate what I’m talking about, but I’m also acknowledging that we can’t fault Huntington for one example and pointing out that my example is just one of many instances in which Huntington has failed to upgrade the ML team. All of this is stuff I say very clearly in the original post.
It’s 100% possible that there’s a reasonable explanation for why Huntington didn’t get Hardy, but it’s much less possible that there are reasonable explanations for all of the ways in which NH has failed to field a team capable of winning more than 75 games in four years at the helm.
it's the only example you give
If you had a better example in mind, maybe you should’ve used that one instead.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Sep 10, 2011 6:55 PM EDT up reply actions
sorry to be so hostile
I apologize for that.
I think Cedeno/Hardy is the best example, which is why I used it. But there are tons of other examples: going into 2010 with Jeff Clement (not a 1B) as our starting 1B; going into 2010 without a platoon partner for Garrett Jones; thinking Lastings Milledge could handle PNC’s LF defensively; signing Correia to address the hideousness of the 2010 rotation; signing Overbay to address the hideousness of the 2010 infield defense; etc. etc. The point I’m making here is similar to points that both WTM and I have raised in the past: Huntington’s done a lot of things that, taken individually, are understandable and defensible, but when you look at the whole picture he’s done precious little that’s really improved the team in a significant way. I don’t know that W-L record is the ultimate standard for that judgment, but I think it’s a warning sign that after four years we’re still an 85-90 loss team and the outlook for 2012 doesn’t look any sunnier.
You may disagree with that, but defending the specific decision about whether or not to upgrade over Cedeno last offseason is largely beside the point.
I think finding a good long-term option at SS or 1B is easier said than done. Hardy was the 1 option, that’s not a very good sample size. Pedro might fill 1B anyways. And if you don’t like his FA approach, who are some guys from last or this you want them to/would have signed to make us an 80+ win team?
who are some guys from last or this you want them to/would have signed to make us an 80+ win team?
I reject the premise. It’s not that NH should have signed better FA last year or this upcoming year. It’s that in four years he should have been able to do some combination of things that result in a team that can win more than 75 games. Maybe it’s getting a couple of above average players in his fire-sale trades combined with a few diamond-in-the-rough FA signings combined with his high-end draft picks from his first couple drafts working out.
Other than his top picks working out
I reject that he didn’t find any above average players or diamonds in the rough. The goal wasn’t to win at all costs, it was to acquire cheap but flawed talent and see who comes out the other side while building through the draft. Only recently have we had enough talent in the majors to bother looking for legit, proven patches to our top level’s holes.
I also think it’s silly to think NH passed on some top talent with years of control, or that a player like that would have been made available to him if he had been the one pressing the issue. You said above Hardy was just 1 example, but as far as I can tell he’s pretty much the only example of a pretty good player we could have likely gotten and didn’t.
also
The argument about top picks is basically about Pedro, and that’s it. Look at the second round of 2008. How many of those guys have had any impact in the majors? Any impact beyond adding a win-and-a-half this year?
And if you’re making the argument that NH isn’t trying, the draft picks don’t support that at all. No one can argue that he isn’t trying in the draft.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Sep 10, 2011 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions
above average players
Which above average MLB players has Huntington acquired? Tabata, Jones, Morton, Karstens, Snyder, McDonald are all fine pickups, but none of them are solidly above-average. You can’t build a team with guys like that, and we’re seeing the 90-loss fruits of those acquisitions.
And again, the point isn’t that his individual moves have been bad; it’s that he just hasn’t done enough, and this extension seems to me like an endorsement of “not enough.”
And again, the point isn’t that his individual moves have been bad; it’s that he just hasn’t done enough, and this extension seems to me like an endorsement of "not enough."
Well, he doesn’t have the talent on hand to acquire guys acknowledged as impact talents through trades, and none are going to be willing to sign here as free agents until the team starts winning. Other than drafting and player development, what does that leave? Press-ganging?
I’d like better players as much as the next guy, but I’m not sure how you think we could’ve realistically gotten them here during the last couple of years.
okay
Well, look, I doubt Huntington would throw up his hands and say, “Short of press-ganging, Overbay is really the best any of us can hope for.” If he is, he’s worse than I think (though, strangely, only exactly as bad as the people who favor this extension think).
But for the sake of argument, let’s say that’s the way it is. That’s why comparing NH to guys like Friedman and Anthopolous is instructive. Vernon Wells’s “untradeable” contract didn’t stop AA from trading him, getting money back, and getting a valuable asset in return. An inability to attract impact players through FA didn’t stop Friedman from getting Pena and Iwamura on the open market. Really good GMs make things happen even when normal folks like you and I don’t think those things are possible. NH hasn’t demonstrated that ability; rather the opposite, in fact, as a lot of the talent he’s acquired hasn’t worked out as well as he hoped.
As with my responses to Mr. E below, I have no idea (specifically) how NH could have gotten better players. And even when I have specific ideas (*cough*Hardy*cough*) everyone rushes to say “wait wait wait I know we asked for specific ideas but really who are you to pretend you know the specifics of how things could have gone what are you some kind of asshole?!!?!?!?!” No one but AA knew specifically how they could acquire Colby Rasmus or Yunel Escobar. No one but Friedman knew how to turn a gifted but flawed young Delmon Young into a #2/3 starter and one of the best defenses in baseball. Knowing that stuff is what makes a GM really good. NH has had four years to show us something like that, and four years later all we can seem to say in his favor is “It was all always impossible anyway.”
by epoc on Sep 12, 2011 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
+infinity
Yep,yes and more excuses for NH.
If NH hadn’t talked Nutting into more spending on draft and international markets, he’d be as bad if not worse than Littlefield.
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
let's not go overboard
I’m not saying NH is terrible. I just don’t see much in his track record to be confident about. Unlike DL, he at least has a long-term plan and doesn’t do anything laughably stupid.
If not for his talking Nutting into spending more on draft/ international
his track record would be a disaster.
Sanchez type of draft picks plus absolutely nothing good from MLB pick ups.
All that’s here is hope that these high draft picks pan out, that’s about it right now. There’s nothing close that will turn this club into a winner, the Cutch, Marte, Walker were from prev regime.
If not for the increased spending (HOPE for future) he’s be widely recognized as the worst GM of all time IMO
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
The only
Sanchez type of draft pickthat NH selected was . . . Sanchez.
Which, may I remind you, was in a year where there were 2 clear-cut impact first-rounders, and then a bunch of uncertainties.
Also, he’s still in AA. Plenty of time for Tony to figure it out.
I agree there's time for him
but the luster/ projections not there in reality, top end a half decent fielder though +CS% and 18 errors is eye popping along with no real hitting.
The hype/ hope or praise on NH and this team are the Tallion/ Cole, Allie, Heredia’s, Bell where he spent alot of Nutting’s money to sign obvious high end draft picks. If not for his talking Nutting into doing so, his grading overall would be embarrassing.
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
scott rolen once had 38 errors in a minor league season, yet is considered to be a stellar 3Bman defensively over his career
you singling out errors for minor league players yet not mentioning anything about their actualy defense is…
wait for it…
horse patootie.
BIG BIG difference between 3B and C
minor league fields might be rough but a catcher?
Nice try there cartoon buff
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions
defense is defense
38 errors is a shatload of errors for any position.
as for sanchez’ defense: ive seen him in person many times now, and have seen 3 of his errors. his footwork is very impressive, his arm more than acceptable, and he blocks the plate like a goalie.
since you didnt like the Rolen number, how about this:
ivan rodriguez. 15 errors in his 2nd big league season.
yadier molina: 14 errors in his 2nd MILB season
that's hyperbolic
We don’t know one way or another about Sanchez (though of course if you held a redraft at this point Sanchez would go 15 or so rather than #4, and some of the guys you’d prefer to Sanchez would not have been appreciably more expensive).
I kind of agree that it seems like the hope is that the draft picks will pan out, and I don’t think that’s a good strategy (although drafting and development is and has to be the foundation of a good strategy).
But NH is nowhere near the worst GM of all time. He’s not even one of the five or so worst GMs right now. There are plenty of things he seems pretty competent at, even if the book’s not closed on any of them. The problem (or, my problem, more accurately) is not that he’s obviously terrible but that he’s not obviously any better than okay and that the specific area in which he’s demonstrated the least competence (building a decent major league roster) is one that is going to become extremely important in the next couple years.
All that’s here is hope that these high draft picks pan out, that’s about it right now.
Pretty much, yeah. That’s been the plan from the beginning – why are you acting like it’s some big surprise?
Has NH purposely tried picking up the worst FA's in MLB?
He pay’s good money too.
BTW, that is a VERY MEANINGFUL part of his job, to maximize wins for this club, to fill holes and to obtain key parts that fill holes and add wins.
Anyone can go spend 17 mill if the boss lets you, giving him credit that he’s outsmarted the rest of baseball with his draft moves is a farfetched kissbutt Vladdy theory. He was given huge resources and he spent it on guys who were expensive to sign. I surely dont see any signs of his other signings, esp soft tossing tall righties out producing any other teams draft picks. Take away the gimmee’s and he’s done squat.
So Vladdy, call Neil, tell him you love him and that big bad Jackie says he’s a hack as far as putting/acquiring MLB talent for this team. AKI, Overbay, Diaz, Correia, only a blind homer or star struck wanna be writer/editor would defend such signings.
You’ll get brownie points when you whisper to him that you put me in my place.
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Anyone can go spend 17 mill if the boss lets you…
And who, exactly, convinced “the boss” that spending twice as much on the draft as most other teams (and almost four times as much as some) was a worthwhile expenditure?
I've given NH credit for that thru out
That is all he has done , it gives hope to the future in 3-5 years but he’s done nothing to show he can put a MLB team on the field.
The oldest trick in the boat is to offer substandard contract offers to players and claim we tried to sign them.
Bottom line, you cant offer slightly less than other teams to get guys here.
COP OUT is believing nobody wants to come here, NH/JR comedy show along with vet’s voicing the “dont care if we win” attitude mgmt has pushed here hasn’t helped I’m sure. Many vets leave here badmouthing how winning isn’t the top goal here, already an excuse by mgmt for losing.
Baseball players are competitors, watching NH and Russell’s shifts, playing guys out of positions, having zero position battles in spring training, VLADDY may be right, NH has caused MUCH of this on his own.
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions
The oldest trick in the boat is to offer substandard contract offers to players and claim we tried to sign them.
ridiculous and no validity at all.
Hinske badmouthed the pirates because he didnt get the playing time he thought he deserved
Burnett bad mouthed the team because he didnt get the chance he thought he deserved.
Duffy badmouthed the team because he didnt get the chance he thought he deserved.
now Gorzo is the only one whom i would agree with, but we still dont know the true details on that one, so we’ll call that a push.
the real reason why vets dont sign in PITT: the team has stunk. and veterans would get dealt at the trade deadline when the team is in last place. and players dont want to sign on with a team for 4 months that is destined to stink.
period.
boom.
There;s a difference of stinking and not caring if you win
Playing Moss everyday despite hitting 180 when Hinske was crushing the ball in batting practice and having multi hit games in a row when given the chance and then benched for another week.
Mgr says he cant play you because he has to get a 180 Moss at bats?
Big difference
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Playing Moss everyday despite hitting 180 when Hinske was crushing the ball in batting practice and having multi hit games in a row when given the chance and then benched for another week.
Hinske was traded on June 30th, 2009.
In 2009, as of June 30th, Moss was hitting .268/.316/.379. Not a great batting line, but not a .180 BA, either, and it’s not like Hinske’s .741 OPS in a platoon role up through that date was setting the world on fire.
The oldest trick in the boat is to offer substandard contract offers to players and claim we tried to sign them.
And the second-oldest, I guess, is to offer more money than the other teams (as we did with Cabrera and Bako and Luis Vizcaino), or more money AND more years (as we did with Bill Mueller), or more money AND a starting job rather than a bench role (as we did with Rocco Baldelli), or a major league deal rather than a minor league one (as we did with Will Ohman), only to have the players sign an inferior offer somewhere else.
Pretty good trick.
Baseball players are competitors, watching NH and Russell’s shifts, playing guys out of positions, having zero position battles in spring training, VLADDY may be right, NH has caused MUCH of this on his own.
These are apparently such significant problems that they caused free agents to spurn our team up to five years before NH was even hired. The horror!
PROVE IT
THEY OFFERED MORE MONEY? BS
NH can try and claim anything, I dont see the numbers, YOU ARE BS"N
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions
PROVE IT
If you insist. I’m not going to bother running down links for all of these, but here are a couple, per your request.
The Pirates offered a slightly higher salary than what free-agent starter Daniel Cabrera accepted from the Washington Nationals in signing his one-year, $2.6 million contract over the weekend. Cabrera, formerly of the Baltimore Orioles, chose Washington because he wanted to remain in the Beltway area. -Dejan, P-G, 12/23/08
The Pirates pushed hard to land Mueller, 34, before he signed a two-year, $9.5 million deal with Los Angeles on Dec. 14, 2005.
Mueller said the Pirates made him a three-year offer… -Rossi, Trib, 4/12/06
(On December 13th, the BCT reported our three-year offer as being for $13.5M. Their archives aren’t online, but you should be able to look it up in the microfiche at the library, if you’re interested. I guess you could try to argue that Mueller’s age-37 season should’ve been worth more than $4M… though given that he retired at 35, that might be tricky.)
The field of suitors for Baldelli had been reduced to four by yesterday, and the Pirates were in the mix to the point that one source directly involved in negotiations described them as one of the two most aggressive teams. Pirates president Frank Coonelly yesterday acknowledged continuing interest, expressing hope that Baldelli would choose the Pirates because he felt they offered the best opportunity for regular playing time.
[…]
Because of Baldelli’s health, the contracts being discussed between his agent, Casey Close, and all interested teams were of the short-term, heavy-on-bonuses variety. That includes the talks with the Pirates, who, after extensive examination of Baldelli??s medical records, decided that some guaranteed money was in order but that a large financial commitment would be too risky.
Part of Baldelli’s motivation for wanting to stay in the American League, according to one source, was that, if his health dictated, he could be a designated hitter and maintain his strength better. One reason he liked Boston was that he is a native of nearby Cumberland, R.I. -Dejan, P-G, 1/8/09
These examples don't support your argument
None of the three are identified as having wanted to play for a winner, or as having wanted to avoid playing for a loser.
Two of the three clearly were motivated by their preference to stay close to home (one also preferred to stay in the AL to keep the option of being a DH open).
The other (Mueller, who picked the Dodgers) had played a long stretch in California and immediately went into coaching and the front office with the Dodgers when he was injured shortly after signing, so he obviously had some connections there.
Your contention is that winning has some strong correlation to organizational attractiveness. That’s just not true and it certainly isn’t proven by examples of guys who would rather play on a coast, with coaches and GMs they know, or near their home town.
There is no doubt that some players will prefer to play in places other than Pittsburgh. Many Latin Americans will prefer the coasts or Chicago, places with larger Latino populations. Other players may want to play near home. Winning is very low in the order, and, in fact, if being part of a contender were the sole motivation in a signing, then any free agent fielding one to three year offers would be wise to sign with the Pirates, who offer the best chance for veteran players to end up on contenders via midseason trade.
If you follow football, you know Larry Foote whined and cried in 2009 to get released by the defending Super Bowl Champ Steelers and then signed with the 0-16 Detroit Lions — because he was from Detroit. This is how things go.
Money is first. Chance to play near home (is second (for some, chance to play in a coastal area will be high). Opportunity for playing time is third. Winning is way down the list. Would you want to freeze and sting your hands throughout October when you could be soaking in the sun on some beach somewhere? Who would?
This is just more excuse making.
by RafaelBelliup on Sep 13, 2011 9:12 AM EDT up reply actions
These examples don’t support your argument
My argument was that free agents often aren’t willing to sign with us even when we’re the highest offer on the board.
Generally, providing examples of free agents who were unwilling to sign with us even though we were the highest offer on the board would be seen as supporting that position.
Your contention is that winning has some strong correlation to organizational attractiveness. That’s just not true…
LOL.
(Just wanted to spotlight that to share the hilarity.)
Money is first.
Then why didn’t any of those three players sign with us? We offered the most money!
Classic Vlad
Your point all along has been that the Pirates can’t attract free agents until they start winning. Several posts above in this thread, you wrote:
Well, he doesn’t have the talent on hand to acquire guys acknowledged as impact talents through trades, and none are going to be willing to sign here as free agents until the team starts winning.
Then you try to support that point by finding a handful og guys who chose to play somewhere else. However, none of them apparently (per the info you provided) chose to play somewhere else because of a desire to win; all of them appeared to want to play close to home or to play for an organization (in one case) that was courting the player to be a coach after his career.
So you switch and claim that your argument has always just been that some players don’t want to play in Pittsburgh, even if the Pirates offer the most money.
Well, yeah, but duh. This is true of every single organization. Some players don’t want to be Yankees because of the media spotlight. Many players would prefer to play in certain geographical locations.
by RafaelBelliup on Sep 13, 2011 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions
The Pirates can’t control where a player was born or what the state’s tax rate is or what the climate here is like. Out of your list of external factors, the only ones that the team can control are how much money we offer and whether or not the team is winning. Since offering more money than other teams has never been effective by itself for us in the past (as the above examples demonstrate), the logical conclusion would be that we can’t attract quality players who have any other alternatives without also playing the “chance to play for a winner” card.
Players express a lack of interest in us as a result of the culture of losing all the time. Look at Beltran’s refusal to waive his no-trade clause for us for just one recent example. And yet you continue to deny the fairly obvious fact that our losing is a huge handicap in free agency, for no reason that I’ve ever been able to determine…
I don’t think the above examples illustrate that at all. The Pirates have not pursued many free agents. Of those they have pursued, some have come here; others haven’t. Money was usually the determining factor. A handful of times it wasn’t. (Beltran wouldn’t count as an example of other things prevailing over money, would he, as his pay was predetermined, so it was only other things.)
The kinds of free agents that they should pursue — the marquee free agents, who are the only ones worth pursuing, as the others reach free agency at a more advanced age and will decline more rapidly — are under extreme pressure from the union and their agents to take the best offer anyway. So it all comes down to money. There is no reason the Pirates can’t push for Prince Fielder, for example, offer him the most money, and earn his services. They just won’t.
by RafaelBelliup on Sep 13, 2011 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Money was usually the determining factor. A handful of times it wasn’t.
In every single case where money was not the determining factor, we were unable to sign the player. You don’t find that significant?
There is no reason the Pirates can’t push for Prince Fielder, for example, offer him the most money, and earn his services.
There’s no reason they can’t push for him, and there’s no reason they can’t offer him the most money – but even if they do, he won’t want to come here if he has other options. Which he will, because he’s a talented player.
For a recent example of how this plays out in practice, look at Mark Teixeira’s deal with the Yankees. The Nats actually had the highest offer on the board, but it was worth a couple million bucks to Tex to be able to sign with a winner rather than a team in the cellar. And the Nats were unsuccessful even though they were able to play the “local boy” card, which we wouldn’t be for a guy like fielder.
I will be impressed if they offer Prince the most money
Even if he chooses to play somewhere else.
by RafaelBelliup on Sep 13, 2011 8:07 PM EDT up reply actions
As with my responses to Mr. E below, I have no idea (specifically) how NH could have gotten better players. And even when I have specific ideas (*cough*Hardy*cough*) everyone rushes to say "wait wait wait I know we asked for specific ideas but really who are you to pretend you know the specifics of how things could have gone what are you some kind of asshole?!!?!?!?!"
Funny and insightful.
by RafaelBelliup on Sep 12, 2011 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
An inability to attract impact players through FA didn’t stop Friedman from getting Pena and Iwamura on the open market.
Not comparable. Tampa has always been able to attract free agent talent, even when they were terrible and being run by Chuck LaMar. The climate and the lack of state income tax are big incentives for players.
I have no idea (specifically) how NH could have gotten better players. … No one but AA knew specifically how they could acquire Colby Rasmus or Yunel Escobar. No one but Friedman knew how to turn a gifted but flawed young Delmon Young into a #2/3 starter and one of the best defenses in baseball. Knowing that stuff is what makes a GM really good.
This is, IMO, a huge cop-out.
by Vlad on Sep 12, 2011 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Not comparable. Tampa has always been able to attract free agent talent, even when they were terrible and being run by Chuck LaMar. The climate and the lack of state income tax are big incentives for players.
That may be the case, but it’s also beside the point. Friedman signed Pena in minor league free agency and Iwamura through the posting system. He found quality, undervalued pieces through creative means when the more straightforward means of paying the going rate for more in-demand talent wasn’t feasible. NH has done some of that (e.g. Garrett Jones), but not on the level of a Pena or Iwamura or anyone that makes you think he really has the creativity or foresight to do that type of thing on a regular basis.
This is, IMO, a huge cop-out.
Really? Admitting that I’m not myself smart or creative enough to be an above-average GM is a cop-out? Or are you just trying to goad me into saying that we should have traded for Hardy or signed Orlando Hudson and shifted the defense around or signed Bartolo Colon or gotten Freddie Freeman included in the McLouth deal so that you can berate me for having the presumption to assume I know that those were possibilities?
Either way, saying that I’m not sure what could have been done is no more or less of a cop-out than implying that impressment is the only ML-talent-acquisition means available to the PIrates. Which is maybe to say that really neither of us knows whether or not NH is a good or bad GM. I’d agree with that. I do, however, think that his ability to identify ML talent and build a decent ML roster should very much be in question.
pena only got the job when Greg Norton went down with an injury. Pena had already been sent to Durham then recalled for the season opener.
if anything, the Rays got super lucky with Pena. remember, Pena had been traded and/or released on numerous occasions, and he didnt even beat out Greg fricken Norton!!!
That may be the case, but it’s also beside the point.
No, it isn’t. If free agents aren’t willing to sign here, they aren’t willing to sign here.
Admitting that I’m not myself smart or creative enough to be an above-average GM is a cop-out?
You’re positing the existence of a thing (the opportunity to fleece another GM) without providing any evidence that it actually exists. It’s the equivalent of saying “Unicorns exist, but I can’t tell you where, because I’m not a cryptozoologist. But look, that other guy found a coelacanth, so it must be true!”
Or are you just trying to goad me into saying that we should have traded for Hardy or signed Orlando Hudson and shifted the defense around or signed Bartolo Colon or gotten Freddie Freeman included in the McLouth deal so that you can berate me for having the presumption to assume I know that those were possibilities?
I want you to provide examples of advantageous deals that NH could have made, but didn’t, since you baldly stated that these things exist. If you don’t have evidence of such, you should couch such a statement as an opinion or a conjecture, rather than a fact.
Either way, saying that I’m not sure what could have been done is no more or less of a cop-out than implying that impressment is the only ML-talent-acquisition means available to the PIrates
There’s a fairly important distinction between asking someone to prove an affirmative (as I’m doing for you) and asking someone to prove a negative (as you’re doing for me).
Fleece anoher GM?
Can NH trade with himself?
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions
No, but he sure did a job
on Ned Colletti…
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Doubtful.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Now that was a steal
Dotel for a flunked out OF’er and a 4 or 5 SP is good but trading your star for nothing via Boston and LA.
That’s priceless.
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions
That they are almost insolvent, maybe
on a pure talent/ wins, they will win more this year, next year and probably a few more before the buc’s finally break maybe .500.
The Met’s aren’t good but they will outplay the bucs.
Last years thoughts were how the bucs were in better shape than Ariz, LOL. You thought NH was better than Ariz’s mgmt, OPEN YOUR EYES!
If your prospects cant dominate in the minors (cant even get a winning record), not a great sign for the future esp near term.
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
what did Bauer do in his last minor league start???
just sayin
by white angus on Sep 12, 2011 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
a heck of alot more overall
than Cole has.
His pro starts avg almost 18K per 9 and sure he was killed last time out, out of gas maybe?
Alot closer to the bigs than Cole, I expect a 4 plus ERA and maybe a K per for Cole in A ball.
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions
maybe
but i doubt cole will ever give up 10 runs in one inning of work in the MINORS like mr bauer did.
>:-D
I've asked you this question before
since you’ve seen a lot of both pitchers. Cole seemed to be having a very good season up until mid-April when he faltered for the last 6 weeks. The reports I’ve read said there was nothing wrong with his stuff (i.e. velocity wasn’t down). Did you see anything in particular that you noticed?
ERA
is about as irrelevant as you can get for predicting major league success from minor league stat lines as a pitcher. It’s better than W-L, but that’s about it.
K per (K/9), on the other hand, is a good stat. One strikeout per inning is a very solid number. If Cole had put up that number this year in the FSL (Bradenton) he’d have finished 4th among qualified pitchers, and if he was at 9.10 he’d be 3rd. Bauer won’t keep up the 18.0 K/9 for long.
Yes, Bauer is alot closer to the big leagues than Cole. I’m also willing to bet someone like Bryan Morris will pitch in the big leagues before Cole and thus is “closer” than Cole. That doesn’t tell nearly the whole story when it comes to evaluating prospects properly.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Sep 14, 2011 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Just to be clear on this
Cole’s K/9 and K/BB at UCLA was much worse than Bauer’s. His K/9 and K/BB was only a tad better than Adam Plutko’s. Plutko had a much lower ERA, WHIP, and opponents batting average.
Among UCLA starters with 60+ innings, Cole was last in ERA, WHIP (Cole was the only pitcher with a WHIP > 1), and opponents’ batting average — Cole’s was .242, the other three were under .200.
Cole’s K/9 (9.4) was way worse than Bauer’s (13.4) and not much better than the other two (7.7 and 7.2).
http://www.uclabruins.com/sports/m-basebl/stats/2010-2011/teamcume.html
By every conceivable measure, Cole’s 2011 performance was mediocre.
by RafaelBelliup on Sep 15, 2011 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions
"Dotel for a flunked out OF’er and a 4 or 5 SP is good but trading your star for nothing via Boston and LA."
What does that even mean?
Your incoherence grows by the post.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions
You are a master of strategically missing the point, dude. What more can I say? I bow in the presence of your skill with strawmen, condescending analogies, and feigned ignorance.
The frustrating thing is that I know you’re smart enough to see how shitty your analogy is and how far beside the point your trivial objections are and how flawed your logic is, but whatever. It’s your style. Plus it’s the internet. I get it. Till next time.
Yeah, everyone wants to play in that hell hole of a stadium in TB
More and more excuses from NH’s new K.Butt yes man.
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions
below is a list of players that the Rays have signed as free agents to play in that hellhole...
Manny Ramirez
Johnny Damon
Pat Burrell
Fred McGriff
Wade Boggs
Greg Vaughn
Jose Canseco
Vinny Castilla
Gerald Williams
travis lee
victor zambrano
tino martinez
jose cruz jr
alex gonzalez
ty wigginton
cliff floyd
troy percival
dan wheeler
yeahhhhhhhhhhhh, no one wants to play in that piece o’ shit stadium.
A hellhole with no state income tax, don’t forget.
Not exactly a trivial consideration when you’re making several million dollars a year.
Flagged
for inappropriate language – unneeded name-calling.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions
a few quibbles . . .
Firstly, although I don’t really agree with your overall point, Epoc, good job anyway: very nicely written and laid-out.
Here’s a couple nits I think are worth picking:
three years [. . .] would be an indication that ownership is completely satisfied with the job NH has done and completely convinced that he can build a winner going forward.
Not necessarily. It just means ownership thinks he’s the best option right now and the best chance to build a winner going forward. Usually hirings and promotions don’t necessarily mean the boss is 100% satisfied, just that you outclassed the other options.
It essentially means that NH is under no pressure in the next couple of years to actually build a contender.
Do you really think this? I’m not trying to be snarky, but this seems intellectually dishonest. You really don’t think Huntingdon feels pressure to end the streak and bring winning baseball to Pittsburgh? I’m willing to bet he worries about it more than any of us.
1. I think you’re right that an extension doesn’t necessarily indicate 100% satisfaction, but I think a three-year extension does. Two years is a far more logical choice, and I’m not sure what reason ownership could have for a three-year term other than that they don’t doubt that NH can build a winner.
2. I’m sure NH is trying to end the streak etc., but it seems to me that he (and Nutting and Coonelly) will be content if it takes 7-8 years to do so. I don’t think he feels pressure to end the streak in 2012 or 2013, for instance, and that’s what I’m talking about. I think Friedman or Anthopolous or Epstein would look at this organization and come up with a plan for 81 wins in 2012 and playoff contention in 2013. I don’t think NH is too concerned with that level of achievement in that sort of timeframe. Which is fine if that’s all that’s possible, but I’m also not sure that it should have taken 6-7 years for a GM to build a winning roster from where we were in 2007.
I’m sure NH is trying to end the streak etc., but it seems to me that he (and Nutting and Coonelly) will be content if it takes 7-8 years to do so. I don’t think he feels pressure to end the streak in 2012 or 2013, for instance, and that’s what I’m talking about.
I think that the FO has as much as come out and said this – with the further clarification that they will be happier to take 7-8 years (measured from 2008) to end the streak and end up with a team that is consistently in contention going forward, than they would be to end the streak in 2012 or 2013 and then go back to consistently winning 65-70 games a season for the next five years.
And, frankly, I agree with that.
yeah
Obviously, no one really agrees with me here, but I think the notion that it needs to take 7-8 years to build a consistent winner and that you couldn’t do it in a shorter timeframe without sacrificing something in the long run is incredibly pessimistic. And whether or not NH can build a winner, which I agree is an open question, is far less important than the general philosophy of he and the organization. There is no way that the Rays under Friedman or the Sox under Epstein or the As under Beane or the Jays under AA would accept that kind of pessimism, and I don’t think it’s a good sign that the Bucs under NH have. It suggests that NH just doesn’t have the creativity necessary to be really successful in a small market.
You make some good points...
In regards to those other GM’s you mentioned, how bare was the cupboard for Friedman when he took over at the start of 2006? I know LaMar was supposedly dreadful, but it appears he drafted decently during the time he was there.
I’m an NH defender, but people who say the cupboard was completely bare when he took over is a little excessive…Cutch, Walker, and Marte were all brought in by DL. The thing that fascinates me in regards to TB is the seemingly out of nowhere divisioin title they won in 08. Everyone kept saying they had talent, but they would just routinely get the tar beat out of them in that division. They’ve also proven that wasn’t an anomaly and are gaining quickly on the Red Sox for the WC (I think they’re 4.5 back now).
I guess I look at TB and hope to see the Buccos as that model, as potential all-of-a-sudden turnaround that makes them contenders for 5-10 years. Maybe NH is the Buccos Chuck LaMar: drafted OK, made a couple of good trades, but couldn’t get beyond that.
by NastyNate82 on Sep 11, 2011 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Friedman and the Rays
Well, Friedman worked as director of development for the Rays for two years before he took over as GM, so talking about the minor league system he inherited when he took over as GM is tricky, since he’d already had a large hand in building it.
That said, when he became GM the Rays had a very good farm system as well as Crawford and Kazmir already in the majors. I don’t think it’s really fair to compare the ’08 turnaround of the Rays to what Huntington has done with the Pirates, because the starting positions were drastically different.
But I also think it was obvious, even before 2008, that Friedman could build a ML roster, with shrewd FA signings like Iwamura and Pena and visionary trades like Young for Garza/Bartlett. Whether or not the Rays had had so much success in 2008, I think it was clear that they had a creative, intelligent GM.
Now, maybe after 2013 or so we’ll think the same thing about Huntington. I don’t think he’s a bad GM by any means, and there’s a chance he can be a very good one. I just don’t think a three-year extension is the right move for a guy who hasn’t proven anything and about whom there should be legitimate concerns about his ability to judge talent and build a competitive ML roster.
That's another thing
Walker was talented but struggling, Cutch had his worst year ever in 2007, was Marte even in the US by then? If NH’s development people are so bad then how did he turn around so many DL guys? Presley, Mcpherson are two more examples of guys who did little under littleman but broke out under the new development team. Should NH get full credit? No, but some is deserved here.
Because you haven't really said what they could have done
you pishaw waiting for draft picks but what else can we really do? We COULD have done it quicker than 7-8 years but it would have required getting lucky on Pedro, Sanchez, Scheppers, Laroche, etc. So far that hasn’t happened but a 1st rounder not being a stud in 3 years isn’t really some huge failure.
We aren’t that rosy about 2012 but if Pedro turns into what we know he can be and you get maybe 2 other guys (say Lee and a mid-rotation SP) then all of a sudden we’re a legit contender for the division.
I’ve already said what they could have done. Gotten more in the 08-09 trades; signed better free agents; drafted some guys who’d made it to the major leagues and performed reasonably well, etc. If I knew specifically what they could have done or what they could do now I would be working for a major league front office. I don’t see why I need to have a specific plan for avoiding 90-loss seasons to point out that Huntington hasn’t been able to avoid 90-loss seasons.
And again, I’m not even saying the 08-09 trades were bad, necessarily. Some were worse than others, but on the whole I don’t have a problem with them. I’m not saying that drafting Alvarez or Sanchez were bad decisions. I’m just saying that nothing’s really working out the way Huntington hoped. He hasn’t been able to produce good major league teams or a core that looks like it could be good before 2013 or so. I don’t like that the Pirates are seemingly so satisfied with that performance.
I think the notion that it needs to take 7-8 years to build a consistent winner and that you couldn’t do it in a shorter timeframe without sacrificing something in the long run is incredibly pessimistic.
I agree that it’s pessimistic. I don’t think, however, that its pessimism necessarily means that it’s wrong.
There is no way that the Rays under Friedman or the Sox under Epstein or the As under Beane or the Jays under AA would accept that kind of pessimism…
All three of those guys inherited a much better situation than NH did when he took over. Let’s look at Friedman, for example. He was hired before the 2006 offseason, and at that time, Tampa’s ML club had the following: Carl Crawford, Scott Kazmir, James Shields, BJ Upton, Delmon Young, Edwin Jackson, Jason Hammel, and a Bay-comparable trade asset in Aubrey Huff. Not to mention the minor league system: Wade Davis, Jake McGee, Josh Hamilton, Jeremy Hellickson, Jeff Niemann, John Jaso, Andy Sonnanstine, and Evan Meek. Oh, and the #3 pick in the 2006 draft, which turned into Evan Longoria. That’s quite a mass of talent, and it dwarfs what we had here when NH took over. And even with all that talent on hand, Tampa still lost 90+ games in Friedman’s first two years on the job.
No, it's not.
Let me re-quote your words:
I think the notion that it needs to take 7-8 years to build a consistent winner and that you couldn’t do it in a shorter timeframe without sacrificing something in the long run is incredibly pessimistic. … There is no way that the Rays under Friedman or the Sox under Epstein or the As under Beane or the Jays under AA would accept that kind of pessimism
You are claiming that the length of our rebuilding cycle is a function of attitude, and that those teams were able to rebuild quickly because they decided they made it a priority to do so. In so doing, you overlooked the hugely salient fact that all three began that rebuilding process with significantly more resources on hand than we did – more talent on hand, more financial resources to use in acquiring talent, and greater ability to deploy those financial resources in an effective fashion. If those three organizations were more “optimistic”, it is because their starting position afforded them the luxury of being so.
Brendan Harris
hi guys..first comment on BD. enjoy reading all the opinions and ideas here. One thing not pointed out so far is the fact that Baltimore had to take on Brendan Harris’s contract at about 1.2 mil and ended up eating that. Hardy at 5.85mil was an upgrade, but by looking at the previous 2 years numbers..not that much of one. not many could have predicted he would regain is big power back this year. I also believe that Chase d’Arnaud was firmly looked at as a big offensive upgrade and him being very close to the bigs , Ronny would be a sufficient gap-filler with enough upside still to keep it interesting.
I defended NH above, but I disagree here
Two points — Harris’s contract shouldn’t have been a problem. If you look at it as sending the Twins $1.2 million, it still wouldn’t have been a big deal. (Not disagreeing that Hardy’s 09-10 numbers were bad, but if that was the problem then Harris’s contract shouldn’t have been the big obstacle.)
Point two is that counting on d’Arnaud would’ve been a mistake; his numbers haven’t looked impressive above A-ball. I want him in Indy next year (and I’m hoping Jordy Mercer can show that he’s our next shortstop, though I’m probably irrationally attached to Mercer).
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Sep 11, 2011 8:09 AM EDT up reply actions
NH's biggest problem IMO
is the blatantly “NO REASON/PURPOSE” in the world trades and FA signings he makes.
AKI was a terrible move, he was getting waiver in a day and if he wanted the fatman bad enough, he could have signed him cheaper on open market.
Overbay signing? He literally makes moves that have add ZERO short term nor long term wins to this organization.
The overall plan of blowing the team up is a sound plan, the execution has been poor, the spending in draft and international markets is sound but IMO, the drafting of tall soft tossing so called projectable righties has been poor at best but i concede it’s still too early to give a fail grade yet…but my confidence on that reasoning has waned considerably.
Same goes with Stark n companies developmental approach, too early to tell but confidence has dropped.
It’s too early to tell for sure but next year should dictate some answers on this draft strategy and 2013 should truly shed light.
I think a 2 year deal would be better, I dont feel NH is capable of putting a plan together that would maximize wins for the big league team but surely hope I am wrong
If its too early...
Why has your confidence dropped so much? The prep righties they picked in 09 were mid-round picks. Its not like they passed over Jason Heyward to get them. I think you do have a point in asking the question about the “projectable” pitchers they seem to like a lot. I would like to see where this belief came from (big, skinny high school kid who throws in the high 80’s and adds 5-6 mph onto has fastball as he fills out). And also if other teams employ that approach as well.
As far as FA signings…well, Overbay was only a stopgap anyway. Pundits will say “sign a big FA 1B,” but who is going to sign with the Pirates, unless they drastically overpay? Yeah, the Aki trade was bad, the Bay trade didn’t net what we wanted, but he’s also traded for an All-Star closer, 2 starters who appear to have a decent future with the team, and their starting OF
by NastyNate82 on Sep 11, 2011 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions
“AKI was a terrible move, he was getting waiver in a day and if he wanted the fatman bad enough, he could have signed him cheaper on open market.”
No, he couldn’t. Please refer to every FA ever turning us down.
“Overbay signing? He literally makes moves that have add ZERO short term nor long term wins to this organization.”
Yeah, it didn’t work out, but to say this move had no purpose is insane.
Ok, so there goes that theory of yours, what else ya got?
"AKI was a terrible move, he was getting waiver in a day and if he wanted the fatman bad enough, he could have signed him cheaper on open market."
No, he couldn’t. Please refer to every FA ever turning us down.
Also, the fact that the entire AL had waiver dibs first.
You really should save your breath with this poster.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 11, 2011 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions
He would have been a free agent if the Rays had declined his option
Not that it matters anyway since all we gave up was Jesse Chavez.
and a locked up position we could have used on Kelly Johnson that year
We made an offer to Johnson that offseason, and like pretty much every quality free agent since the dawn of time, he decided to sign with somebody else.
AKI was a terrible move, he was getting waiver in a day
No, he wasn’t. He was having his option declined in a day – at which time, like all free agents of any pedigree whatsoever, he would’ve signed with someone else.
If we didn’t trade for him, we wouldn’t have gotten him.
I'm sure there was a huge market for fatman
We wouldn’t have gotten him, surely you jest???
Most if not all teams actually would interview him, give him a physical and realize he was so out of shape that the chance of him being productive was almost nil.
Overbay? He traded a quality lefty reliever for Bowker who’s full year numbers if he had played daily here had to be atleast even and probably much better that Overpay’s. What is the logic of signing an overaged heavily declining NO UPSIDE 1B when you just traded for a younger but unproven AAA star 1B who had DECENT UPSIDE potential?
What is it? He traded Lopez because he was bored? He wasted 5 mil on Overbay on a whim? His whole thought process on this was a joke, made ZERO common sense. If this was an isolated problem, maybe he had a bad day but the Aki deal, his complete lack of talent evaluation skills w/ regards to MLB players.
This team has all the signs pointing to another 65-75 win season in 2012 and most probably 2013.
You talk about Friedman inheriting all his talent, he had part in the draft system for a couple years prior plus his picks tended to produce very good numbers RIGHT away and improved progressively. Huntington’s picks aren’t producing “high end type” production numbers nor or they particularly improving. Sure there are a couple middling C types who had decent numbers but I’m talking about the dominant numbers that most teams top prospects produce, TB’s Hellickson, Moore ect, nobody close to those numbers and there’s not much reason for me to believe that Stark n co will all of a sudden strike lightning.
I hope I’m wrong but the numbers posted by these minor league affliliates were poor by ANY STANDARDS!
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions
We wouldn’t have gotten him, surely you jest???
Nope. Even crappy free agents don’t sign with us when they have any other options. Iwamura was at least as desirable as Paul Bako or Daniel Cabrera, for example, and they both snubbed us.
Most if not all teams actually would interview him, give him a physical and realize he was so out of shape that the chance of him being productive was almost nil.
So it’s your contention that he gained all the weight he was going to gain between the end of his season in late September and the trade in early December, and that none of it went on after he had a contract in hand? He just gorged himself for two months, and then went cold turkey for no reason? How does that make any sense?
What is it? He traded Lopez because he was bored? He wasted 5 mil on Overbay on a whim
Where did I say anything about either Overbay or Lopez? I was correcting you on Iwamura because you were spectacularly wrong on the circumstances of his acquisition in a way that totally invalidated your point, so I felt obligated to set things straight for anyone in the thread who didn’t know any better.
You talk about Friedman inheriting all his talent…
No, I talk about Friedman inheriting much more talent than Huntington did. Which he clearly did. It’s pretty much indisputable.
he had part in the draft system
Sure, and if Huntington had been making picks for us instead of Creech in the years before he took over, we would’ve done better in those drafts, too. What’s your point?
He'd had done better than Cutch?
Maybe, point is figuring 5 mil is a good deal for an outta shape 2B sorta tells me where your mind set is.
Claiming Friedman isn’t a better GM than NH tells me again where your mind set is.
Good thing you are an editor here, NH might not meet and greet you if he was judged fairly by a competitent staff, that he knows guys like you will bow down to him and praise his feats and miraculous works (you said he did great not to lose 120 games? right) kissing butt’s OK when you are star struck maybe?
Anyone who can condone that trade of fatman and call Friedman lucky (yeah, he and NH are the same, that’ll win you lots of interviews with your majesty)
Vlad, your pathetic
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions
He’d had done better than Cutch?
He’d have done better than the collective sum of Creech’s drafts, which were collectively awful even after you give him credit for Cutch.
Claiming Friedman isn’t a better GM than NH tells me again where your mind set is.
Please point to where I claimed this.
Anyone who can condone that trade of fatman and call Friedman lucky…
Please point to where I said this, too.
(If reading comprehension is a problem for you, there’s no reason to be ashamed. Help is available.)
Vlad, your pathetic…
My pathetic what? Don’t leave me in suspense, man!
by Vlad on Sep 12, 2011 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You may not have outright claimed that NH is better than Friedman or that the latter is lucky, but you clearly implied something like that when you responded to my claim/implication that Friedman would not be as pessimistic and un-creative as NH has been with the strawman about how Friedman inherited a better situation. We shouldn’t accuse jackie of a lack of reading comprehension for picking up on the subtleties of your implication.
You may not have outright claimed that NH is better than Friedman or that the latter is lucky, but you clearly implied something like that when you responded to my claim/implication that Friedman would not be as pessimistic and un-creative as NH has been with the strawman about how Friedman inherited a better situation.
This is not in any way an accurate characterization of my position.
In this post, you attributed the length of our process for building a winner to “pessimism”, and the comparative shortness of the Rays’ process to a lack of “pessimism”. I simply pointed out that a more logical explanation for the disparity was the Rays’ substantially superior talent base at the time Friedman took over. If he was “optimistic” about the Rays’ chances, then the Rays’ huge amount of young talent he inherited was doubtless the main reason for that “optimism”.
If Friedman had taken over a totally bombed-out team with a bare-ass-naked farm system, he would still have been able to construct it into a winner – but there’s basically no chance that he would’ve been able to do so in two years. He would’ve needed to spend several seasons rebuilding the talent within the system first, as we’ve done.
this!!!!!!!!!
is 100% correct!!!!
the DEVIL RAYS had a top farm system before Steinberg became “the man” in west florida. as a Devil Rays fan, i remember the team dismantling their MLB squad and having NO minor league talent back in the early 2000s.
the reason why the 2008 Rays hit it big was because their pitching matured and gelled, pitching that mostly came from the farm system that they had built with guys like Shields.
steinberg didnt even make the trade for Kazmir.
the Young for Garza trade is probably his biggest plus in his short time there. and his drafts have been very good, and has gotten some great talent on the way up, but almost no one from the 2008 team was aquired because of him… longoria is the exception, pena is the fluke.
the Young for Garza trade is probably his biggest plus in his short time there. and his drafts have been very good, and has gotten some great talent on the way up, but almost no one from the 2008 team was aquired because of him… longoria is the exception, pena is the fluke.
Ben Zobrist was also a very astute pickup. He was seen at the time of the deal as a decent prospect, but not a guy who’d end up as the kind of star that he’s become.
true, forgot he got him from the Stros
even though Mitch Talbot was the one the Rays thought highly of.
I don't think that it is quite true to say
that their pitching came mostly from the farm system.
Three of their 5 starters – Garza, Jackson and Kazmir – came via trade, as did most of their bullpen Howell, Balfour, Wheeler and they signed Percival as a FA.
by WestCoastBuc on Sep 12, 2011 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions
see Vlad's post above
Friedman has been a good GM, no one is disputing that. but to give him complete credit is just wrong, and not even close.
for example, if the Pirates won the division this year, do we give complete credit to NH? No. Theres still lots of pieces on the roster that were here when NH took over.
If the Pirates got a new GM today
and won the division in 2 years, is that a similar enough analogy to Friedman? In that scenario I think we would rightfully credit NH quite a bit.
I was only making a minor quibble
regarding your post above that I otherwise agree with. I didn’t mean to imply anything one way or the other regarding Friedman.
by WestCoastBuc on Sep 12, 2011 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions
If bucs win big in 2 years
and NH has been gone, he gets credit for talking Nutting into spending on top end draft picks and international guys but bottom line, he hasn’t shown any ability to actually put a roster together that makes any sense. He shows no ability to figure out what holes need filled to maximize wins.
He hasn’t been able to sign anyone worth a darn to a FA contract, I believe he made it tough on himself by the amateuristic approach he and this club took as far as the MLB club was concerned. Anyone seeing the idiot shift and knowing he was playing “Jerry Jones/ Al Davis type games as a GM” by managing the team via J Russell the puppet.
They will need someone who can do all these things if the bucs will ever seriously compete for a title
by jackiegleason on Sep 13, 2011 8:51 AM EDT up reply actions
knowing he was playing "Jerry Jones/ Al Davis type games as a GM" by managing the team via J Russell the puppet
Jerry Jones and Al Davis are owners, which is why it’s such a big deal that they interfere with management’s operations. A GM, in contrast, is supposed to dictate overall organizational strategy to the manager. It’s part of the job description.
by Vlad on Sep 13, 2011 8:54 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Really, they're owners?
A GM’s job isn’t to set shifts and dictate line ups and who to start on a nightly basis.
His approach with the handling of personale and line ups ect just screamed “Winning isn’t important, even though mis positioning guys and idiot shifting OF’ers are costing us games regularly, I think my hairbrained schemes are genius work.” I have a hard time believing he’s a baseball guy, sure he can sell the owner into spending for expensive picks but as far as pure baseball knowledge, how to win games, how to improve a MLB team, he’s incompetitent. It’s as though they hired a computer geek who’s never watched the game to build a MLB winning team.
NEVER HAPPEN ON HIS WATCH!!
by jackiegleason on Sep 13, 2011 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions
A GM’s job isn’t to set shifts and dictate line ups and who to start on a nightly basis.
And your evidence that Russell was receiving lineup cards directly from NH’s hands is…
If a GM wants to tell the manager that Player A should get most of the starts this year, rather than Player B, that’s absolutely a normal and standard part of the job. When they aren’t willing to do that, you get messes like Mike Scioscia’s misadventures with Jeff Mathis.
"Winning isn’t important, even though mis positioning guys and idiot shifting OF’ers are costing us games regularly, I think my hairbrained schemes are genius work."
There are times when maximizing short-term wins ISN’T the most important consideration for a team, and rebuilding from the ground up is the most obvious of those.
Littlefield tried to maximize short-term wins, at the expense of long-term development, and we all saw how that turned out. You get Joe Randa starting ahead of Freddy Sanchez and Derek Bell starting ahead of Craig Wilson and Leo Nunez traded to bring in a nine-hundred-year-old Benito Santiago.
TOO EVERYONE HERE
Huntington has done good and bad, he’s talked Nutting into splurging on draft and international markets, that is his GOOD.
The rest is sporadic trades where he gave away whatever value he inherited for liyyle besides Tabata (who still is unproven via injury issues)
His managing of the mlb roster has been poor at best, the team won more than last year because he kept his nose out of the dugout/ managing this year. No more idiot shift, miss positioned players ect, Hurdle has helped but bottom line is this team has quite a few holes and NH has done his best to waste all FA monies on guys who dont add a single win to the team.
I’ll give him his credit due but to this staff who blatantly kisses butt in regards to his job, and also degrades any poster who’s opinions (and usually correct) call a spade a spade, that he has not done such a good job, that he’s lucky to still have a job.
Kiss the butt, but you are the worst or the worst when it comes to TRUE journalism, yes men and kissbutts are weak and generally losers.
"Kiss the butt, but you are the worst or the worst when it comes to TRUE journalism, yes men and kissbutts are weak and generally losers."
Yet you continue to post here.
You even went so far as to create a second screen name.
Who’sthe pathetic one?
.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
Keep the day job
2nd screen name? Ok there.
Too nad NH wasn’t live at your high schollish type bantra, you two could sold him on York softball scouting and then reminded him how you thought he was god.
He’ll call you and Vlad, when he needs some ego boosts, I love you Neil, you are so cool Neil, you should be GM of the decade Neil. You are my hero!! Congrats on your extension, your sub 400 winning % in your first 4 years was a testimony on your greatness, Vlad just said how any other GM would have lost 480 games over these years, you are great. Please call back, please please please!
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
for what
all I said was pretty factual
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
None ofwhat you said was fact,
except that you’re using a second screen name, which, as I point out above may be a violation of SBN’s TOS.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Correction -
point out below.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions
This is mostly gibberish, but I'll try to make head or tails of it and respond...
Keep the day job
Original – really original. Unfortunately, the actual line is “Don’t quit your day job,” which is kinda funny, since I’m currently unemployed. But that’s another matter.
2nd screen name? Ok there.
You’re damned right I’m right. Didn’t you make the second one because the first one was so roundly laughed off by the posters on BD who were unamused by your condescending “I played the game” attitude? Also, it’s worth noting that your creating a second screen name may be in violation of SBN’s TOS – see senator/fatbastard/primetime as an example.
Too nad [sic] NH wasn’t live at your high schollish [sic] type bantra, [sic] you two could sold him on York softball scouting and then reminded him how you thought he was god.
Ummm… okay… here’s where it gets difficult. What is “bantra?” And where do we infer that “he was god?” (Perhaps you meant “banter?” See, when you make a post, and you look at it before you hit the “post” or “reply” button, you’ll see some squiggly red lines… those are the words that the spellchecker is asking you “WTF?” and maybe you should correct them so people know what the hell you’re talking about.)
He’ll call you and Vlad, when he needs some ego boosts, I love you Neil, you are so cool Neil, you should be GM of the decade Neil. You are my hero!! Congrats on your extension, your sub 400 winning % in your first 4 years was a testimony on your greatness, Vlad just said how any other GM would have lost 480 games over these years, you are great. Please call back, please please please!
Phew – okay, here we go…
First, we requested an interview. Then we called him.. don’t know where the “ego boosts” part of it comes in. NH does many, many many interviews, this is one of them. I suppose when he does the weekly radio show, or answers questions from the P-G, that that’s him needing an “ego boost?” I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here… are you implying NH is an egomaniac? If so, why not just come out and say it?
I’d like you to point out exactly where anything like we love him, that he should be GM of the decade, or that he is a hero. Also, I need to point out that the interview was taped before the announcement of his contract extension, so we didn’t talk about that, either.
As far as including Vlad in this, I really don’t get that – Vlad is in no way, shape or form involved or affiliated with Rumbunter.com or the Rumbunter Podcast.
Perhaps you’re trying to be snarky / sarcastic / “humorous?” If so, you’ve failed miserably. Again.
Face it, Dan/jackie – you’re either jealous that Charlie runs a really great website, and that Tom and I have managed to do what no other Pirates’ blog has done – create a well-received podcast…or you’re just bitter and cranky in general. Perhaps you should create your very own Pirates’ blog - I’m sure you’ll have lots of readers!
(See, that last one thereis an example of a good snark. Sad that I have to point it out to you, but I’m glad to provide the assistance – old dogs can learn new tricks, right?)
Have a nice day.
.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Actually Charlie does a great job
I stick to the rest of my comments though.
No job, economy stinks I guess but dont turn one down to pursue talk show fame.
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions
angus
I know you dont have a job.
Maybe a cartoon hobby
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions
cartoon hobby? i dont get it.
i’ll just stick to myself in my 6 bedroom home on my designer’s salary… thankyouverymuch mr helper help.
with my gorgeous wife… uhhhh, morgan fairchild… yeahhhhhh, thats the ticket
angus -
Stay off of Dan jackie’s lawn.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions
"I stick to the rest of my comments though."
Of course you do.
That way you don’t have to address the valid points that I’ve made.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think I've discovered the mystery of cocktails, angus,Vladdy ect
They are all unemployed and trying to edit, kiss butt, make believe reporter/talk show cartoon buff types that live with MOM.
No wonder the arguments of NH being god and that he is the top GM in baseball, no wonder like it sounds sorta backwards, I mean anyone who watches baseball other than the pirates for the past few years has to realize every FA NH brings in is a joke.
I am reminded of the movie, dumb and dumber, the lack of real intelligence or true understanding of why teams win or lose is highlighted in many of your posts and arguments.
The leafers of this gang all living with mom, this obviously should have caught my attention earlier on how so many lamebrains could justify NH’s handling of the MLB team and claim our top prospects / farm system is so underrated. Nobody produces, dominates nor wins and just because NH tells you they are projectable and will get better, you all nod/clap and take the word as gospel.
Look at Pomeranz, Minor, Leake, we have guys with 4 plus era’s in A ball in the same time line.
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions
I flagged you, too.
Good to see you’re sensible about one thing.
Too bad you’re so pathetic otherwise.
Now, back to your porch, shooing kids off your lawn.
.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 6:01 PM EDT up reply actions
They are all unemployed…
My boss will certainly be surprised to hear that. To think, for all these years he’s been cutting me checks without any obligation to do so!
cartoon buff types
That’s a bit more accurate. I do enjoy Archer and the Venture Brothers, when I have time to watch TV.
that live with MOM
I hate to waste the opportunity for a good “Yo Momma!” joke, but it’d be kind of unseemly for me to take advantage here. Sigh.
Look at Pomeranz, Minor, Leake, we have guys with 4 plus era’s in A ball in the same time line.
You’re honestly trying to make a case for Pomeranz over Taillon? Good luck with that…
Also, just as a reminder: BA had Sanchez rated as the #32 player in the 2009 draft, and according to Jackie, he was a horrible reach and an indefensible pick. Instead, we should have taken one of the obviously superior alternatives, like Minor… BA’s #35.
cartoon buff types
Oh, and of course the old rotoscoped Fleischer brothers stuff is superb.
by Vlad on Sep 13, 2011 8:56 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'd never seen that one!
Koko is awesome. Easily one of my top 5 favorite characters.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 13, 2011 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions
Again, you refuse to address my points. I'm sure it's simply because you can't argue the truth.
“Your mama” remarks? Yeah, I should have expected that.
By the way, my mother has passed on. Nice one.
You’re pathetic. Simply pathetic. You can’t refute, so you make shit up. I repeat, pathetic.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions
By the way, my mother has passed on. Nice one.
And still you continue to live with her? Buy a coffin, for the love of God!
"A boy's best friend is his mother."
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions
you have no points
they are child like and again the dumb and dumber type of arguments.
face it, too much make believe in that head of yours
by jackiegleason on Sep 12, 2011 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Aww...
and I spent so much time breaking down your post and refuting it, too.
The only “make believe” is in your post – because you certainly don’t state any facts.
Is that what it’s like being bitter and pathetic?
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 12, 2011 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Reply to epoc's o.p.
I almost started my post by saying I’m in complete agreement. But “upon further review,” that’s not true.
I don’t think Huntington’s extension should have been for 2 years rather than 3. Instead, I think he should have been replaced. My reasons are much the same as epoc’s.
To be successful (that is, to field a competitive team), the GM of a small-market team must make a preponderance of good moves, with few mistakes. No GM gets everything right, but Huntington has made too many bad moves. NH’s plan is right, but his execution just hasn’t been good enough.
- His trades have been no better than 50-50. (That has been documented extensively elsewhere, so I won’t rehash here.) Yes, he needed to blow up the major league team, but it’s a shame that he didn’t get back more value than he did.
- His free agent acquisitions have been less than stellar. No doubt there are many factors working against NH in the free agent market. But that doesn’t excuse moves like wasting $5 mill on a guy like Overbay. (I wasn’t reading/posting on this board at the time, but on the two boards I WAS reading, the opinion about that signing was overwhelmingly negative at the time.)
- His drafting APPEARS to be significanlty better than that of the Littlefield-Creech era, primarliy because he has been willing and able to spend on the draft. I’ve been encouraged by the money spent and the APPARENT talent acquired in the draft….. but not so much by the results so far. I know he’s only made 4 drafts, and I know his drafts may pan out in the future. Just sayin’ this aspect of NH’s performance isn’t a slam-dunk yet.
Bottom line: Despite the bad situation left by Littlefield, I expected to see SOME improvement at the major league level by NH’s 3rd season (where “improvement” is defined as some improvement in W-L record and some decent baseball played by an emerging core of talented players). That didn’t happen in 2010. The first half of 2011 had me thinking that perhaps I’d been too hard on NH. But the collapse since mid-July provides strong evidence that the team STILL hasn’t improved in any significant way….. and suggests that the 2012 team is unlikely to impress.
This perspective will seem overly pessimistic and will be unpopular with many. And I recognize that there are many potential counter-arguments. But I gotta feeling that the Pirates’ 2012 performance will convince at least some of those to lament NH’s extension. I fervently hope I’m wrong, and I fervently hope that the Pirates and Huntington prove me wrong….. but I won’t hold my breath.
?
“where "improvement" is defined as some improvement in W-L record and some decent baseball played by an emerging core of talented players”
I don’t think this means what you think it means…
Seriously, a few sentences later you even ADMIT he met your standard, then you wave it away as insignificant.
You’re allowed to feel think whatever you want about the extension but your 4 points used as examples of bad NH make no sense. He’s been way better than 50-50 on trades, he’s made no major FA errors and only pursued I think 2 starters in like 3 years from the market. And his draft history is inconclusive, as you suggest, which can’t reasonably be used against him.
Sorry, no
I said EXACTLY what I meant.
Huntington did not meet my standard, nor did I “admit” that he did. My stated “standard” was that I expected to see some improvement in W-L record by Huntington’s third season. That did not happen. Quite the contrary.
- In Littlefield’s last season (2007), the Pirates went 68-94, after winning 67 games in both 2005 and 2006.
- In Huntington’s first season, the Pirates went 67-95 (essentially no change).
- In Huntington’s second season (2009), after Nutting, Coonelly, and Huntington all stated that they expected improvement, the team won 5 fewer games, finishing at 62-99.
- In Huntington’s third season (2010), after those same folks stated again that they expected significant improvement, the team finished at 57-105.
What I DID say in my previous post was that “the first half of 2011 had me thinking that perhaps I’d been too hard on NH.” In other words, I was fooled like so many other hopeful Pirate fans. Since their high point, the team has played at a dismal pace (16-37—- .302) and are showing no signs of recovery. As I’ve posted elsewhere (with my reasons), my expectations are that the Pirates’ W-L record for the 2012 season will be worse than their final record for 2011.
Finally, imo, my points make good sense. But the same discussion has occurred in several other threads with a number of people on both sides….. so I see no point in re-hashing that here.
I hope the optimists are correct. I hope you’re right and I’m wrong. Time will tell.
2011
To be honest, with the talent they have on the roster they have right now, they’re probably right where I expected them to be. They weren’t as good as they looked thru the first 4 months and they aren’t as bad as they’ve looked the past 6 weeks. Let me put it this way…what would you think if we put the season on its head? For example, say they started the season with that awful 16-37 mark, but then went 51-45 over the next 4 months. Would you feel differently?
man, thats a good point
it would give many people hope, false hope?, that the team is putting it together.
good post.
by white angus on Sep 15, 2011 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions
No doubt
Had the Pirates started the season 16-37, and subsequently gone 51-44 through today, there would be legitimate cause for optimism. The beginning of the season would have looked just like last year. Then the 51-44 part would look very much like a turn-around. (And that appearance would have a higher probability of being valid.)
It would mean that the pitching staff (both rotation and bullpen) would be looking good and performing well NOW, and the offense would be scoring enough runs to win a lot of close games NOW. Unfortunately, that’s not the case. In fact, just the opposite has been happening. The performance of the pitching staff has been poor. The offense has been poor. Just like last year.
- Pirates’ pitching staff has been worst in the league since the break.
- Maholm is on the DL and likely gone.
- Correia is on the DL and had regressed to his career norms.
- Karstens seems fatigued and has regressed toward his career norms..
- Morton and McDonald remain promising but inconsistent.
- The bullpen has been inconsistent.
- The offense looks pretty bad.
- The team which has gone 16-37 (on merit) looks very much like the 2010 Bucs.
For the first 95 games of 2011, everything seemed to go right for the pitching staff and the Pirates were the beneficiaries of a lot of good luck. But It appears to me that the current team looks very similar to 2010, and everything needs to go right for the Pirates to show improvement in 2012.
- Is it reasonable to expect starting pitching like we had in early 2011?
- Will Ohlendorf and/or Lincoln pitch well enough to contribute?
- Will Pedro Alvarez find himself?
- Will the Pirates re-sign Derrek Lee, and will he have a good year at age 36/37?
- What will happen at the catcher position?
- What about SS?
- Will Presley and Tabata put their injuries behind them and continue to develop?
- Will the Pirates sustain any significant injuries? (Most teams do in most years.)
- Will McCutchen break out, after showing no signicant offensive improvement over his first 3 seasons? (.836 OPS in 2009, .814 in 2010, .829 in 2011)
- What should we expect from Walker? (OPS deteriorated from .811 last year to .736 this year.)
- What about the bullpen? Will Hanrahan regain dominance? Will Meek regain his heat? Will some of the rest regain their consistency? Who will be in next year’s bullpen?
- Can the team expect any help from the minor leagues?
- Can the team expect any help from free agents?
- Will Huntington make any good trades?
- WHERE WILL IMPROVEMENT COME FROM? WHY SHOULD WE EXPECT MORE WINS?
It’s likely that SOME of those questions may turn out well for the Pirates (although in years past, it seems that most have not). Right now, I see a bad team on the field and too many question marks to expect much going into 2012.
I admire those who glean a more optimistic outlook from looking at the same information, I really do….. but I just don’t see it.
You're right
I mis-read. I’ll just say that’s an unreasonable expectation then since NH wasn’t really trying to do what you said. And yes it’s been re-hashed but I’ve yet to see someone contest what I’ve said, they just move on elsewhere, still spouting the false info.
A couple of points:
I’ll just say that’s an unreasonable expectation then since NH wasn’t really trying to do what you said.
I’ll start by saying that it’s possible that my expectations were unreasonable. You’re not the only one who feels that way. On the other hand, I’m not the only one who feels that Huntington’s performance has not been good enough.
However, according to everything I read at the time (including multiple quotes from Nutting, Coonelly, and Huntington), Huntington WAS trying to do what I said. All three said that they were expecting improvement at the major league level prior to both the 2009 and 2010 seasons.
On one hand, they should not have made those statements if they didn’t believe them. If they WERE sincere, the poor performance of the team reflects badly on all three.
On the other hand, it’s possible that those quotes were uttered for public relations purposes. If that’s the case, it also reflects badly on all three (in my opinion), for being insincere, for “lying” to the fans, and for building false expectations.
And yes it’s been re-hashed but I’ve yet to see someone contest what I’ve said, they just move on elsewhere, still spouting the false info.
I have contested what you’ve said in those other threads, quite successfully in my opinion. Again, i’m not going to re-post the same rebuttals here. You can find them as easily as I can.
You are not going to convince me that Huntington’s trades have turned out better than 50-50, or that his free agent acquisitions have been better than “poor” overall, or that his drafts can be judged to be a major plus until some of his draftees start to contribute at the major league level. There appears to be no chance that I will convince you, either. At this point, it appears that we should agree to disagree on Huntington’s performance….. and let time determine which perspective is more accurate.
Are you freakin’ serious? He has not been way better than 50-50 in trades. Not even close. As for your comment that he has not made any major FA errors, uh Mr. Overbay and Mr. Diaz would like to speak with you. Stunning that someone actually thinks this.
Proud fan of Pittsburgh's professional sports teams and the Pirates too.
by Black&GoldTrain on Sep 16, 2011 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, he needed to blow up the major league team, but it’s a shame that he didn’t get back more value than he did.
this is usually a comment from someones who’s favorite player got traded away from the Burgh. and seriously overestimated the worth of those traded.
however, you have made really good points about the shortcomings over the last few seasons with NH on hand, but i still think you are expecting way too much and way too early
Partly right
I have posted elsewhere that I am a McLouth fan. I was against that trade at the time, as much on principle as anything else. The Pirates had recently signed McLouth to a multi-year contract while lauding him as exactly the kind of player they needed to build around. I happened to agree with that sentiment.
I may have overvalued McLouth at the time, although I continue to believe that he will come back strong if he can overcome his injury problems. Nonetheless, I have admitted that the McLouth trade has turned out in the Bucs’ favor to date.
However, by the same token, I don’t think I overvalued Jason Bay, Freddy Sanchez, Tom Gorzelanny, John Grabow, and a few others. (I have acknowledged that Huntington has made some good trades….. just not as high a percentage of good trades as I deem necessary.)
At any rate, I understand your stance…… that I expected way too much and way too early. But I don’t agree that expecting a modest improvement in W-L at the major league level in year 3 was too much or too early….. let alone “way” too much and “way” too early.
I agree that no GM gets everything right, but Huntington has made too many mistakes….. and those mistakes have retarded expected progress at the major league level. A small market, small revenue team needs an innovative GM who makes a higher percentage of right calls than Huntington has made. I know you disagree, and that’s OK. I hope I’m wrong, but I expect the W-L performance of the 2012 Pirates to vindicate my position. We shall see.
You might be his most level headed critic.
I’m trying to think of a good analogy for it all. Perhaps it’s like being down by 1 in the 9th and we send up a pinch hitter to lead off. NH sends up the speedy guy with a .375 OBP while leaving the guy with a .330 OBP but over the fence power on the bench. The speedy guy then strikes out. Regardless of result, was it the right move?
It’s probably crap but hopefully you at least see where I’m trying to go with this.
Not sure.....
My interpretation is that you’re saying that a move may be the right move, even if it doesn’t yield the hoped-for result. If that interpretation is accurate, then my response is:
- On a “micro” scale, I agree completely. No one gets every move right. And every “right” move doesn’t necessarily yield good results.
- However, on a “macro” scale (i.e., looking at the big picture), results are what count. If a GM makes a bunch of moves which appear to look right at the time, but he doesn’t get results (that is, the team he puts on the field is not competitive), then that bunch of moves….. in aggregate….. by definition….. were NOT the right moves. The only reasonable argument I can see AGAINST this position is how long a GM should be allowed to keep his job without the team showing significant improvement on the field.
The reasons for my impatience are two-fold:
1. I’ve seen many turnarounds of bad teams (not just the Pirates) during 60+ years of following MLB. Almost all of those turnarounds have been visible within 3 years (or less) of the right GM taking over the franchise….. where “visible” means that significant improvement in the team’s performance is obvious.
2. I’m 68 years old and have been a Pirate fan since 1950….. through some very good times and some very bad times. I never thought I’d see a stretch as bad as 1950-1957….. but the current 19-year streak is worse. I want to live long enough to see the Pirates become competitive again.
If my interpretation (in my first paragraph above) is not accurate, I’m gonna need more help in understanding what you’re getting at.
Going into year #5 next season.
Is it still considered too early for NH to actually do something?
Proud fan of Pittsburgh's professional sports teams and the Pirates too.
by Black&GoldTrain on Sep 16, 2011 10:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bucs Dugout
Related FanShots on Bucs Dugout
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
