The Pirates Acquire A.J. Burnett. Do I Like This Deal?
After days and days of speculation, the trade of A.J. Burnett from the Yankees to the Pirates has finally been completed.
As a long-suffering Pirates fan, this looks like another case of the team acquiring a once dominant player in the twilight of his career. Like Sean Casey and Matt Morris before him, Burnett was one of the best in the game a few years ago, but after signing with New York, his production slipped considerably, and he was a .500 pitcher during his time with the Yankees with an ERA hovering around 5.
I've been an advocate of going with a total youth movement and saving any veteran acquisitions for a time when the team is really close to contending.
After a 72-90 season, I'm not so sure the Pirates are close. Even if it works out with Burnett, how much of a difference is it going to make in the win/loss record?
I bet my brother that if Burnett is still with the team past the trading deadline, I would shave my head.
What are the chances that I'll have to go out and buy some clippers in August?
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.
127 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think you're toast
Bald toast – we don’t have the young pitchers to fill up all the necessary innings and Burnett is cheap this year. No need to rush and trade him – although if he was doing really well, I’d love to see a trade to the Red Sox ….
Welcome to the new dark ages.....
40%
Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?
http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained
by Kosstic518 on Feb 19, 2012 11:17 PM EST via mobile reply actions
It's
a catch 22. If he pitches well, there’s more of a chance we are doing well and so he’s not traded. If he doesn’t, no one will want him anyway.
You might be safe.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Feb 19, 2012 11:59 PM EST reply actions
as a guy who is a BBC, bald by choice, I say do it anyway. chicks dig the cranium.
as far as a total youth movement, its impossible to compete that way. we would be as bad as the Stros by doing this, especially since we have few “ready” young talent in the upper minors.
and by “ready” i mean “good”
it's really not like matt morris or sean casey
at all
by Mingy on Feb 20, 2012 12:09 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
I agree with mingy completely it’s not like the Matt morris trade at all. If I remember correctly the pirates covered all of matts salary, and threw in rajai Davis who had a couple good years with Oakland.
by Neil the real deal Walker on Feb 20, 2012 12:30 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
THIS.
I stopped reading as soon as I hit the Casey and Morris reference.
by yeah, im a jerk on Feb 20, 2012 8:10 AM EST up reply actions
You actually think Burnett being a .500 pitcher with the Yankees was a good thing?
The Pirates don’t need 35 year old guys like Burnett.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 9:58 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah, who needs a 35 year old with a 94 MPH on average fastball, or his average of 170 Ks per season? Especially a pitcher whose flyball style is actually suited for Pittsburgh due to the glorious notch?
I’ll kill my facetiousness for a second — there are better measures than W/L and ERA, but you knew that already (I hope). He’s a better pitcher than Maholm ever was, and we’re paying 2 million less for Burnett this year than we did for Maholm last year.
Equating him to Morris is hilarious, given their physical differences.
Thank you Ned Colletti.
I just laugh at the fact that they were so unwilling to give up Jones to get Burnett. They could have paid even less money for him.
They’re going to regret this deal.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 10:12 AM EST up reply actions
Money, they have.
First Basemen? Not so much.
________________________________
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Feb 20, 2012 10:15 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
wow, this is a really poor argument
I just laugh at the fact that they were so unwilling to give up Jones to get Burnett
I have no idea what you’re trying to say here. The only thing that might make sense is if you think they needed to save money, on which point apparently the Pirates disagree with you.
Of course, that’s not the only assumption you’re making— you’re also saying that the Yankees would have been willing to eat more money, which nobody knows at this point.
Equally, why do you think they should have given up a player that they clearly didn’t need to give up? Nor do you know they were “so unwilling” to give him up, since the only way to know that would have been if the trade broke off because of it.
by BurgherKing on Feb 20, 2012 10:20 AM EST up reply actions
It was said in the days before the deal that if the Pirates were willing to part with Jones, the Yankees would eat even more of the contract.
Instead of going after has-beens like Burnett and eating part of his bloated contract, why don’t they use that money to try and extend Cutch? If he was a .500 pitcher with the Yankees and their killer offense, imagine how he’s going to perform in Pittsburgh.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 10:32 AM EST up reply actions
In case you haven't read it the other gajillion times it's been posted.
Extending Cutch is a two-way street, and he has not been willing to give up any of his FA years. Until he is, there’s NO point in renegotiating his existing contract, as he is under control until 2016.
From PiratesProspects:
The Pirates discussed the possibility of a contract extension with his agent during the season, one that would include buying out one or two of his free agent years. The sides couldn’t reach agreement, but reportedly will try again during the off-season.
Are you just being obstinate on purpose? Serious question.
________________________________
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Feb 20, 2012 10:49 AM EST up reply actions
Not that I've been in the middle of the discussion...
but the Pirates Prospects quote would indicate that the Pirates AND Cutch’s agent are willing to work on something about 1 or 2 of Cutch’s FA years…but could not agree on a price. I don’t see anything in that quote as an unwillingness to discuss buying out FA years…just that they couldn’t agree on a price.
Considering the front office history of trying to sign someone as cheaply as possible (see also Tabata, Jose), does it really surprise anyone that the first attempt at extending Cutch did not meet with agreement?
That’s not to say that Cutch won’t eventually sign away FA years, but if NH/FC want to low ball Cutch, it won’t happen. They’re gonna need to be fairly close to market price. And a breakout, all around, good season for Cutch is going to raise that market price.
That quote
is the most current one Tim has on McCutchen’s page.
It’s been noted in the past that Cutch’s clique was not yet willing to give up any FA years, which is why it had not been done previously.
I can’t really be arsed to look it up now.
________________________________
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Feb 20, 2012 12:28 PM EST up reply actions
Resurrection
I will get up and walk again if Cutch signs away one inning of his free agent years. He wants big $$money to play for his favorite team growing up: New York Yankees
I feel like I remember
you saying something about this before…if it’s the comment I’m thinking of your neighbor (or brother or friend or something) makes fried chicken that Cutch really likes. At one such chicken-eating extravaganza McCutchen confided in your source that he will never resign with Pittsburgh because he wants to play for the Yankees. If this is the case, I can’t disagree more strongly. First of all, McCutchen would not put it out there that he will not stay with his current team any longer than he has to because he wants to go to (arguably) the most hated team in every small market in America. More importantly if the money and years are right, I truly believe a deal gets done. Pro baseball is a business. These guys aren’t fans the way all of us are. Maybe he did grow up loving the Yankees (so did Cole BTW) and all things being equal, he might like to put on pinstripes before his career is over. However, he would not reject a smart business deal just because he wants to stand in the same sun-soaked centerfield that was once covered by Brett Gardner.
The Pirates want 1 or 2 free agent years which means Cutch still would hit free agency at 30 or 31 and could still sign a mega-deal. McCutchen wants to be paid like a star and it’s likely that the final two years of that contract would pay him as much or more than he’d get in the first couple years of any free-agent mega deal. The Pirates should not just buy out McCutchen’s arb years now because that takes all leverage that they could have away from them in negotiations to keep him past 2015. To get something like this done, the Pirates are probably going to have to put together some kind of deal resembling the contracts Markakis, Upton, Bruce and CarGo have signed. If that’s on the table it will get done.
by KentuckyPirate on Feb 20, 2012 5:14 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Well, regardless, there is no reason to waste $13 million on a 35 year old pitcher who isn't what he used to be.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 6:28 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah there is
He’s a pretty affordable and pretty clear upgrade at a position of need. I don’t see why they WOULDN’T make a move like this
If this is an upgrade, I'd hate to see a downgrade.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 9:54 PM EST up reply actions
It's not?
You think Kevin Correia is a better option?
by Superstar25 on Feb 20, 2012 10:18 PM EST up reply actions
I get it, I'm a troll because I don't like something. I see how this board works.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 21, 2012 9:16 AM EST up reply actions
Absolutely not
I’ve read enough of your comments/posts to believe that you are generally a thoughtful and rational contributor.
That does not mean that I don’t disagree with your conclusions here (which is absolutely fine) but you’re definitely not a troll.
by KentuckyPirate on Feb 21, 2012 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
He's not a troll
He’s a regular contributor to the Steelers SB Nation site.
He just dosen’t know what the hell he’s talking about.
Ovechkin-Leich-Semin: The greatest line in hockey..............................Tee Hee
Proud supporter of the following clubs: Pittsburgh Penguins, Erie Otters, Columbus Crew, Boston Celtics and the best football clubs in the land: Manchester United F.C.
The Manchester United Football Club: Winning countless trophies and making City fans jealous and full of envy since 1902.
by Bradley James McEachern on Feb 21, 2012 3:15 PM EST up reply actions
he has also done some highly recommended fan shots.
by karreemofwheat on Feb 21, 2012 3:46 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, def not a troll.
But this is very out of character, as is today’s repetitious version.
________________________________
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Feb 21, 2012 6:12 PM EST up reply actions
$13M over two years is not all that much money for an MLB starter these days
And Burnett, despite not being what he used to be, is still better than the Pirates 5th starter so it makes sense to acquire him.
by maguro on Feb 20, 2012 7:53 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
so you think the Pirates should save money while they have room on the payroll so they can pay Cutch?
[ 1 ] What makes you think Cutch wants to sign? Esp on a team that loses year in year out?
[ 2 ] If $13M over 2 years which is market value based on the lower end of expectations for AJ Burnett is going to affect a Cutch extension especially given those will be years in which the Pirates dont pay Burnett, then we might as well field 25 0-3 year players and have a payroll of 10M so we can use the additional 30M or so for Cutch— why keep the Hanrahans around?
[ 3 ] And, uh, W-L percentage… you’ve been around here long enough to know just how bad a statistic that is.
[ 4 ] “If he was a .500 pitcher with the Yankees and their killer offense, imagine how he’s going to perform in Pittsburgh.” I am… it strikes me that Burnett’s numbers often depend on the opposing offense too, and the ones in the NL Central are distinctly friendlier than the ones in the AL East. Even for someone who doesn’t follow the numbers much, this should be easy to grasp (esp now without Pujols and Fielder in the division).
by BurgherKing on Feb 20, 2012 10:49 AM EST up reply actions
Win loss percentage is a good enough indication of a pitcher's ability, especially if he pitched for the Yankees.
And if that’s not enough, an ERA is more than enough evidence, and I’m not in love with an over 5 ERA. There are a lot of wannbe GMs and scouts running around quoting stats other than the obvious in-order to make a player look better than he really is, and in the case of Burnett, looking to make a trade seem better than it really is.
In the general sense, that’s what’s wrong with baseball, and why players like Jones lose in arbitration and still triple their salary. Ask Ross Olhendorf about that. In fact, I believe he won after winning one game.
You can use whatever stats you want other than win/loss and ERA, but you can’t hide the loss in velocity, and you can’t hide the fact that he’s not the dominant pitcher he was when he was given that contract.
Anyone who thinks the comparisons to Morris and Casey are not valid is only delusional.
Simply put, if the Yankees thought Burnett could still help them win, they wouldn’t have been so eager to get rid of him, and they certainly woudln’t have settled for two lower level prospects in return.
Remember, these are the Yankees, a team that will do whatever it takes to win, and they don’t think Burnett can do it anymore.
The last thing the Pirates need to be doing right now is payign a guy $13 million who isn’t in his prime. I give this trade a thumbs down.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 6:43 PM EST up reply actions
No.
________________________________
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Feb 20, 2012 6:55 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
That pretty much sums it up
There are a lot of wannbe GMs and scouts running around quoting stats other than the obvious in-order to make a player look better than he really is
Do you really think W-L record and ERA are better indicators of ability than things like K/9, FIP, and xFIP? Just because W-L is easy to track and has been around forever means it’s even the slightest bit useful for predicting future performance and evaluating talent level. Think for a moment about how context dependent W-L and ERA are. If you have reason to believe they don’t tell the whole story, why is using something else somehow deceptive (i.e. used “just to make the trade look better”)?
You can use whatever stats you want other than win/loss and ERA, but you can’t hide the loss in velocity, and you can’t hide the fact that he’s not the dominant pitcher he was when he was given that contract.
We’re paying him less than half of that contract and we’re not paying him to be the pitcher he was when he signed that contract. We’re paying $5 mil next year for him to eat innings, stabilize the rotation, and (in my mind at least) basically fill the Maholm role for $4 mil less with arguably better upside.
Anyone who thinks the comparisons to Morris and Casey are not valid is only delusional.
Come on, man, you can’t just insult people! That doesn’t help the debate. Do you have any evidence to support that? I’d contend that Morris was being paid $10 mil/yr and had posted three straight seasons with fewer than 6 K/9 and fewer than 1 WAR. Burnett is making way less, has been more productive over the last few years, AND there are reasons to expect him to improve given the fact that his HR problems could be cured simply with the move from the AL (B)East to the Pujols-Prince-and-Braun-(for 50 games)-less NL Central and a more neutral park. I just don’t see any comparison other than that they were both older pitchers at the time of the trade.
Simply put, if the Yankees thought Burnett could still help them win, they wouldn’t have been so eager to get rid of him, and they certainly woudln’t have settled for two lower level prospects in return.
Or maybe they had a crowded rotation and wanted to slash some salary for luxury tax/signing a DH purposes? They didn’t want to spend $33 mil over the next two years on a guy they might not even have a place for. Trying to lose a large portion of his salary while acquiring two even marginally interesting minor league players was obviously a very appealing option and thus the decision to move him, in and of itself, says nothing about his value to the Pirates at $13 mil over two years.
You really think making a general statement like delusional is a really big insult? I think that's being a little dramatic.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 9:47 PM EST up reply actions
So you won't back up your statement?
I’m just trying to have a discussion about the article you wrote. If you’re not interested, that’s fine.
You could at least try addressing some of the things I said.
by Superstar25 on Feb 20, 2012 10:22 PM EST up reply actions
OK, Matt Morris was a high paid player who was way past his prime, and the Pirates acquired him.
Same with Burnett. The only difference is the Yankees picked up a portion of his salary. Regardless of how much the Yankees are picking up, it doesn’t take away from the fact that Burnett has been a struggling pitcher, and speculating that he’ll be better simply because he’s now in the NL Central is a very weak argument, in my opinion.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 10:28 PM EST up reply actions
It's more than that the Yankees are picking some of it up
$10M for Morris vs $5M this year and $8M next. That’s a nontrivial difference for sure. There’s also the issue of production: Burnett has been better over the last few years than Morris was in the years prior to the trade. He’s been struggling in terms of ERA, yes, but his FIP and xFIP were both better than his ERA (xFIP was substantially better last year: 3.86 vs 5.15) indicating that bad luck may have played a role in his performance.
I think his ERA is due to regress closer to his FIP and xFIP over time just because that’s what tends to happen. That coupled with the move into a league without a DH and into a division without a hell of a lot of good hitters? I’m not expecting him to win any Cy Youngs, but I think it’s reasonable to expect him to post an ERA ~4.00 and eat ~180 innings. That’s not bad production for $5M and for some pretty marginal minor leaguers.
by Superstar25 on Feb 20, 2012 10:38 PM EST up reply actions
Isn't that basically what Maholm was doing minus the strike outs? And he's like five years younger.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 10:40 PM EST up reply actions
Basically
But Maholm’s option was also ~$9M, and being 5 years younger than Burnett doesn’t mean much…
by Superstar25 on Feb 20, 2012 10:44 PM EST up reply actions
I guess we'll find out. I'm just tired of scraps. To me, Burnett represents sloppy seconds.
Could he be a decent starter? Perhaps, but how about an ace for once? I’m sick of the guys who used to be better than they are now coming to the Pirates.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 10:50 PM EST up reply actions
but aces aren't signing with us
We offered Edwin Jackson a lot more money than we’re paying Burnett — 3 years at 30 million. He turned it down for a one-year contract. And he’s not even exactly an ace.
Basically the only way the Pirates are getting a true ace is growing one from within, emptying out the farm system to trade for one (as the Brewers did with Greinke), or landing on a huge pot of money that lets them shell out Buehrle/Wilson money for them. The third one isn’t happening anytime soon, the second one is a bad idea unless they need to go all in on contention, so they’re quite rightly trying the first; but until the top prospects are ready, it’s good to have a decent stopgap who they aren’t overpaying. A.J. Burnett isn’t expected to be anything more than that. (And having too many starters shouldn’t be a problem; if Locke and Lincoln are tearing it up they’ll get their shot somehow.)
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 20, 2012 11:47 PM EST up reply actions
So it's a purely aesthetic preference?
I mean, sure, apparently there’s some sort of evidence that he could be decent, but SO WHAT if he’s “sloppy seconds”?
by tobynotjason on Feb 21, 2012 3:19 PM EST up reply actions
this is a very very poor argument
and you should do better. The first reasonably valid point you make appears halfway down, when you point out the loss of velocity. What you didn’t point out, of course, that his declining velocity is now the same as the best on the current Pirates (SPs).
Anyone who thinks the comparisons to Morris and Casey are not valid is only delusional.
Sorry, I think delusional applies best to you. It’s not that there isn’t an argument against the trade, but none of your points contribute to said argument in any meaningful way. I won’t bother dismantling your entire post, but I’d suggest checking out FIP, xFIP, WAR and generally paying attention on BD rather than logging on and writing about whatever struck your fancy.
Basically, if you have to find enough reasons to rationalize a trade, it's probably not a very good one.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 9:48 PM EST up reply actions
I think you're the one grasping at straws to justify your viewpoint right now though
ERA and W/L record are not compelling arguments.
by Superstar25 on Feb 20, 2012 10:26 PM EST up reply actions
no clue what you're talking about
you’re the one struggling to find any good reasons for your dislike. I see plenty of reasons that rationalize this trade, which as executed counts as a no-brainer, imo.
by BurgherKing on Feb 20, 2012 10:31 PM EST up reply actions
Well, for starters, the people saying he's automatically going to be better because he's coming to the NL Central? Come on, man. Give me something better than that.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 10:39 PM EST up reply actions
right
because your arguments of him pitching on the same team as the Yankees offense made so much sense.
What part of “the NL Central offense is worse than the AL East” is hard for you to parse?
by BurgherKing on Feb 20, 2012 10:52 PM EST up reply actions
Just because it's worse doesn't mean he's going to be better if is stuff is lacking.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 11:01 PM EST up reply actions
averages 94 MPH on his fastball, still struck out 170 batters last year — seems his stuff is fine to me, and will be for a little bit longer.
Thank you Ned Colletti.
92.7 MPH*
was his average fastball velocity. but that’s still REALLY good. that’d be top 15 in NL i believe. luv u ryebr3ad
looked it up
Burnett came in at 26th or actually tied for 22nd in MLB last year in fastball velocity at 92.7 MPH
The best one I heard today was Teke saying "hey, maybe some people just don't have the make up to pitch in New York."
I almost wrecked my car when I heard that one. Either you can pitch or you can’t. A 4 something era at home and a 6 something era on the road combined with 31 dingers? That’s got disaster written all over it. I know, I know, the jet stream in New York, right? That’s the reason for the home runs.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 9:50 PM EST up reply actions
Statistics like that are for people who want to try and justify a bad trade. Sorry.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 9:52 PM EST up reply actions
which statistics are you talking about?
if you’re talking about FIP, xFIP or WAR, then I suggest you work on losing the halo of ignorance you’re currently sporting. Those are used for decision making in general, and their use with respect to this trade is not to justify it.
by BurgherKing on Feb 20, 2012 10:33 PM EST up reply actions
I think going with Jeff Locke or Brad Lincoln (speaking of someone who is going on 35) would have been a better option. It's about time they go with the prospects we've been hearing about for years.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 10:35 PM EST up reply actions
rather than paying a guy $13 million who may or may not be toast. I guess we'll find out soon enough.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 10:38 PM EST up reply actions
My problem
is you keep saying $13M which you know is a half-truth to try and make your point. The Bucs are paying $6.5M PER SEASON for a pitcher that will make 30 starts, will pitch 180 inning, strikes out 8 guys per 9, still averages 93 on his fastball and puts up a defensive independent ERA around 4. So volumes of stats back up that he was as effective vs the AL East as Maholm’s been vs the NL Central and the Bucs are paying him $3M less than Paulie’s option. What exactly is your problem with him over Correia, Lincoln or Locke?
by KentuckyPirate on Feb 20, 2012 10:55 PM EST up reply actions
Well, Lincoln or Locke, for one, are Pirates prospects. It's about time we take the training wheels off and let them roll for a year.
Burnett won’t be around in a couple of years when the Pirates are supposed to be contending. I’ve seen this same story play out time and time again.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 11:03 PM EST up reply actions
If Locke/Lincoln
really deserves a rotation spot, they’ll get a chance to prove it at some point this year. Not wanting to block pitchers with career ERAs around 6 is a bad reason to not get a legit ML starter if you can. If/when the Pirates are contending in 2014 and beyond, they had better be able to find #4 starters like those two hope to be…
by KentuckyPirate on Feb 20, 2012 11:10 PM EST up reply actions
What's a half truth about $13 million? It's the total they're due to pay him over two years, isn't it?
And a portion of my original argument was that I didn’t think he’d be around past the trade deadline. You saying that it’s only $6.5 million a year is basically hinting that you don’t think he’ll be around beyond this year. If you’re right, and he is, well, you’ve just paid an average starter $13 million to eat up some innings on a team that may average 70 wins a season over the next two years. Yippee.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 11:09 PM EST up reply actions
It's a half truth
because you’re using the total to make it seem like more of an overpay. $6.5M is just not very much for 30 starts. It makes the team better so I just don’t see the downside.
by KentuckyPirate on Feb 20, 2012 11:15 PM EST up reply actions
I'm using the total because it's $13 million too much no matter how you slice it.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 11:17 PM EST up reply actions
13 MM for TWO years.
Maholm would have been 9MM this year alone. Burnett is getting 5MM.
You’re using misdirection.
________________________________
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Feb 21, 2012 6:22 AM EST up reply actions
for less than 1 year of pauls 9.75 mil
we get bedard 4.5 mill and burnett 5 mil
by karreemofwheat on Feb 21, 2012 6:53 AM EST up reply actions
yeah
there is potentially an opportunity cost being lost by the Burnett acquisition. That is the only somewhat valuable point you’ve made so far, although your reason for it (“let’s play prospects we’ve been hearing about for years”) is just as silly as the rest of your arguments against Burnett.
by BurgherKing on Feb 20, 2012 10:54 PM EST up reply actions
Dude, haven't you been paying attention for the past ten years? It's the same old crap over and over again. The only reason Pirates fans are happy about this is because Burnett used to be good. It's like getting a seven year old computer.
Is it still functional? Mostly, but it’s way out-dated, and it’s just going to give you problems in the end. This is Derek Belle, Jeremy Burnitz and Joe Randa (the second time) all over again.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 20, 2012 11:05 PM EST up reply actions
actually, i have only followed the Pirates since 2007
but I can see why people who’ve been around longer are tired of fans like you, people who don’t understand much, nor make much effort, resorting instead to the lazy matt-morris-all-over-again or have-locke-pitch-instead or tired-of-sloppy-seconds.
You might find this community more your speed.
by BurgherKing on Feb 20, 2012 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
Comparing me to those Smizik followers was an even bigger insult than my delusional insult. Now I'm insulted.
If I go to that community, I’ll be forced to pick a user name with the name “Nutting” in the title.
by Anthony Defeo on Feb 21, 2012 9:23 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
If Burnett is a 7-year-old computer
Correija is the Apple IIe Sears clone that I had as a kid. Or a Commodore 64. The PS2 is awesome if you’ve been playing Colecovision the past few years.
I'm not convinced there were ever any in use
by Superstar25 on Feb 21, 2012 12:26 PM EST up reply actions
there's a lot of C64 nostalgia around
Seems that way for just about every old computer except the one I had, which was a TI994A. I think people particularly loved the C64’s sound chip.
Here’s a C64 sound chip playing the closing theme from Portal.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 21, 2012 2:05 PM EST up reply actions
I don't know
But all this talk about retro electronics just made me think of the Radio Shack Tandy Computer.
Ovechkin-Leich-Semin: The greatest line in hockey..............................Tee Hee
Proud supporter of the following clubs: Pittsburgh Penguins, Erie Otters, Columbus Crew, Boston Celtics and the best football clubs in the land: Manchester United F.C.
The Manchester United Football Club: Winning countless trophies and making City fans jealous and full of envy since 1902.
by Bradley James McEachern on Feb 21, 2012 3:25 PM EST up reply actions
The only reason Pirates fans are happy about this is because Burnett used to be good.
Please don’t presume to speak for me (and probably any other Pirate fans as well). Personally, I am excited about this because it has a good chance of improving the Pirates rotation.
Put on your dancin' shoes.
Please don’t presume to speak for me (and probably any other Pirate fans as well)
and certainly not the majority of people on this board! But he has to keep knocking down the strawmen cuz he has gut feeling on his side and … well, uh, just that.
Not that there’s anything wrong with a gut feeling, because they sometimes work, but it helps when people recognize it as such, and not try to rationalize it with bad stats and arguments.
by BurgherKing on Feb 21, 2012 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
Opinion
The pirates acquiring A.J. Burnett was a good idea because I think he still has a little bit still left in the tank, and we don’t have to trot Kevin correia out there every fifth day either
by Neil the real deal Walker on Feb 20, 2012 12:34 AM EST via mobile reply actions
But...
Did Acquiring Burnett really bump Correia out of a starting job yet?? I haven’t heard as such
I think you're in trouble
Burnett was one of the best in the game a few years ago
Not sure how much I would agree with that. Even with his struggles, he still averaged 194 IP/year in New York. And the Pirates are really going to struggle getting innings from their starters. One of these three things happens:
1. Burnett is good, Pittsburgh’s in contention, he stays.
2. Burnett stinks, no one wants him, he stays.
3. Burnett is good, Pittsburgh’s out of it by early July, he gets dealt for a pretty nice haul (especially considering what the his cost was to the Pirates).
I think the first two are far more likely than the third; although I’d like to think of a great return on Burnett as a silver lining if we have to suffer through another awful Pirates team. I agree with Trog above… and I’ve got some clippers if you’d like to borrow them.
situations 1 and 3 are the likely ones for me
Burnett in NY – DID NOT STINK haha. It’s driving me a little crazy. The floor of Burnett (what he did the last two years) is more valuable than all of our starting pitchers perfomances last year (except Charlie Morton) .
I’ve heard some say you immediately shave half a run off your ERA going from AL to NL but i think it’s a lot more than that. Go from the best hitting division in baseball and the worst pitching park to a pretty average pitching park and the worst hitting division in baseball.
Even if we’re playing well Burnett COULD get traded if the package is right because a team with an idiot GM like the SF Giants might be willing to completely overpay for a ‘revitalized’ Burnett because of his name recognition and the fact that when you watch him pitch he’s got some really good stuff! Watch his curveball – looks good to me. Fastball still clocking in at an average of 92.7 MPH – that’s good!
Burnett is going to come out and pitch great for the Bucs – he’s going to be good. People are going to say “oh he’s so rejuvenated! couldn’t handle the spotlight in NY!” when the truth will be that his numbers will just be normalizing.
but this post
i don’t think you were doing it on purpose – but you need to look at some advanced numbers my friend and do some more research before you post things like this. Citing a pitcher’s win loss record really doesn’t do much for anyone.
Is Kevin Correia our best pitcher because he had the most WINS last year? Nope – he’s out of the starting rotation because he’s a replacement level player and we know that HE STINKS (bob ryan style). Reporters that don’t know what they’re talking about will be all like ’can’t believe correia is going to the pen, he was an all star!’ I can’t wait for that actually
Huh?
You mean the original post? I like the Burnett move, even if he’s merely a 180 IP Livan Hernandez. I see absolutely no downside; if he’s awesome, Pittsburgh either gets good performance or spins that into more/better assets. If he’s awful, the prospect/cash cost was minimal, and at least he’ll take the ball every 5th day and give the bullpen a bit of a rest.
"If he’s awful, the prospect/cash cost was minimal"
The cash cost is nowhere near minimal for our team. This is a significant investment of our resources, especially the $8m for 2013, and if AJ is a failure this year it will reflect very poorly on our GM.
Let’s say, hypothetically, that the Pirates go to a $50 million MLB payroll next season. Burnett’s $8 million would be 16% of that (which really is more of an indictment of the MLB payroll number). I think “minimal” is still accurate because it’s not a long-term commitment. Even E-Jax, at 3/$30 million, isn’t franchise-ruining because it’s short. A.J. Burnett’s contract doesn’t kill your mid-market team; Vernon Wells’ does.
I like the move...
Burnett isn’t great, but he is respectable…. and I like respectable rather than horrible.. particularly because I like to go to a few games and see our starter in the game past the 3rd inning. I think the Pirates got this one right! Man, I need baseball season to start right now… Then NBA and NHL just aren’t doing it for me.
Make sure
You use Edge, you’ll get the closest shave that way!
Barbasol would disagree with you

Ovechkin-Leich-Semin: The greatest line in hockey..............................Tee Hee
Proud supporter of the following clubs: Pittsburgh Penguins, Erie Otters, Columbus Crew, Boston Celtics and the best football clubs in the land: Manchester United F.C.
The Manchester United Football Club: Winning countless trophies and making City fans jealous and full of envy since 1902.
by Bradley James McEachern on Feb 21, 2012 3:28 PM EST up reply actions
its presidents day, they are prolly on sale. i'd get it today.
the way the deal is structured, we pay 5 million this year. 8 million next year. at that price they don’t move him until next years deadline, imo.
by karreemofwheat on Feb 20, 2012 10:16 AM EST reply actions
well they could because they might get a better return
but i agree with your thought on the shaving of the head.
by BurgherKing on Feb 20, 2012 10:21 AM EST up reply actions
fair enough
we need pitching. assuming aj is average over the span of the contract. at next years deadline, we would have 1 1/2 years of service for 9 million. 4 million for rental to a contender plus a couple of prospects. hell if they are desparate they may overpay. who knows we might even flip him to the yankees.
by karreemofwheat on Feb 20, 2012 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
technically he’d cost $8m to the team acquiring him in July 2013, unless we kicked in the $4m we’d be getting from the Yanks.
i think he get draws through out the year.
like the 1.9 mil he has received from the yankees this year. though that is not fact, its my guess.
by karreemofwheat on Feb 21, 2012 6:36 PM EST up reply actions
Not to be a jerk
but anytime someone starts off by identifying themselves as a “long suffering Pirates fan” I tend to tune them out. I know. It’s been twenty years. I get it.
The Pirates still have a responsibility to the fans and the players on the team to field the best team they can. Howsabout we start making some progress on the Major League level, getting some more fans in the park, and increasing the team’s revenue.
I would be surprised if Cutch, Walker, et al are all content to wait until the guys in the minors are ready. If they don’t see any progress what incentive is there for them to stay?
"Don Mossi was the complete five-tool ugly player. He could run ugly, hit ugly, throw ugly, field ugly and ugly for power.
aj burnett is exactly the type of pitcher the bucs needed
This is my first post but i have been reading the site for awhile. Anyway, I feel like burnett was the perfect guy to bring into this situation. For starters, I believe that he is going to be able to fill out our rotation in a way that makes me feel like we have a chance to win with any of our five starters on the mound.
He will also be a good clubhouse guy who will be able to mentor some of the younger pitchers on a fairly reasonable salary.
Glad you have joined the discussion.
If you don’t mind sharing, does the “hbg” in your screen name denote Harrisburg? (Only reason I ask is that I live near a different “hbg” outside of PA.)
it is harrisburg pa
not too many of us bucco fans from there
Thanks for answering.
BTW, I haven’t found a single other Pirate fan in my different “hbg.” Many, MANY Steeler fans though.
you will when they start winning
of course, whether any of us will survive till then, who knows!
by BurgherKing on Feb 22, 2012 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
Your comment certainly applies to me
I’m healthy, but approaching my 69th birthday….. and I recognize that my age contributes to my impatience with the current losing streak.
But believe it or not, a large chunk of my impatience comes from wanting younger Pirate fans to experience the indescribable euphoria which results from one’s favorite team winning a World Series. I’ve been fortunate enough to be part of that 3 times. I truly feel for younger Pirate fans who have never experienced that. (For those of you in that boat….. please trust me on this….. winning a division doesn’t come close.)
And then there are those who have never experienced a winning season. That’s gotta be close to tragic for a real fan.
I have no problem with this trade either....
Someone who
1. Eats Innings (which was what Maholm did until late last year when he hurt his shoulder)
2. Is Durable
3. decently priced (6.5M/yr is pretty good)
considering…
Morton (coming back from hip surgery)
Bedard (coming back from Shoulder surgery)
I’m betting Karstens may end up going back to middle relief instead of starting which I think would help out the bullpen. Karstens would pitch those short starter games (innings 4-6,7)
So as I see it…This would be our starting 5.
AJ Burnett®
Erik Bedard(L)
James McDonald®
Kevin Correia®
Charlie Morton®
now pretty much Burnett, Bedard, McDonald, and Correia are locks to start when the season opens barring injury.
Morton from news reports sounds like he isn’t going to be ready to start. So You have
Jeff Locke, Brad Lincoln, Rudy Owens, Kyle McPherson, Justin Wilson, and maybe some of the non-roster invitees fighting for that last opening roster spot as a starter. Could someone bump Correia? possibly, but they’d have to blow training camp staff’s socks off, pitch well with control and I think W-L in training camp as it’s been said before is a mirage as pitchers sometimes work to refine things while in camp.
Asking 2 young pitchers to come in and take the ball every 5 days will make for a very long season; However, the only instance where I saw that happen and the following year be very productive wasn’t too long ago..i think .. with the Detroit Tigers. However, the following year after that the pitchers struggled quite a bit aside from J Verlander I believe.
Personally if Morton doesn’t start, I’m hoping Lincoln gets his slot, but we’ll see how Spring Training unfolds.
now pretty much Burnett, Bedard, McDonald, and Correia are locks to start when the season opens barring injury.
Ack! What? Nooooooooooooooooooo! Much rather give the first roll-of-the-dice shot to Karstens than Correia!
Have you seen where they’ve said Correia is not going to be in the Starting Rotation yet??
I haven’t heard or seen anything saying anything to that effect that he was going to be demoted.
no, i haven't
i was hoping it’d be obvious. Although if they thought Correia would be effective over a 2 month period as a SP, it might make some sense… still, I’d hate to see Karstens lose his spot without another shot.
I know it's Yahoo
but here’s one with Karstens listed as the #1 pitcher and KC not in the rotation;
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AiyrgtBlrNgmM5IQID1vk1.FCLcF?slug=teamreports-2012-mlb-pit
I do wonder if Karstens would work as a super reliever.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 21, 2012 8:02 PM EST up reply actions
That's a first!!!
I’m a regular reader of 3 Pirate boards and converse regularly by other means with a number of Pirate fans.
Your rotation is the FIRST I’ve seen (from a Pirate fan) which includes Correia. (I’m not being critical….. merely stating a fact.)
On the other hand, as I’ve posted elsewhere, I am familiar with the phenomenon which consists of many professional writers, both locally and nationally, suggesting that Correia will remain in the rotation at Karstens’ expense.

by 






















