Fifth Avenue Forum

The thing that bothers me, is they keep trading sure talent for prospects who may or may not pan out in the Pirates system. I guess I'm still very iffy on how this new regime can draft/trade AND develop.

This

BC had to turn the Huntington roster over. They would be in a worse place if they were just riding out the final years of the Taillon, Bell, Musgrove and Frazier.

I think Morkle and I were talking about the Reynolds trade talk. You have a 5 WAR guy: gee, let's see if we can get two guys below 1 WAR that project to maybe be a 2-3 WAR player...if everything breaks right. And let's hope every other prospect hits their 2-3 WAR projection at the same time.

Why not add to the 5 WAR player?

My concern is that the 5 war player won't be around by the time the rest of the team is actually worth a damn.

No I think those guys should have been traded, and agree with that. The guys they've received are great, but the Pirates jury is still out on whether they can develop them to be competent MLB players.

Indeed, this is still the honeymoon phase.

I think the success or failure of Nick Gonzalez, Henry Davis, Liover Peguero, Roansy and Priester will determine the sort of tenure that BC has with this team. Priester is a NH guy, but he's developing under BC. Pegeuro is the piece from Marte, who thus far is probably the best player that they've traded (though Musgrove could surpass him). Roansy is like the surprise asset, sort of like getting Cruz for Watson. I don't think there are any potential impact prospects in the lot of his recent trade bounty. They can be complementary pieces, but the identified group is going to dictate whether this team gets any good.

Theyre past the first phase which was restock the system. This is the next phase where quality takes priority.

The reason the Rays are good every year is they trade guys at the peak of their value. All guys. You can't deviate or you could risk starting back at square one. That's where the pirates are.

Will Reynolds value ever be higher than it is today? Hard to say

My concern is that the 5 war player won't be around by the time the rest of the team is actually worth a damn.

Agreed - I don't really ever want that to be the case. I just don't like the idea of trading a guy to trade him if he has 1-2 years left of eligibility to be on the Pirates IF the best you can get for him are middling prospects, and you do the trade to do it.

For me it's more like, gee we have a 5 WAR guy, but the best offer we're getting is 4-6 years away from playing. Welp we have to do it though because we'll lose him for nothing.

When I think more like "well we have a 5 WAR guy, let's keep him until we possibly can't if nobody is going to offer anything substantial and make the MLB look like we're trying," lol.

To me, losing him for nothing, versus dumping him and attaining him for things that may never even make the MLB team is kind of meh.

Theyre past the first phase which was restock the system. This is the next phase where quality takes priority.

The reason the Rays are good every year is they trade guys at the peak of their value. All guys. You can't deviate or you could risk starting back at square one. That's where the pirates are.

Will Reynolds value ever be higher than it is today? Hard to say

Very much aligned - but I don't know if the Pirates have ever gotten anything from a "peak" trade that's been majorly substantial, unless we're counting Reynolds?

Secondly, Tampa can do this because they can develop players. Phase 2 would indicate the Pirates need to take major priority in making sure these assets are given the proper tools to develop, which I think is still out.

Constantly flipping assets has helped the Rays stay relevant. But their recent run is really strongly led by executing one of the most lop-sided trades in MLB history. And actually that Blake Snell trade screwed them for the playoffs when Glasnow went down.

I guess I would just say, the flipping pieces all the time isn't the reason they are good, it's the reason they can stay good with a cheap payroll. And they don't have a great record flipping assets, their Will Myers trade was bad and dealing Cronenworth and Pham to the Padres looks bad at this point as well. But it just takes a couple lop-sided trades where impact players are brought in, like the Meadows/Glasnow deal and that Arozena or whatever his name is that they got from the cardinals for a mediocre pitching prospect.

Call me greedy but I don't want to be Tampa 2.0. Would rather be like Milwaukee or Cleveland. Markets aren't that different, so with a real owner (HA!) the expectation should be more like those two, IMO.

I agree with that 100% but we already know this ownership group will not do that, sadly

What have they really done to be a better model than Tampa?

Milwaukee and cincy have kind of been up and down.

Cleveland made a recent WS but have mostly stunk outside of a few year period.

So good point.

Milwaukee has is on par with the rays in terms of being competitive. Their approach has been very different .

Last 20 seasons.

Brewers
-10 winning seasons
-3 division titles
-6 playoff appearances (2 WC, 2 NLDS, 2 NLCS)
-3 last place finishes (2002-2004)

Reds
-5 winning seasons
-2 division titles
-4 playoff appearances (2 WC, 2 NLDS)
-4 last place finishes

Indians
-11 winning seasons
-4 division titles
-6 playoff appearances (2 WC, 2 ALDS, 1 ALCS, 1 WS)
-0 last place finishes

Rays
-10 winning seasons (all in the last 13 yrs)
-4 division titles
-7 playoff appearances (5 ALDS, 2 WS)
-6 last place finishes (all but 1 over 15 yrs ago)

Pirates (sigh)
-4 winning seasons
-0 division titles
-3 playoff appearances (2 WC, 1 NLDS)
-8 last place finishes

Yeah I really just think of the current Rays approach as 2007 and on when David Price came on during the WS appearance

Quite a deal for the blue jays

Are we rooting for a strike?

Are we rooting for a strike?

I'd root for it over the pirates...

I'm rooting for a strike if we get a salary cap out of it.

I'm rooting for a strike if we get a salary cap out of it.

Those are contradicting positions though. A strike would be the response to the salary cap, a lockout might result in the cap though.

I'm rooting for a strike if we get a salary cap out of it.

Those are contradicting positions though. A strike would be the response to the salary cap, a lockout might result in the cap though.

Ok, you're right...

I'm rooting for a salary cap.

i just meant in terms of not watching the Pirates next year

I'm rooting for a player to get fairly paid for exceeding expectations during their rookie contract. If I'm the union, i'd be more worried about someone like Neil Walker, who was never really cashed out but had a really nice career, than preserving $25 million contracts for Justin Verlander at age 39 or whatever.

it does seem like teams get control over players for stupid cheap for far too long

it does seem like teams get control over players for stupid cheap for far too long

Agreed. Cole acted like a dodint about it a few years ago, but he has a point. If I'm the union, i'd say something along the lines of for every number of WAR a guy produces (or whatever metric), you get a $1 or $2 million bonus. or something.