Morning links: Huntington clarifies reply

You always say how you are unbiased and always just report the facts as a beat writer.  In this case I believe you are subtly being very biased

Moskos ERA in May and June 3.31 and 3.00.His ERA in April ..5.94.Is this some kind of trend?Maybe we need to keep an eye on this guy.

WTF?

Steve, with all due respect, where was DK's bias?  He quoted word-for-word what what said to him.  

The fact that these words were spoken is not only astonishing, but validating.

My Lord.  in some dark recess of my heart I actually have to give Neal a tip of the cap.  Even though his job is riding on what he says to the media, go back and read what he said.

He just told  us he can't spend money.  He can only listen to 'His Master's Voice'.

And he is just as frustrated by that as we are.

I like Neal.  I still hate Ebenezer Nutting.  Yet another career you've ruined.  Enjoy your profits.

Wow, and I thought it was Connelly who was the lawyer. That defining the best on our board versus the one with the highest upside is almost as good as Clinton defining the meaning of the word "is".

At least I have more faith in their intellect. They aren't as stupid as I sought, just misguided, and if we are to believe Smizik, under significant financial starin. I can take that.

Now in re bias.... I  do believe frustration slipped through. If you ever have had the feeling you were being lied to, then get some evidence that while not a lie, it was not the full truth, you too would be a little upset. I'll give him a pass on this, given circumstances

I still think this was a waste of a first day, and a crapshoot of the second ( God knows which of these will sign.)

Huntington says that between '98 and '06 4 high school pitchers taken in the top 10 have become major league starters.  I looked and came up with:

Clayton Kershaw 32 starts

Homer Bailey 18 starts (probably doesn't count)

John Danks 70 starts

Adam Loewen 29 starts

Zack Greinke 115 starts

Gavin Floyd 74 starts

Josh Beckett 205 starts

Who is he counting as the 4 players?  I'll understand not including Bailey as he's been up and down, and Loewen as well, but I assume he's also not including Kershaw.  If he isn't including Kershaw then the window he looks at should not include 2006.  A guy who is now 21 years old taken out of high school making 32 starts already sounds pretty impressive to me.

Keith Law had this to say today:

With Day 2 now in the books and just about all of the top prospects off the board, here are my takes on five teams' drafts so far:

Pittsburgh Pirates Pittsburgh's selection of Tony Sanchez at No. 4 overall on Tuesday was the most controversial pick of the day, but the Pirates did do one thing they promised, taking some tough-sign high school pitchers on Wednesday. Their philosophy is that high school arms are so volatile that paying premium prices in the first round is a poor strategy, and that the value of that first pick (when you might get a premium bat or college arm) is too high to surrender, so try to stockpile young arms in later rounds. Whether Sanchez was the best pick for slot is another question -- I don't think he was -- but the idea of adding young arms who fell due to signability reasons is a sound one, and they added four good ones, two from my top 100 in Jordan Cooper and Zach Von Rosenburg and two who would have ranked in the next 50 or so players in Colton Cain and Trent Stevenson. Stevenson and Cooper both looked like top-two-round picks last summer, but neither had a good spring, with Stephenson losing a little velocity and Cooper pitching very inconsistently until late in the season. If the Pirates sign three of those four kids, it's a great draft, and if they sign two, it's still a good one.

Source: insider.espn.go.com/.../story

Jonathan Mayo @ MLB.com also praised the strategy/HS pitcher selections.

I apologize, I came off a little too blunt, and my point may be a bit misdirected. I didn't mean to sound as if I was attacking you. It just seems like everyone, including Bob Smizik tonight as well as many fans, is implying that this was due to money.  My question would be if they spend or exceed last years draft budget, would this still be everyones opinion.  At this point it looks as if we took a guy we liked, who we will save a bit of money on, and reallocate that money to high end HS guys.  Taking a cheap guy at 1, but spending the same amount of money, saves us no money.  Of course the jury is out on if this will happen, but I would advise everyone wait and see before jumping off the deep end.  And to answer your question DK, I just have felt that you have been implying this.  Especially with this quote which was said in the context of talking about the selection of Tony Sanchez and the money aspect of it:

"As the team's own management types say again and again, there exists no better vehicle for a team spending in the Pirates' range to add elite talent than through the draft or Latin America. If money is going to be saved at the major league level -- and it surely is, based on payrolls in comparable markets -- then the flexibility of the draft budget should not be even a tertiary issue for a franchise that is serious about adding elite talent."

If I have misinterpreted this, I sincerely apologize to you.

@ DK

Your link to the poll whether Pirates first draft pick was best doesn't go to that poll, in fact is says it doesn't exist.  

Just sayin'.

Steve

At the risk of being accused of pandering to the boss here, Neal pretty much said the same thing during yesterdays broadcast of the game. That is his story and he's sticking too it.

It's for the fans to decide if they like this year’s approach or not.

There is only one villain, and it is Nutting.  How long has it been since he spoke?

Go back and read what NH told DK.  You can almost sense the frustration he feels, since he HAS to do what he's TOLD to do, even though every atom in his being says do the opposite.

NH will never be another GM again.  This was his only chance.  He got demoted by the Indians.  Nutting came in with a rescue rope.

John Russell got fired as a 3rd base coach.  How tough is that?  Judge how deep a ball is hit, remember how good that outfielder's arm is, and either wave him on or make him stay.  Not that tough.  Still got fired.

These two were desperate.  Came to the only organization that wouldn't look at their resumes without a belt-loosening GUFFAW!

Why?  Because they will follow orders.  Just like Littlefield.  Just like Bonifay.  Just like Jim Tracy.  Just like Lloyd....oh, sorry....Lloyd actually cared.  And that's why I'll never lump him in with this disgusting soup.

Amarillo, please check  the previous thread again if you get a chance.

I find it so hard to know how good these kids are.If you've seen them in 4-5 games you have a good idea.On Tuesday there was so much anger over players we have NEVER  seen,but we choose to believe writers we know nothing of.Speaking for myself...I know very little about any of these players.I've seen a few play on tv.I'm thinking we'll know in 3-4 years.

DK,

if you say so... maybe it is MY bias creeping in. They may be nice guys, want the best for the franchise, but I don't agree with their direction. I take you at your word. Sorry for the inference....and why are we all up at 1 AM??

jnn... Cole Hamels was drafted the same year as Bullington, Grenke, Loewen I believe. Thata was also referred to as a weak draft.

Ok thanks for the clarification DK.  I understand you have to challenge them about money, and you should.  The point I was trying to make was that we don't know how much money they will spend considering none of the picks were signed.  Keep up the good work, your coverage is A+.

I am actually sorry for those on this blog who still believe what is force-fed them.

Can you not see that DK is trying to lead (without sacrificing his journalistic integrity) you to the truth?

My lord.  What I would give to have been the drunk dude next to NH and DK when they had this convo.

I'm pretty sure NH was drowning his professional sorrows.  Becaause I know now that he never would have done what he did if not directed from Mr. Burns.

And I have even more respect for DK now....because now I see why he (very briefly) let his emotions get involved in the McLouth trade....while giving us his best-effort unbiased news.  And as a lifeling Pittsburgher who I have no doubt has loved the Buccos since time imemorial, he has to report what these jackals say...and (99.2%, which is 99.1% more often than I could) parrot the company line with at least a semblance of a straight face.....

...while I sit here and stew.  And wait for a heart attack or a stroke in the owner's box.

DK- dude you are on west coast time! get to bed!

thanks for the article. I always remember the idea of ockham's razor-`Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate'', which translates as ``entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily'' or, for the bloggers here, 'keep it simple stupid'. WAY too many words this week by FO. makes me more $u$piciou$. keep up the good work.

wasn't nutting behind the fence on the grassy knoll?

Maz...the article I linked to on MLB.com in the previous thread says MORE than 6 figures for 21 of the 30. The PG article says 6 figures. I don't know which is correct, obviously...but I did not misstate my source, which cites Neal H.

ok, as a long time pirate fan ('87), i don't get the jaded view you are all placing upon this administration.  how can one not see the clear differences between this and the DL/Bonifay regimes?  neither one of those GM's spent near as much on the draft and international signings as huntingdon has.

they spent a franchise record 400k on latin OF exicardo cayones and are primed to shatter that record this year.  the level of commitment to bringing the franchise back through these outlets should be exciting us, not the other way around.  DL never spent more than 6 mil on the draft and NH blew that away that away last year at 9.8 mil.  those dollars brought us 4 high potential impact players.  this year, without the alvarez albatros contract, should bring us 7-8 more.

how can any of us complain about that?  this is what we all wanted....a GM and owner that would commit to bringing high impact talent into this organization.

while true that it will take some time for this all to come to fruition, i personally can see the light at the end of the tunnel.  i see where this is going.  i tried putting together a pre-draft top 20 prospects list and for the first time that i can remember, i had a hard time deciding  who legitimately was top ten, and i left off some very talented guys.  that says alot as to where this organization has come in a very short time.  

these guys seem to have a plan, and i think it will bear much fruit.  the pirates are not going to win now, but they are competitive, which for now is good enough, but when this team goes on a tampa style run remember where we were and who got us here.

we, as pittsburgh pirates fans, have, for once, reason to be optimistic that our beloved team will compete for championships in the near future.

i felt this same way when ray shero was hired and evgeni malkin was selected, and we see how that is going.  have faith bucco fans..... the best is yet to come

I can see why NH has risen to be a GM at such an early age...he almost had me with that response about his magical formula to determine who to draft. (I'm picturing NH explaining it to Nutting, and Nutting racing out to the press declaring his management team "the best in baseball," as if Nutting even has a clue what makes a great organization.)  I can understand calculating some form of return on investment, and factoring in the likelihood of success. However, after thinking about the logic of such a move, it struck me that I had almost forgotten about the $30 million gap between our Buccos and the Brewers. So, I then thought of an alternative strategy: Draft the best player that you can get your hands on in every round, especially the first five! I doubt that the $30 mil gap could be completely erased, and sometimes the simplest strategies are more effective than falsely scientific ones. If Nutting is not spending on major league payroll, make it up elsewhere. Of course, the Bucs will not do this, because they are not 100% committed to winning. It would take that kind of major "breakthrough" change rather than small incremental step changes to make this club a winner. Doing things such as improving the LA operation, upgrading the scouting function, and not signing Derek Bells are examples of small, incremental improvements that are not sufficient to change the course of our PBC.  Success at the highest levels takes exceptional performance and commitment, and the past 18 years (I'm already counting next year as a losing season) bear that out.

As someone relatively mentioned above, Huntington's statement looked like part of a dissertation for a potential law degree.

I wouldn't say these front office people are stupid, but they sure think the average fan is ultra-stupid.

It really doesn't matter what Huntington says, as his actions speak very loudly.

They're going to cut every corner, sell every payer, and do whatever it takes to maintain the profit that has been pre-determined.

I don't care what anyone says, this is not run like a real sports franchise.

Needless to say, the results tell the story.

As for DK....You've got a great job.

You're in a tough position, as you just want to report.

But.....You have to know what's going on here.

Yes, there is a difference between "top of our board" and "highest upside".

For an example that might resonate with Steeler fans, who would you have at the top of your board, Ben Roethlisberger or Eli Manning?  On Draft Day, 2004, the pundits were sure that Eli Manning  (and Phillip Rivers) had "higher upside" than the kid from the MAC.  Would you prefer TO or Hines Ward?  We've got Fast Eddie Parker, but Maurice Clarett had "higher upside".  Pac-Man Jones has "high upside", too.  I'm suggesting that upside ain't all it's cracked up to be.

The biggest difference seems to be that we trust the Rooneys judgment, but we've been burned so often by past Pirate regimes that we have no confidence in their judgment at all, leaving us with nothing to go by except "upside".  I promise you that the guys who drafted Ryan Leaf and Tim Couch could tell you all about their respective "upsides".  In return, the record says plenty about their judgment.

I long for the day when this topic has passed into distant memory, and we can appreciate the team that takes the field every night as a scrappy, determined bunch who out work and out hustle other teams, rather than simply outspending them.

@Pi-rat:

Thanks for elevating the tone with some Latin.  Here's one for you:

A posse ad esse non valet consequentia.

   * Translation: "From a thing's possibility one cannot be certain of its reality."

Rome had pretty good upside for a while, too.

Upside, backside, downside....You didn't see the Steelers blink when Roethlisberger fell to them!

They could have gone the cheap route and taken someone at a position that required them to pay less.

QB was not an "absolute need" at the time.

Let's not include the Steelers and Pirates in the same sentence, because it is literally....the best and worst franchises in sports.

i am so sick  and tired of hearing most of you complain.  are you all so blind?  the things that are happening now are exactly what we all wanted the previous regime to do, but now they are considered "not enough."    

are you kidding me?  

i've suffered through the same 16 years you all have but choose to not suffer through the same chronic pessimism most of you all seem to.

i challenge you all to compare our top 10 prospects lists right now to the list of two years ago.  tell me it was better then.  go ahead........ but you can't because it isn't.

i know the prospects are a few years away but this is what it takes for us to compete.  it's what the brewers, rays, a's and twins all did and so will we.

alot of these guys won't pan out, but the key is to have enough that those who do make it and those who don't balance eaach other out.  

that is how we will win.

and we WILL win

So, on the one hand the FO gives what is determined by the questionair as a short response and then that assumption is validated by the deprth of the printed response is while on the other hand questioned again by that same known skeptic

and so therefore gives that mentioned more detailed response, and he is already being held accountable for suspicious activity.

The skeptic in us all may be how they turn out: but they have planed their work and are working their plan.  

The owner is what he is and what he is is way too early to tell.

We do not have the best team in the world.  We do have a team that goes out and plays hard and wants to win.  I choose to not be one to detract them from their goals and I am probably supersticious about that.

I am thankful you guys are looking out for the rest of us.  I do get concerned about clubhouse filedpaly destractions.

persp231.....

Are you kidding me??????????

There is no difference (and basically it is the same ownership) between now and 16 years ago.

I cringe when I hear people say there is any difference!

The only difference is what they are telling you.

But....there actions are exactly the same in the long run.

I challenge you!

Show me any difference in the standings between now and (for example) 1996.

And don't talk about prospects that have absolutely no proof of panning out at this time.

There is NO difference....there is no plan

It's just another set of liars....lying in a different way.

@persp:

I've developed a new soft drink. It tastes really good, and apart from that, only edgy people drink it. Roxtar likes it, and look what a cool name he/she has! You know you wanna try it...

Sorry, being petty, but couldn't resist. Other teams have been scouting, working LA, not signing Derek Bells, spending a bit of money on the draft, etc. for a number of years. My point is that merely catching up with the rest of the league that has a head start only inches us towards them, while they go in search of the next way to improve. The only way to catch the real organizations is to make a big improvement quickly. Taking back-up catchers with the 4th overall pick as well as other questionable early-round picks is not the breakthrough that is required to make us into a real organization.

Good morning inmates near and far. Nice win lastg night. What is the status of Morton?  Is Karstens back in #5 spot?

Now I must do something I don't like doing. I have tried to stay out of personality conflicts on this blog, but a post above mine this morning crosses the line from my point of view.

Persp 231 wrote:

i am so sick  and tired of hearing most of you complain.  are you all so blind?

To this poster, mam or Sir;

Your use of the word "blind in this context is not appreciated or appropriate. As some of the posters know,  I AM BLIND.  As a blind man, I am not ignorant. Yes I go about obtaining information about situations somewhat differently than you do, but I am not ignorant or stupid. I certainly do not have the baseball knowledge most of the others do, but my lack of sight does not detract from my love of sports, or baseball in particular.  Let's pull away from using such out of date remarks to judge someones opinnion of a situation or action by the Bucs.  I can confirm to you, you don't need to have 20/20 vision to know what the draft was about.  

I observed what i thought to be a very nice improvement with Gorzo.  I would love to see him translate those relief inning back into a starters role, but if not would be happy with him in the pen with they way he has come along.

A lot of maybe all of of noticed a different karstens ride last night, a much smoother ride and then there was a conversation about maybe a new role for him.  There is evidence with his so many innings burn out some have noticed.

He came in focused and pitched well.

maybe the pepper shaker can take his spot and gorzo may be in the wings if you know who has another tantrum.

Maybe coming out of the pen brings out the best of the magic ride.

Maybe the pepper shaker pounds salt.

Maybe Gorzo has found himself.

Three inadvertants from Ians problems might have been found.

I went out on a limb by saying at the time of the trad ethat from what is said about morton he may make the trade even up.

I like how the team is reacting to the turn of events.

I think we could see the day when many more will say that Andy may make that trade an even up trade.

Sure we have some continuing downsides like Moss has not yet become a fulltime boss.  Adam was effective for the start, for the most part.  I think it is looking clear that Adam will get his numbers but this team needs more consistancy from his at bats.

I still would be shocked to not see Jack back.  iit would take another stunner move.

I do not think the team misses Yates.

                            GIVE PAUL THE BALL

roxtar and ph-rat, I would like the latin translations that brings us the english vesrion of the saying what was i to do?

@ jersey joe

Quis eram ego efficio?

And to keep things baseball oriented, the LA Angels are desperate for bullpen help, and their AAA middle infield of SS Brandon Wood and 2B Sean Rodriguez looks might sweet.  (Wood .299 12HR OPS .972 Rodriguez .274 21 HR, OPS 1.000)

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<  PROSPECT WATCH  >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Today’s Topic: CORNER INFIELDERS (stats thru 6/10/09)

Steve Pearce – 1B – Indy   (8th Round, 2005 Draft)

8 HR 36 RBI  .275  ** 56 Games 200 ABs, 27R, 55 H, 33K, 29BB, 3 SB ** 4 errors

Neil Walker – 3B – Indy   (1st Round, 2004 Draft) …on DL since 6-10-09

7 HR 32 RBI  .239  ** 51 Games 184 ABs,  20R, 44 H, 32K, 18BB, 4 SB ** 8 errors

Jamie Romak – 1B – Altoona   (A.Laroche for Gonzo/Lillibridge trade)

3 HR 19 RBI  .160  ** 53 Games 175 ABs,  8 R, 28 H, 54K, 13 BB, 1 SB  ** 7 errors

Pedro Alvarez – 3B – Lynchburg   (1st Round, 2008 Draft)

10 HR  42 RBI  .236  ** 56Games 203 ABs, 28R, 48 H, 59K, 32 BB, 1 SB ** 11 errors

Matt Hague – 1B – Lynchburg   (9th Round, 2008 Draft)

3 HR  24 RBI  .280  ** 55 Games 2000 ABs,  27R, 56 H, 32K, 20 BB, 1 SB ** 4 errors

Calvin Anderson – 1B – West Virginia (12th Round, 2008 Draft)

7 HR  35 RBI .297  ** 49 Games 182 ABs, 21R, 54 H, 55K.  9 BB, 1 SB ** 6 errors

Jeremy Farrell – 3B – West Virginia   (8th Round, 2008 Draft)

3 HR  22 RBI  .254  ** 33 Games 118 ABs,  18R, 30 H, 31K, 14 BB, 1 SB ** 12 errors

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

* RAISE THE JOLLY ROGER !

* Let's Go Pens.

Morning Links Part 2

Play by Play of Last Night's game

scores.espn.go.com/.../playbyplay

Atlanta vs. Pittsburgh Preview

www.cbssports.com/.../MLB_20090611_PIT@ATL

Baseball: Pirates select Denton's Baker in MLB draft

www.dentonrc.com/.../drc_bakerdraft_0611.6b78e95a.html

Pirates Select Southeastern's Summerlin

www.lionsports.net/.../BSB_0610092959.aspx

Which rookies will make deep impact?

www.usatoday.com/.../2009-06-10-fantasy_N.htm

Wider stance helping Huber succeed at plate

www.dailymail.com/.../200906110013

Buddy Thomas: No amusement for Pirates' fans

www.southcoasttoday.com/.../article

2009 MLB Draft Report Card; First Round Results and Grades of Draft Picks

www.associatedcontent.com/.../2009_mlb_draft_report_card_first_round.html

Stopgap at Shortstop? Boston Hopes for More

www.nytimes.com/.../11redsox.html

I think it shows a great deal of prudence to go with the volume approach.  If your stats show that less than half of first round picks will ever make the majors, let alone make an impact.  And less than 10 percent of top ten round picks ever step foot in a major league stadium, why make that gamble? We took the stud last year when he was available, this year there wasn't one. It actually is a very Steeler-like move to go with the guy that makes sense to them, rather than go with the sum of the mock drafts or what the magazines say.  

THE OFFICIALLY UNOFFICIAL PBC BLOGS AND MLB LINKS:

Raisae the Jolly Roger--No Morton No Problem

raisethejollyroger.com/.../no-morton-no-problem-pirates-3-braves-2

Sandlot Swashbucklers--2009 Draft

mvn.com/.../2009-draft.html

Pittsburgh Lumber Company--Karstens Is hero in relief

mvn.com/.../karstens-is-the-hero-in-relief.html

WhyGave--Pirates 3 Braves 2 and draft

whygavs.com/.../game-59-pirates-3-braves-2-day-2-draft-wrap.html

Mondesi's House--CHARLIE MORTON'S DEBUT WAS...INTERESTING

mondesishouse.blogspot.com/.../charlie-mortons-debut-wasinteresting.html

Hyzdu Headquarters--Tomorrow Nwever Knows

hyzduhq.blogspot.com/.../tommorrow-never-knows.html

Hyzdu Headquarters--Q&A with The College Baseball Blog

hyzduhq.blogspot.com/.../q-with-college-baseball-blog.html

The Green Weenie--The Bench Comes Through

oldbucs.blogspot.com/.../bench-comes-through.html

The Green Weenie--The New Dawn, Day 2 (Draft)

oldbucs.blogspot.com/.../new-dawn-day-2.html

Rumbunter--Pirates GM Knows You’re Not Happy as He Spends A Lot of Bob Nuttings Money

rumbunter.com/.../pirates-gm-knows-youre-not-happy-as-he-spends-a-lot-of-bob-nuttings-money

Rumbunter--Hillcats Dubee Continues A-Ball Domination

rumbunter.com/.../hillcats-dubee-continues-a-ball-domination

MLB Transactions

www.cbssports.com/.../transactions

Bucco Fans-Suddenly the Draft Looks Great

www.buccofans.com/.../suddenly-draft-looks-great.html

I believe the Steelers did hesitate when they picked Big Ben.  Dan Rooney had to come into the draft room and lay down the law. They weren't going to pass up a QB again...like they did with Dan Marino.

If the NFL had a draft that was 50 rounds would people criticize who the Steelers drafted in the 25th round?  I haven't seen any of these kids who got drafted play and I have read very little on them.  I wonder if that is true for most of the people on this board.  And I wonder how many of the players on his list of Top 100 that 'the great Keith Law' has actually seen.

A PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT Covering Some Basics About The Blog

As more people join this  community a number of questions arise.  Here are some clarifications.

1) Many of us who post here treat this as a discussion forum, not as a traditional blog.  Dejan's post sets the table but we respond to each other more than we respond to specifics of Dejan's post.

2) We always start the day with two threads--morning links and other stuff.  Morning links is primarily baseball discussion and Other Stuff is non baseball.

3) When some posts "OS" they are referring to the "Other Stuff" thread.

4)  Throughout the day, as stories break, Dejan will upload a new thread.  When you see the term "ants marching"  that simply means a new thread has been posted and most of the posters move to the new thread and start posting there.   Going to a new thread helps keep things flowing as we often have over 100 or even 200 posts on the original thread.

5) Instructions for uploading an avatar can be found by clicking my name, BK's name, or Mad's name.  We all have the instructions on our announcements page.  Many find avatars make following the posts easier.  The photo must be on your computer and the avatar will not appear instantly.

6)  Sign in w/ Nurse Cratchet for your straight jacket, meds, and room assignment

7)  As Dejan reminded us the other day, this thread is for baseball talk and the OS is for other topics

8)  Please read the 'guide to commenting' before you post" A link to the guide to commenting on the blog is located on the left near the top of the page in the section labeled  "Authors"

9) Do not post entire articles from other sources. - It is an act of illegal copyright infringement.   Just post links to the story

I surely left something out but hopefully covered the basics

From my post Wednesday:

As I said yesterday, the draft is more voodo than science: high picks falter, low picks become stars and there is no way to accuratel predict the outcome!

That said, I want to focus on the $$ aspect. We have been told that this club will build from the farm system up. Fair enough. That attitude rationalizes (on paper) the MLB club's payroll, which is some $25 - 30 million less than the league average.

So, if the big club's payroll is ultra low:

1) how could finances be an issue?

2) once the PBC has "re-stocked" and the payroll on the big club goes up, does that mean there will be no money to keep the farm system stocked?

3) if lack of talent is the problem, would it not behoove you to "flood the system" as Neal puts it with the best available talent - period?

My concerns are not about the outcome of the draft, but the appearance that choices are made based on what they want to spend. Rather than shopping at Neiman-Marcus the PBC is shopping at Dollar General.

As I noted above, I have some questions of Neal as well. While I appreciate his answer to DK (and by the way DK, I appreciate your diligence in asking these questions!), he does not address the long-term goals here.

I think that, like Doc, I am more than a bit confused as to what this management team is really up to. It is beginning to sound to me like "building up the farm system" is going to ba a self-perpetuating mantra that prevents us from ever seeing a truly competitive club at the top level as there will always be "needs" to address down on the farm.

@dfraj8: Your comment about inching towards a goal is dead-on. Great analogy!

Jose

$$$$$  BODY WATCH – ATTENDANCE AT MLB PARKS $$$$$

Thru  6/10/09

30. PIRATES ….. 26 dates ** 431,288 total 16,588 avg.

29. Florida……… 32 dates ** 539,196 total 16,849 avg.

28. Oakland……. 30 dates ** 517,344 total 17,244 avg.

27. Washington… 30 dates ** 637,704 total 21,256 avg.

26. Baltimore….. 31 dates ** 680,631 total 21,955 avg.

1. NY Yanks … 29 dates ** 1,298,114 total 44,762 avg.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Must've been a night when only grouchy people were allowed into the Blog...

I'm dumbfounded at the percentage of people complaining about the Pirates draft this year! They got, what...4 or 5 players listed in the top 100 prospects lists? BuccoNation nailed it with those two opinion bits--the baseball pundits loved the Pirates draft. They mopped up.

Now, I can see complaining about the McLouth trade if you're focused only on the team on the field right now. Think McLouth would've left six runners stranded last night? But this draft is awesome--basically they traded a high 1st round pick for 4 or 5 low first-round picks.

I also agree with roxtar about the high-upside stuff. Those are some great examples. I'd say it's quite a stretch to imagine that Tony Sanchez will be our Hines Ward, but that doesn't really matter because he's just basically one of our four or five 1st-round picks.

well it is definatlty an echoing mantra

IMO in the space of the last two weeks, Neal Huntington has put in place a serious of actions that will result in him becoming a scout for the Cleveland Indians sometime in 2011 or 2012.

Joey,

How does the Pirates 2009 attendance compare to 2008?

Up, down, flat?

In every interview that I've heard NH give the past few days he has always mentioned Bob Nutting and the resources he has provided.  I must admit it makes me raise an eyebrow every time I hear it.  But I like the job NH is doing and he seems to very honest. I appreciate his candor, especially the comments below.

"Ultimately, we did not believe there was the blue chip in which to invest a very large percentage of our significant resources and, instead, chose to diversify our portfolio in an effort to find the highest possible return."

"We recognized prior to the pick that the pick would not be popular, but our focus is on building a winner because that is ultimately what we all truly care about."

I think Smizik is right......

When they say it's not about the money........

It's about the money.

IMO Neal and Frank are under immense pressure to feed Nutting's thirst for wealth while maintaining their credibility as baseball operation leaders.

Money shouldn't be seen as a beside-the-fact factor.  With the meaninglessness of slot, teams would be irresponsible not to factor in money in relation to talent.

Regarding the comparison of how much the Pirates spends vs the Brewers.   Does anyone know if the Brewers' owner is wealthier than Nutting?

There does seem to be a pretty good size gap between the spending of the two clubs,  but the Brewers have much better talent -so I think they should spend more money.  Plus they have signed more free agents because they are closer to winning than the Bucs.  If the Bucs get into the same position as the current Brewers I expect them to spend more.

I understand the idea of not taking high school pitchers with high picks (most of the top guys available were college pitchers though).  I've heard this before (Moneyball).  In fact, it's been a while since I've read Moneyball, but I think there was a similar strategy used in the book.  The A's drafted an out-of-shape catcher that never made it (Jeremy Brown) with a pre-arranged signing amount and saved the money to spend on later rounds.  

Did we pass on a high school pitcher because they're too risky just so we could draft more high school pitchers later?  Maybe quantity over quality (a strategy that is terrible in general for a baseball draft) might be a decent strategy for HS pitchers with the lower success rate of pitchers straight out of high school.  But, it is kind of odd.

21 of 30 are asking for six figures?  They know the Pirates are over a barrel now.  We'll see how many sign and how much is spent.  They've said the money is approved by ownership.  

Do we know how many top 100 or 200 or whatever guys (ESPN or Baseball America) that we actually got?  I haven't checked.  

Radio

Would McLoluth have left six runners on--maybe

Nay 29--6-1 loss to Astros

1st--bases empty-Nate K

4th--Sanchez singles to lead off--Nate K

6th--Vasquez single--moves to 2nd--Nate flies out

8th--with 2 out Morgan walk, Sanchez double sending Morgan to 3rd-Nate flies out

That is 4 left on

Too many gray men today--Avatars make following the posts easier  Please click on my name for instructions on adding an avatar.

@ NH: That is why I think this whole building a strong farm system and "flooding it with talent" mantra is the construct they will hide behind to avoid spending $$ at the big-league level.

I doubt there is any team in baseball that is satisfied with the talent level in their minor-league system. So long as you are never satisfied with that, trading for prospects, stocking via the draft and going to Marrakesh to scout the next Rinku and Dinesh will be Job 1.

A competitive big-league club? A secondary outcome at best.

Jose

Junior

Keith Law say they drafted 3 of his top 100--Sanchez, Cooper, and Vvon Rosenberg and two more of his next 50--Cain and Stevenson

I have other articles that say they drafted 6 of top 100, or 8 of top 100--depends on whose top 100 you use

Why not have one high 1st round pick AND 4 or 5 low first round picks! Where is it written that we must spend less overall than the legendary, glorious city of Milwaukee?! The apologists are like a software engineer that is trying to build a new operating system by accepting that all the current assumptions and limitations of Microsoft are indisputable.

I went back and looked at the draft from 10 years ago, the 1999 draft.  The Orioles had 7 of the top 50 pitcks that year.   Three of those 7 made the bigs, two for some significant time, Larry Bigbie and Brian Roberts.  Bigbie is now out of baseball.   Josh Hamilton was the top pick that year.  Josh Beckett was the first pitcher picked and he went 2nd overall.  The Pirates picked 8th that year.  With Barry Zito and Ben Sheets still available, (not to mention Albert Pujols and Jake Peavy) the Pirates took....Bobby Bradley.  Zito and Sheets then went 9th and 10th.    Justin Morneau was a 3rd rounder, JJ  and Aaran Harang were 6th rounders, Coco Crisp round 7.  Pujols went in round 13 as the 402nd overall selection and Peavy went two rounds later at pick 472.  In round 42, with pick # 1254, the Marlins selected Adam Laroche, the 2nd to the last pick of that draft to make it, and who, with 118 homers would have to be considered a pretty good bargain.  10 years later Pujols is a Hall of Famer to be.  Who would have known then?

Moneyball is about taking advantage of undervalued resources.  If the MLB draft is attempting to mimic the NFL draft and Scott Boras is driving first round draft salaries to a point that is disproportionate with actual results, then those assets have become overvalued.  It's the same principal with trading, you buy when assets are undervalued, you sell when they are overvalued or at their peak.  It seems like the Pirates are trying to abide by that principle with their recent activities.

JAL - it would be interesting to know if the overlap between the various top 100s are made up of the SAME players.  If so, maybe it means something.  If not, i'd think these guys are just making this stuff up.

Do you happen to know?

Do you know how 5, 6 or 8 compares to what they're saying about other teams?

Thanks

One thing that's been amazing to me of late is people who have been citing the opinions of Bob Smizik as somehow holding meaning.  The guy has written exactly one column - his second one the McLouth trade, which comepletely contradicted his first - in the last, oh 20 years.  I'm not even necesarily saying he was wrong, but he's so rarely right when he's talking about baseball why would you want to use him as your source?  If he did happen to be right, this would be his needle in the haystack moment of his career of Bucco bashing.  

I guess the assets have been overvalued for 17 years now. And, unlike the stock market, I can offer a fairly rock-solid prediction with regard to the Buccos. There will be a lot of over-valued assets that we don't buy over the coming years.

Wow--Thre gray men in row and people complain about the Pirates--Avatars cost nothing and provide much

With that

Ants Marching to the Q & A thread==================================================

I wish the great Keith Law would show the players that were rated #100 prior to each draft for the past 10 years and then we can see how many made it to the majors.

So is the top 100 a good sample size to judge your draft?  Or should it be the top 250 or top 50?

My point is that the baseball draft is such a crap-shoot. Plus there are so many people commenting on it -and most don't know anything about these kids or have never seen them play.

The fact there is such a wide variety of top 100's that have so many different players listed should just be taken as further proof of what a crapshoot the MLB draft is!

No one asked, but here's my opinion on the flash of tempers we've seen on the blog the past week or two following the trade of McLouth and the underwhelming first 4 picks in the draft.

I find the anger and outrage by those who are offended by criticism of these moves interesting to say the least, and completely baseless for the most part.

The Pirate organization has not had a winning season for 16 consecutive seasons. - That is a fact that cannot be disputed.

The Pirate organization has produced horrible draft results  during this same period in time, particularly bad results with # 1 picks. - This is a fact that cannot be disputed.

The Pirate baseball operation has operated on one of the three or four lowest budgets in the entire sport during this same time period. - That is a fact that cannot be disputed.

A certain portion of the draft failures can be directly attributed to low budgets compromising the draft process and past failed strategies of drafting affordable players instead of the most talented players. - Subsequent front office leadership has acknowledged this issue and pledged previously they would not follow that same path.

Now low and behold the club selects a first round pick, the 4th overall that the club readily admits was not who they perceived as the most talented player at the time he was chosen and who was projected by the industry to be a late round pick to save money.

And now apparently the Pirate Fan Club somehow thinks that even though the strategy of utilizing affordable, undertalented draft picks and low baseball operation budgets have plagued the club for 16 years and running, it's all different? Those same failed strategies are going to work now and going into the future?

And all of a sudden we should accept and have faith that the same scouting organization that brought Bryan Bullington and John Ven Benschoten and believe the scouts have somehow some suddenly seen some secret intangible in the likes of Tony Sanchez that the rest of the industry doesn't see?

End of the day, this club deserves no slack whatsoever. The same owner who presided over previous front office regimes and asked them to succeed with the third or fourth lowest budget remains in place and now is asking a new front office to do the same. - Succeed with one of the lowest budgets in the business and now these guys are falling back to similar strategies that were employed by, and failed the previous regime. Until this club begins producing winning results, the criticism is completely fair and reasonable. It's up to the club at this point to earn credibility and faith and nothing it did this week has helped them do that.

T-Crack,

"Regarding the comparison of how much the Pirates spends vs the Brewers.   Does anyone know if the Brewers' owner is wealthier than Nutting?"

What difference does that make? - If Bob Nutting and his ownership team do not possess the capital to invest in the club they have the option to bring on additional investors. - However, they are unwilling to do so, thus holding the organization, players, and fans hostage to their own selfish wants.

"There does seem to be a pretty good size gap between the spending of the two clubs,  but the Brewers have much better talent -so I think they should spend more money."

Why do you think they have better talent? - The answer is when they were losing they did not waste high draft picks on affordable players. - Instead they chose the most talented players with their picks. - Players such as Prince Fielder, Ricke Weeks, J.J. Hardy, Ryan Braun, Corey Hart, Yovanni Gallardo, etc. - They didn't lie to their fans and the sport and tell them they were going to build a championship caliber club and then turn around and draft undertalented affordable draft picks.

Also, the Milwaukee area is two thirds the size of the Pittsburgh market and has to compete with the Cubs and White Sox just a few hours away for mind and wallet share. - Yet they can afford an $80M payroll and the Nuttings can't?

Hmmmm.

Hostage -

I actually agree with most of your post, however, you have omitted the reason that Huntington said that they did not take the player with the highest upside.  That is a significant reason to take into consideration.

The highest upside has also been asociated with the highest risk in many cases.  Thus they took a 1st round player (late selection but still 1st round) that has very good chance to perform in the major leagues on an everyday basis.  Great defensively, with some work needed with the bat.  

I do not see this as a pick as poor as Moskos JJ Davis or Bullington.  I see this as a limited risk perspective, one which is often taken in business.  Guranteed return often outweigh a higher potential.  This is the same mentality that allows for the clubs to get players to sign contracts which cover the arbitration years.  If it is a smart move for the players, why is it so bad for the club to take the same approach.

Also, from yesterday, I still have not seen your choice besides Scheppers that would have satisfied you.

The ants have marched===============================

One point on Scheppers--the Pirates could not take him at #4 because they drafted him last year.  They could take him with the supplemental pick if gave permission but that became moot when he was selected before the Pirates picked.  

Menkrick,

Huntington now admits the club did not choose the most talented player with the 4th overall pick.

Now where are you going to move your goal posts?

I already told you, I've previously posted who would have made me happy and regulars here know who that is. - But additionally, I'd have been happy with any player rated universally within the industry to be worthy of the # 4 overall pick.

It's not rocket science.

A key point I want to make about the Brewers is that we need to look at their franchise players:

Prince Fielder 1st round pick

Ryan Braun 1st round pick

Without these two guys, they're like, well, the Pirates.  We need elite players like that, although that's pretty obvious.  I don't think we did that either in the draft or the McLouth trade.  

In addition, Weeks was a 1st rounder (OK, he's just pretty good and not a star) and Hardy was a 2nd rounder.  Ben Sheets was a 1st rounder too.  He's not on the Brewers anymore, but he was a key part of their team for years.  They got Sabathia last year primarily for Matt LaPorta, another 1st rounder.  I know CC's not there anymore either, but he got them into the playoffs.

They didn't get cute in the draft.  They just went and grabbed the best guys they could find with their top 10 picks.  They had some bad teams, got high draft picks, built around the 1st rounders, and became a playoff contender.  

The Pirates need to use their top picks on top players.  BJ Upton and Wieters could have been our Braun and Fielder (OK, they're not in that range at the moment, but they should be stars for years).  Hopefully, Alvarez can do for us what Fielder does for Milwaukee.  I was using Tampa Bay as a model earlier and I didn't even think about Milwaukee.

OK, there was no clear cut pick at #4 who would be our Braun or Fielder.  But, there were 4 or 5 guys who immediately would have become the Pirates' 2nd or 3rd best prospect.  There were some college pitchers who could have been our Ben Sheets possibly.  

We'll see.  Even if they spend the $9 million they say, it doesn't mean they got as good of a haul as we could have.  

If we got 5 of ESPN's (Keith Law's) top 150, then we came out about even at a glance (assuming they sign) since there's 30 teams and they all should get about 5.  But, if we didn't get any of the top 25-30 prospects (like Braun, Sheets, Fielder, etc. were), then maybe we don't come out even after all.  

NuHo, here are my views:

If one owner/ownership group has $250 million to spend and the other has $100 million, that can make a difference on how you run your club.  I don't know which owner has more money.  But I don't there is an owner out there that likes to lose money for any long period of time.  I don't want these comments to open up a can of worms that leads to another endless debate about ownership and money spent.  These are just my views that went into the question I asked earlier.

The Brewers did draft way better than the Pirates did.  That doesn't mean that they also didn't have discussions about 'signability'.   Plus they didn't have Dave Littlefield.

This all comes down to talent evaluation here.  If you believe, like many "experts" have written, that this draft did not have a large number of players that were clearly at the top, then I think Huntington's strategy is sound.  The hit ratio is the baseball draft is low, even in the best of circumstances.  If you're dealing with a pool of, say, 100 players, and there's really not much separating players 3-100 in that pool, then why not take the approach of signing as many as possible.  I understand that, in an ideal world, the Pirates should use their first pick on the "best" available, spend what it takes to sign him, and then go after all of the others as well.  But let's be fair.  They have a budget, and that is reasonable.  I would rather try the approach of spending $10m on 10-14 players, than spend $4m on the first choice, and then only be able to sign another 6-8 high end guys.  

This is pretty much straight out of Moneyball, by the way.  And the key concept there is trying to find market inefficiencies and do your best to exploit them.  So, let's give Huntington some credit for trying a different approach, and see who he can sign.  From there, we have to hope that their talent evaluation is good, and they can hit on, say 20% of their picks.  It's a numbers game.

nuttinghostage,

why twist the facts to fit your argument?  outside of the first pick, not very many of our first 30 picks are low ceiling.

consider the strategy here.  slightly overdraft players in rds 2-3 because they are players management wanted but knew they wouldn't be able to select later.

why?   because they were planning on taking high ceiling, high $ demand players in those spots.  21 of the 30 picks so far are condidered highly talented, but tough signings.

key word........... TALENT

that is what we need, and it is what we are getting.

to the others that challenged me,

while true that the big club's record is unchanged, most else within club operations has.  this management group has not lied to us.

Mclouth was deemed a core player, but it was also stated that no one is untouchable.  where is the lie?

we spent a franchise record in LA last year and will do it again this year.   exactly what we were told.  where is the lie?

same with the draft.  franchise record last year and we'll spend a similar amount this year.  the difference is that we'll have more good players in this draft.  where is the lie?

so, yes virginia, things are different this time.

i implore you all to look deeper than the #4 pick.  you will see.

as for the blind guy,

get over yourself, no where in my context does my use of the word "blind" denegrate those with that disability.  do not ask me to feel sorry for you based on my language as you clearly do not feel sorry for yourself.   you are better than that.