Post-Gazette beat writers Dejan Kovacevic and Chuck Finder blog about the Pittsburgh Baseball Club.
Join the Pirates forum for more conversation.
Register to comment Guide to commenting
Firsties
I was watching the Packers play and Troy Aikman kept talking about the Pack not protecting the QB. He mentioned it several times then said"I hate to harp on this but".Then he proceeded to say "I hate to harp on this but"three more times after that.Talk about redundant!!The guy absolutely drives me up a wall.We all saw it,but I'm guessing he doesn't think so.Vin Scully drones on but Aikman is half his age and knows better.Sheesh!!Aikman needs to stick with Dallas.
How I do hope the Yankees can finish this thing in Philadelphia - rub it in their noses, right in their own house. The more big-spending franchises the Yankees can humiliate, the better the chances for meaningful change.
__________________________________________________
Freddy made the right move. The Pirates low-balled him, and he made the right move to call their bluff.
The Pirates know what the financial value of a player is, be it a 16 year-old prospect, or a 31 year-old veteran. It's their business to know. FC was baseball's man in that regard.
So, either the Pirates wanted Freddy, which means they (once again) failed to get their man, or
they don't know the financial value of their players, or
they didnt want him, and they purposely low-balled him, which means they're both cheap and deceitful with their employees.
I think #3 stacks up best.
You may now commence your "conspiracy theory" sarcasm.
Rule #1 of debate - if your opponent has a strong argument, ignore the subject at hand, and create a false caricature of your opponent's argument.
Or they see Freddy as beaking down by the uprise in injuries and want a player to play more than once in awhile.
Or the giants to save face like a many a person has said would over pay to prove they got something for Alderson.
Or the Pirates see the strike out numbers on the rise and to become a continued rally killing device od self destruction
Or Bob Smizek knows a little more about than you or me.
Or a big point you just may have missed or purposly ignored:
They would have kept him but at the reduced value that his recent playing had shown to be.
So, the Giants examined Freddy before they made this offer.
The Giants also examined Freddy before they traded for him and pronounced him well only to watch him gimp out the remainder of the season.
So, Or, The Giants overpayed for what could be a part time player.
HEAR YE HEAR YE
Next gathering Special Guest
Lou DePaoli
Executive Vice president and Director of Media Marketing
Date: December 5th.
Complete information to follow
JJ - very valid points. It wasn't a lowball offer. It was a fair one. Freddie freaked out and felt he was worth more (and maybe he would be if it were guaranteed he'd play more). He's fortunate Sabean didn't get fired, because no one else would have given him that kind of dough.
As for Aikman, I believe he's the proud owner of the following nugget, from a few weeks ago:
"Well, Joe. The Giants have had trouble with that for years and we're seeing it today, as we've seen for years. It's a long-standing problem for them, like today. So you're exactly right on that, there's no question, you're exactly right."
Exactly.
Morning Links
World Series Play by Ply--Yanks go up 3-1
scores.espn.go.com/.../playbyplay
For the Pirates, He's the Curse: ULowell's Mike LaValliere Pieced Together a Pretty Decent Career
www.americanchronicle.com/.../137195225
The Main Event: Waner brothers' baseball gloves
www.newsok.com/.../3413954
THE OFFICIALLY UNOFFICIAL PBC BLOGS AND MLB LINKS:
Bleacher Report--Sanchez's San Francisco Signing Shows Pirates What Might Have Been
bleacherreport.com/.../282364-sanchezs-san-francisco-signing-shows-pirates-what-might-have-been
Pirates Can't Learn Much From Phillies
www.bucsdugout.com/.../pirates-cant-learn-much-from
Sandlot Swashbucklers--Walker Homers, Machi Saves, Noris Homers
mvn.com/.../walker-homers-machi-saves-noris-homers.html
Raise the Jolly Roger-Winter Leagues Update: October
raisethejollyroger.com/.../winter-leagues-update-october
The Green Weenie--Colton "Billy" Cain
oldbucs.blogspot.com/.../colton-billy-cain.html
The Green Weenie-Evan Chambers
oldbucs.blogspot.com/.../evan-chambers.html
MLB Transactions
www.cbssports.com/.../transactions
Bucco Fans--Pittsburgh Pirates Top 50 Prospects: 25 - Trent Stevenson
www.buccofans.com/.../pittsburgh-pirates-top-50-prospects-25.html
Bucco Fans Wiki--Links to many things
buccofans.wikispaces.com
North Side Notch--Weekly Winter League Roundup
www.northsidenotch.com/.../weekly-winter-league-roundup.html
Pirate Winter League Stats
mlb.mlb.com/.../org.jsp
Vegas re Aikman: "Well, Joe. The Giants have had trouble with that for years and we're seeing it today, as we've seen for years. It's a long-standing problem for them, like today. So you're exactly right on that, there's no question, you're exactly right."
Perry Aikman?
No one works harder than JJ to make excuses for the PBC.
I'll give him that.
are we still debating Freddy? ok.
I don't want to overstate either side of the argument. Consider me a moderate on this. The offers by Ps and Gs, were relatively close: 2 years $10 M vs 2 years $12 M, and they werent bidding against each other so we dont know how close they may have ended up in a competitive bidding situation. I consider those two offers as setting the REASONABLE range of the market. IMO they were both in the reasonable range.
As noted, the Ps and Gs were NOT bidding against each other but were made independently at different times. Ps indicated a willingness to go a bit higher, but Freddy withdrew from the process. That's not blame, i don't see it as taking-marbles-going-home...it was a negotiating decision. it's just a fact, not whining.
Had the Ps actually been bidding NOW, and had they gone to $12 M (i dont think they would have gone that high but let's pretend)....Freddy would most likely STILL have taken the G's offer since they're a contender.
Sometimes there's a tendency in the asylum to take an issue and blow it up into armaggedon to prove or disprove a point about the front office. i'm just sayin', i don't think that fits in this case. i think it was a situation of reasonable offers by two teams at two distinct, different times, and a reasonable decision by the player.
Hos - re: offseason evaluation...just after you left for the treestand, i posted the following which you might not have seen:
"the gist of my idea is the rate EVERY move independently
eg, losing Perry gets a negative score, signing Garcia gets a positive score but not as high a positive as the negative for losing Hill. signing a not-so-hot L reliever gets a very small positive score, if L relief still open at Opener, the HOLE gets a bigger negative. if the Ps then sign a second more solid L reliever, that gets an independent, higher score. Signing a SOLID OF gets a BIG positive score, signing a SOLID 2B gets a BIGGER positive score because it's filling a bigger need, signing a SOLID 1B gets a big positive score but not quite as big as equal-bat-OF signing because Legend is stronger at 1B than OF. Then, on opening day, tabulate the positive and negative points and you have the score.
The BIG HOLE in my system is that EACH AND EVERY score is completely discretionary and open to constant debate/disagreement...see our earlier posts re: Blalock. What i liked about our Draft scale was that we pre-set criteria, which was how we ended up with only fractional difference in final grade.
BTW, whatever system we use, i think we should give MID-TERM grade on Opening Day - since it's just impressional at that point - and FINAL grade at some point in season where we have enuff time in to judge, say All Star Break."
i think the last paragraph is most meaningful (two scores, immediate and final) since i can't see how to make the "independent scale" anything but completely discretionary.
Not gonna have time to discuss now...have to run...maybe early evening or tomorrow morning.
Carry on.
Drew,
Sorry I didn't get back to you Saturday or Sunday regarding the off season evaluation process. - Tried to spend as much time as possible outdoors both days.
Anyway, here's where I am at....
1. I definitely like the idea of evaluating the off season, much like we did the draft.
2. I would like to partner with you in the off season evaluation process.
3. I agree with the priorities you established:
1. 2B
2. OF or 1B w/ power. (Probably should be RH by the way)
3. LH Relief
4. Starter
4. But here is the rub......for over a decade now this club has continued to invest in short term, 1 yr stop gap, fill out the roster so we can play out MLB's 162 game schedule type talent instead of attempting to building a winner by investing in worthwhile players. - And frankly, I resent it. A lot. So while I agree completely that 2B, and OF power, and lefty relief, and another starter are all obvious needs, I am sick and tired of signing yet another round of 1 yr wonders, in most, if not all cases risk type players coming off a bad season or injuries. This crap of "oh let's sign Ankiel and if he works out, we can trade him" as DK suggested in one of his chats or Q & A's has got to stop. I am sick and tired of Joe Randa, Sean Casey, Jeromy Burnitz, Luis Rivera, Chris Gomez, Doug Mientkiewicz, Ramon Vasquez, Eric Hinske, Craig Monroe, Jason Michaels, Masumi Kuwata, Shawn Chacon, Victor Santos, Mike Edwards, etc, etc, etc.....
One, these players are a waste of money given the clubs full fledged commitment to rebuilding. All any player like this would be is a 1 year roster filler and frankly, I resent this ongoing practice of the PBC. I realize all clubs rotate out a handfull of players on their roster year in and year out, but not to the degree the PBC does, and certainly not with significant needs year in and year out like the PBC does.
I've had enough.
I would much rather the club save the money they would spend on 1 yr wonders and instead sign more than 23 amateur draft picks, or sign a Latin American prospect like Sano.
So with all that said, and my extreme disdain for the kind of players the PBC usually employs to fill the priorities you identified, I am wondering if we can build in some kind of criteria that reflects poor performance based on the kind of player and kind of contract the club puts in place into the overall criteria? For instance, if they sign an Ankiel, or Greene, or Blalock, to a 1 yr rent-a-player we'll trade him July if he has a good season or let him walk at the end of the season if he sticks with us kind of deal, that should reflect poorly on the off season performance.
Another thing that should be a poor reflection is if they fill major gaps with last ditch chance kinds of solutions like they did with Craig Monroe last season.
If they fill the 2B or OF needs with a player that hit .220 and we're hoping he can turn it around.....that should be another penalty to the off season evaluation.
End of the day, my preference is this.....either 1) Remain committed to the rebuilding process and not waste money on 1 yr roster filler wonders, or 2) Attract a good player and sign him to 3 or 4 years and be a player that can be part of the rebuilding process. - One who can help provide leadership to the young prospects the Pirates will be employing over the next several seasons is not going to provide any kind of leadership to the McCutchen's, and Tabatas, and Alvarezs, when they get here. They need a veteran rock. Like Stargell was to Parker. I think we will be doing Pedro Alvarez a huge disjustice and possibly bury him with undo pressure if come the day her arrives in Pittsburgh, he is expected to carry this club. That limitation of support will ultimately fail IMO.
If this club is going to fill the gaps, do it with good players who will be around for 3 or 4 seasons and provide not only production but good veteran leadership, or don't fill the gaps at all.
Hope that makes sense to you and can be incorporated into the off season evaluation process.
Let me know what you think.
Thanks.
Because here is the thing.....a series of 1 yr declining veterans streaming in and out of the clubhouse
Hos - that helps. I think there are ways we can merge our thoughts but i have to run now. Will give it more thought then we can talk later.
"they don't know the financial value of their players"
CG, does this apply to every team that has their contract offer rejected by a player?
And if 4 teams are bidding on a free agent, does that mean the 3 teams that lose out on that player don't know the financial value of the player?
Because of his age and history of injuries I think there is a certain gamble in signing Freddie to a multi-year contract , especially for a team that can't afford bad contracts. But I do wish they would have signed him. I didn't their offer was way out of line and I don't think the Giants' offer was way out of line.
i forgot to add to my Freddy-Not Freddy rant...
...Therefore, imo it was NEITHER a situation of PBC being cheap or stupid (they were in reasonable range), NOR a situation of PBC being smart because Freddy was breaking down, a strikeout king, older than dirt, etc etc. imho, and no insult intended to anyone, but either extreme of these arguments risks overstating facts to fit a predetermined opinion.
enjoy the day...i'll catch up on the erudite commentary in the evening.
Juicy rumor: Ogden newspapers shutting down after Thanksgiving. Just a rumor. Very interesting and would explain every single move by the FO. Every one was a salary dump. Shocking isn't it?
Srsly.
"Therefore, imo it was NEITHER a situation of PBC being cheap or stupid ......"
I think it was a situation of being more committed to a undetermined future.
They chose not to retain and extend a good second baseman and instead traded him for a pretty decent AA prospect in hopes of being positioned to compete at some point in the future, a timeframe in which the PBC front office refuses to pinpoint so they can avoid being held accountable for as long as possible.
"We don't have a definitive answer but, at the same time, we're not saying it's 2015," Neal Huntington - June 16, 2009
In other words, I won't go on record and state a timeframe or year because then I'll be hold accountable.
But until we reach this nebulous time, I reserve the right to dumb down the major league product all I want.
Demery -
JJ will somehow turn the newpaper rumor into Nutting saving the world..... just wait.
JJ - you really are amazing how you find new, previously unimagionable ways to twist facts to make the FO seem like heros. Your response to George was quite a work of art. well done.
Where's our free pizza FRANKIE?
Mr. Demery,
Are you serious? - Where did you hear that rumor?
Every one one of the Ogden publications? - All the newspapers and magazines?
Wow, that would be huge and would explain everything.
They'd be in a position to make the PBC and Seven Springs their livelihoods.
"No one works harder than JJ to make excuses for the PBC."
No one works harder than NuttingHostage/Demery44 to attack people that disagree with him.
Demery
Won't psost all the stats but please do some research before posting blanket statements. Burnett and Morgan for Hanrahan and Milledge a salary dump? Not a math major but how does trading a $408, 000 and a $411,000 salary for a $420,000 and a $452,000 salary make a salary dump?
BFD
I knew why you had a pizza avatar, I was asking if it was just a pepperoni pizza or had other items on it :)
Demery,
Which players were salary dumps? The only players that were not in the final year of their contracts were Snell & Gorzo --I think. And Freddie and Jack had club options.
Would you have been in favor of holding on to those players and finish with a losing season again?
BFD, thank you.
More seriously though, please point out one item that is twisted?
I did not make up the theory that the giants would sign him just because they gave so much up for him, heck, i do not follow minor leaguers so i have not a clue what they gave up.
I did not make up the idea that the giants did in fact examine him before the trade, that was well written about by DK.
Fact is Freddy did have injury issues prior to the trade and they got worse after the trade.
Fact is freddy has increased his strikeouts with men on base this past year.
fact is that i di not even bring up was his wild swinging at balls way out of the strike zone was widely discussed here.
Fact is that Bob Smizek did say that the offer was fair.
As Drew points out the Pirates and Giants were not that far off with their offers.
Oh by the way, you never did provise the evidence that Carlos is not qualified to be a major league infield instructor.
Whine whine whine, again.
JAL,
"Won't psost all the stats but please do some research before posting blanket statements. Burnett and Morgan for Hanrahan and Milledge a salary dump? Not a math major but how does trading a $408, 000 and a $411,000 salary for a $420,000 and a $452,000 salary make a salary dump?"
Oh my goodness. Please.
They purged payroll from $51M down to $29M.
Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees.
jaL -
Just pepperoni :)
JJ -
I responded yesterday to you wishes... aparently you decided to ignore it to make it seem as though the PBC was correct again.
Hoss and Drew -
I understand you wanting to perform the accessment exercise (for fun), but to judge this FO and their moves, one only needs to look at the MLB product. It stinks.... the MLB product is all that matters.... not what the back up 2nd baseman in single A is doing (as many others on here like to point to)
------------
The payroll dropped by 30 million... major dumping occured (besides Nutting dumping all over the fans)
"Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees."
Hostage/Demery,
You made the statement. Now you won't back it up.
Hostage
I am aware of that -Demery posted that "every single move was a salary dump" and that was what I responded to to with specific data on one move that was clearly not a salary dump. Point counterpoint on a specific point. Has nothing to do with the greater picture.
Point counterpoint, or nonsensical nit picking?
End of the day, the club that has endured a record 17 consecutive losing seasons, and 3 consective last place finishes cut it's payroll 43%.
Wow, you really showed BFD.
21 wrote you made the statement, now you can not back it up. Well, he almost said that.
www.youtube.com/watch
Out of curiosity, why not explore the rumor that Ogden Publications are in some kind of financial duress instead of pointing out perhaps the single trade Neal has made in 2 years that could not be characterized as a salary dump?
Again....not seeing the forest for the trees.
But you know.....whatever helps you sleep at night.
That is classical logic--If someone says all or every and there is one counter example the claim falls. Claim data warrant--in this case the data fails to support the claim. That is not nit-picking.
An extremely interesting story on ESPN insider yesterday...
The report is that with the downward correction in free agent salaries that we've seen, there are many players who are arbitration eligible that would get higher salaries through arbitration than they would get on the open free agent market.
These players are now non-tender candidates because of this disparity. ESPN is saying there could be 93 players non-tendered.
------------------------------------------------------
On mlbtraderumors.com...
> If the final number comes close to that, nearly 300 players will be looking for a new team this offseason, vastly deflating the asking price for most free agents.
>Olney names two non-tender candidates in detail, in J.J. Hardy and Bobby Jenks:
------------------------------------------------------------
So, it looks like the price for JJ Hardy might be a good bit lower than Zach Duke after all.
Also, there was a rumor that the Pirates are wanting to approach Zach Duke about a contract extension to lock him up though the beginning of his free agency years. No word on whether he would be interested, though.
"why not explore the rumor that Ogden Publications are in some kind of financial duress "
I did. They're not.
I did a search and on Ogden Publications and did not find anything on that though it would not not surprise me as newspaper revenues are falling like a rock. $2 billion in the 3rd quarter which is an 18.1% decline
I call it classic nitpicking.
Overlook the far bigger and compelling topic for a minor, meaningless detail.
They cut the payroll 43%. - In the grand scheme of things, Demery is spot on.
But like I said....if that is what help's you sleep at night then go at it.
"They cut the payroll 43%. - In the grand scheme of things, Demery is spot on.
But like I said....if that is what help's you sleep at night then go at it."
I having two registrations on this board for the purpose of agreeing with yourself helps you to sleep at night, then go at it.
I googled it too and didn't find anything.....
But like you said, it hardly would be a big surprise given the current state and likely future of the newspaper industry.
I just can't see them shutting it all down though.....
It is certainly an interesting topic though if there is any validity to the rumor......
I am not the one who who used "every". It may be meaningless to you but cogent argument is meaningful to me. Has nothing to do with any picture, just whether the warrant and data support the claim.
>End of the day, the club that has endured a record 17 consecutive losing seasons, and 3 consective last place finishes cut it's payroll 43%. Again....not seeing the forest for the trees.
NutHo, the fact is that almost every major position player on the 2008 team was going to be a free agent after 2009, and there were absolutely no replacements for them in the minors.
THAT is the DESERT that you are not seeing coming up out of the forest.
How do YOU expect that the PBC was going to solve that mystery? If the Pirates had had good drafts and there were replacements for even HALF of those players plus some good pitching coming down the pike, then the situation might have been different.
It was absolutely imperative to start again. And when you do that, your payroll is going to be less - not because the players are WORTH less, but simply because they are PAID less.
There is a huge difference. Once these same players play year or two more, they will automatically be making more money, regardless of even whether they are worth that or not.
LOW PAYROLL DOES NOT EQUAL LOW VALUE.
JAL -
would you agree, that the net result of all of the "trades" was a large drop in salary? That is the point. You or anyone else can argue that one of the trades was not a dump, but the net result from ALL of these was infact a huge dump (on all of the fans) in salary.
We should be asking where Demery hear this rumor. There's obviously no trace of it on the net, so Demery must have an inside source. So, please come clean or there's no point in even thinking about it.
MARK and others -
I have asked this and stated in numerous times and the "pro-nutters" never respond.
For the sake of argument, lets say the 2010 payroll is 30 million. This is 25 million less than 2009's begining payroll. what is Nutting doing with this 25 million? If he said he was going to have a pathetic payroll for 2 years and in 2011 bankroll the 25 million in savings x 2 = 50 million and add that to the 2011 payroll, I could swallow this.... This is not what happens. He pockets the money calling it rebuilding.
21,
"I having two registrations on this board for the purpose of agreeing with yourself helps you to sleep at night, then go at it."
If being a pathological liar and barking pathetic baseless lies helps you sleep at night, go at it.
DK commented a few weeks ago that someone has duplicate registrations.....he knows who it is and he knows it isn't me.
Since you are so concerned with the matter, why don't you take it up with DK and ask that he take action on the matter?
Oh wait, that's not your style though is it.....it would impede to continue to lie about the matter......
"LOW PAYROLL DOES NOT EQUAL LOW VALUE."
Now that right there is funny, I don't care who you are.
NuttingHostage,
You are Demery44.
NutHo, if you believe that the amount a team spends on payroll equals the amount of value gotten from those players, then you must believe the Pirates will never play over .500 baseball.
It's almost impossible to see the Pirates ever having a payroll over league average, which logically means .500 ball.
Is this what you believe?
Yes, the overall effect was a significant drop in salary.
Mark -
"It's almost impossible to see the Pirates ever having a payroll over league average, which logically means .500 ball"
--------
I know this comment wasn't directed directly at me, but I thought I'd answer
Yes. This is my believe with the current Owner and FO lackeys I do not believe they will ever reach their magical .500 mark
Morning Mates, good tidings
Regarding rebuilding and trading and all of that, I have no problem with a 30 million payroll, if that is what it is, next year. I would much rather see that than us signing stopgap guys as has been noted, a one and done bunch.
I have no problem (now anyways, not then) with them trading JW and Freddy, I think it would have been wiser had we kept them, as I don't think we got a heck of a lot for either of them. Same with Grabow.
Its just kinda odd, we trade our 2B and all of our left handers, now two of our needs are??
Expect - hope, 2012-2013, till then, its going to be ugly
PS, I am not taking sides here, just saying what I think. Spending 20 million over the winter on FAs is not going to get this club to respectability, and I don't think good ones would come here right now
"I have asked this and stated in numerous times and the "pro-nutters" never respond."
BFD,
I have pointed out to you several times that the Brewers didn't spend until after they went 81-81 and you don't respond.
"Since you are so concerned with the matter, why don't you take it up with DK and ask that he take action on the matter?"
I did take it up with DK and no, I didn't ask nor do I want action on the matter.
BFD, then why waste your time?
I think instead of "Morning/Afternoon Baseball Talk" the thread names should be changed to "The Business of Baseball Talk All Day - Everyday"
I just don't see why everyone is always so concerned with payroll. They could spend $130 million and end up in the same place (ala the Mets) or they could spend $50 million and end up in a WS (last years Rays). IMO it has no bearing on how this team will do. The players are the ones that are going to be playing the games, not their paychecks.
Can someone explain to me the point of hashing and rehashing the same grievances everyday?
How many of us have had 1-on-1 conversations with the following (not fan group get-togethers, actual sit down 1-on-1, you and the below people)?
1a) Robert Nutting
1b) Ogden Nutting
2) Neal Huntington
3) Frank Coonelly
I'm gonna go with there are maybe 2 or 3 posters that have done this. 1 being DK, 1 being Chuck, and maybe Colin Dunlap (if you have and I am wrong, please correct me). Since we haven't been able to sit down and get their real and true thoughts (and even then, do we really know?) why do we speculate on that all Bob Nutting does is sit in a room and count $100 bills?
And I'm pretty sure many in here are in the wrong line of work. I'm pretty sure that there's 10-15 baseball GM minds going to waste here.
Here's a link: http://www.monster.com/
Please post your resume.
The point of my rant is, everyday, the same argument gets made: Everything that this club does is to be cheap. My challenge to the regular posters is to evaluate everything from a strictly baseball standpoint (not a business standpoint).
If you do that, and then cannot see a valid baseball motive behind the decision you are questioning, then go nuts, cry wolf, call conspiracy.
"NuttingHostage, You are Demery44."
You are a pathological liar.
Tell you what you do.......why don't you express your concern to DK and ask him to look into it.
Oh wait.....that won't work because that would confirm you are a liar and what fun would that be right?
See my previous post which you obviously missed.
21st - my response to the Brewers is GOOD FOR THEM....... we ain't gonna be them the way this ship is run
-----
JJ - I wonder why I waste my time often. More than anything, my response is because I try to show the other side of the sunshine and rainbows people such as yourself try to paint here.
Roberto - said
"My challenge to the regular posters is to evaluate everything from a strictly baseball standpoint (not a business standpoint). "
This is not able to be doen my friend since Bob has made this about business... not baseball.
also
"why do we speculate on that all Bob Nutting does is sit in a room and count $100 bills?
----
I don't think he counts the money.... When the paint fumes from the bobble heads becomes too much for one of the young foreign children to handle, Bob gives them a slight reprieve by letting them work the money counter for a few days.... Bob just supervices this.
" 'LOW PAYROLL DOES NOT EQUAL LOW VALUE.'
Now that right there is funny, I don't care who you are." - NuttingHostage
=================================
(all monetary values and standings were obtained from ESPN.com)
Mets 2009 payroll: $145,367,987
Mets 2009 division finish: 4th (70-92)
playoffs?: No
Tigers 2009 payroll: $119,160,145
Tigers 2009 division finish: 2nd (86-77)
White Sox 2009 payroll: $100,598,500
White Sox 2009 division finish: 3rd (79-83)
Mariners 2009 payroll: $112,053,666
Mariners 2009 division finish: 3rd (85-77)
Cubs 2009 payroll: $134,058,500
Cubs 2009 division finish: 2nd (83-78)
Astros 2009 payroll: $102,996,414
Astros 2009 division finish: 5th (74-88)
All of the above teams spent over $100 million and didn't make the playoffs (3 out of 6 finished with losing records).
THAT is funny.
I don't care who you are.
If he said he was going to have a pathetic payroll for 2 years and in 2011 bankroll the 25 million in savings x 2 = 50 million and add that to the 2011 payroll, I could swallow this.... This is not what happens.
=============================================
BFD - Of course, I myself can not answer what it is exactly that they would do with this money. However, there are basically 3 things they could do.
1. Pay down debt on the club. This would increase Nutting's value and in essence provide him profit way down the road if he should sell. Since there's no indication he is going to sell soon, this also would enable the Pirates to temporarily borrow money in the future in case they wanted to temporarily raise payroll above where revenue alone would allow. This would be in essence just like #2 for that reason.
2. Save it for later. At some point if they are successful in building a cheap competitive team, those players won't be cheap anymore. This situation will start to happen as escalating salaries from their core players climb in arbitration. Look at Tampa Bay - their payroll increased $20M each of the last 2 years. The Pirates I'm sure are hoping attendance rises as they become a competitive team, but will attendance keep pace with payroll, or will there need to be a cushion in case there's a lag? You can bet the safe thing is to create a cushion into the system to take care of this. $20M or even $40M is not really an enormous amount of money when dealing with those kinds of intangibles. For example, Tampa Bay has been very disappointed their attendance did not rise more after their WS appearance last year. On the other hand, the Brewers were able to raise their attendance substantially over a period of time.
3. Pocket the money. Nutting could just live off Pirate fans' misery and smoke Cubans all day as he laughs sinisterly.
========================================
OK, which is most likely? As I've said, #1 and #2 are basically the same option. If you have a mortgage and you pay off a big chunk of it, that enables you to save the interest for that period of time and then re-borrow money when you need it later.
#3 would run into problems with MLB most likely, as teams that benefit from revenue sharing must show they are putting the money back into the clubs.
As I've shown before, there are many precedents for lowering payroll substantially during a rebuilding process. It happens all the time. And yes, the fans of those teams then scream that the owner is greedy, etc.
But I choose to look at the history of those moves and see it as a legitimate strategy that builds a cushion of economic security for the team while their prospects turn into good players.
Of course, if the FO's moves don't pan out and they draft poorly and none of the prospects turn out to be players, then there's a real problem and you have to do it all over again.
But that has nothing to do with whether the strategy itself is legitimate.
"21st - my response to the Brewers is GOOD FOR THEM....... we ain't gonna be them the way this ship is run"
You're completely ignoring the point. Whether or not it's intentional, I don't know.
I guess NuttingHostage/Demery44 went to have his gasket replaced.
Its a real good thing Nurse Ratchett took all the sharp instruments away from us a few days ago, especially today.
There was an earlier post regarding possibly trying to sign Duke to an extension. Any thoughts on length and $$?
Is there anyone else we should be thinking about sigining to an extension? I'm not sure who all is arbitration eligible, except for Duke and Capps
Re: Signing Duke to an extension
That's a tough one. He pitched well this year, but there were many times that we saw that 2008 Zach Duke come out (especially down the stretch).
I like a 4 year/$18 million extension for Zach. This way, it does give stability to the rotation (at least somewhat) as many of the new young arms get seasoned in the minors (Zach von Rosenburg, Colton Cain, etc.). Also, if they do look to trade him (in a year or 2 when some of the younger arms are ready), I think a contract of an avg. of $4.5 million/year is reasonable and wouldn't be a hindrance in getting a deal done (as it wsa with Jack and Freddy).
I think the best thing would be for Zach to pitch well to get his trade value up. IMO, he wont be here when (if?) this team turns that corner.
MArk -
I am going with #3. Add drinking scotch while blowing the smoke in childrens faces to the senerio too....
Add drinking scotch while blowing the smoke in childrens faces to the senerio too....
You ever see Terminator 2? It'd be like when the guy blows the cigar smoke in Arnold's face in the beginning.
HAHAHHAHAHA. Too good thinking about that.
I hate to get away from all this stupid payroll talk, I mean, if we get to 400mil, then payroll might be something to talk about, otherwise, we and nobody else can pay the dollars the Yanks do, if the amount of payroll determines how much of a winner you are going to be, we will never win a WS and neither will anyone else, we will have to find another way to win.
As for Duke, I think they will try to sign him for the rest of his arb years and 1 year of FA, I would say 4-5mil a year for the next 3 years with a club option and give a 500 thousand buyout to Duke.
>I am going with #3.
BFD - I figured you would. And I'm going to wait until I see some evidence before I think Nutting is doing that.
Like I have shown before, there's no evidence - NONE - that Nutting is any cheaper than any of the other MLB owners.
Mark
________________________
I guess some people have to blame somebody and he is as good a target as anyone. Too bad people can't just look at the product and determine from there what needs to be done to improve it without going off the deep end.
Since I would have done what Nutting and the rest of his front office have done, I have no room to complain, I think we are going in the right direction, with some bumps in the road, but with some very good acquisitions along the way also.
Payroll = value
Pat Meares = Most Valuable SS in Pirate History
Matt Morris = Best Pitcher in Pirate History
Derek Bell = Salary dump
NH -- who gave you the gullible pills today? Stop drinking that kool-aid. You know, earlier, a couple weeks or so ago, I advocated everything you and Drew agreed was necessary to a successful off season, and then you go and contradict everything you've said with a silly shot in the dark like that.
Even you, should recognize that a player's value visa-vis wins and losses has to do with WHAT HE DOES ON THE FIELD and not how much the players union and agents can extort for his services.
Next thing you know you'll be joining BFD in the (pardon me Baywatch for giving an old expression a new meaning) pizza wars.
And speaking of gullible, is Demery ever going to divulge the source of his rumor? Or does he have BFD and NH jumping onto an invisible bandwagon?
Come on...... do you really believe "there's no evidence - NONE - that Nutting is any cheaper than any of the other MLB owners."
---------
Look at the payroll.......CASE CLOSED!
Roberto -
Terminator 2 - that is what I am picturing......
Good stuff.
JHadar -
Don't make me have to give you a verbal smack down!
Isn't it amazing with all the talented players on the field between the Yanks and Phils that these games have come down to one guy.........................Rivera, take him away from the Yanks and I would not be afraid to bet the Phils win this series.
Father Hadar,
Thought we had yinz on Saturday, but the boys in cream and crimson got a little tired, good news is we get to return the favor on the court later. LOL
After watching the blood-letting between NuHo/Demery and WDIGTSR /21, I am glad that I am not in their cross hairs. However, it pans out I am firmly in both of their respective positions. I mean it is still off-season. That is why they call it "off". Value is determined by how much YOU are willing to pay. Ergo, inherent value is something everybody will DISAGREE on.So please just say no.
NuHo/Demery44 if that is your real name, I think you started as PAMT, and are somehow related to uncle dirt. *wink*
Please pick on somebody your own age/size/weight and leave the wee ones alone
Finally to my good friend "B" may I please have a piece of the pie that Frank should have bought but didn't because he is too cheap.
This just in: The source of the Biblical plagues has been traced to the corrupt regime of the pharaohs, and NEW data traces their royal line to the Ogden Nutting family in WVa.
leadoff -
Exactly. It's not like we're all saying the Pirates are a great team and just need to wait until all their players mature. I don't know of anyone who is saying NH has done everything perfectly right and nothing could be improved upon.
BFD << a verbal smack down >>
Your style is your own. If you can't think, yell and threaten.
>Look at the payroll.......CASE CLOSED!
BFD - I have shown that the Pirates' usual payroll - which is in the $55M range - is actually right where they should fall given their revenue position.
So, in fact, your point is ridiculous. It's like saying someone who works at McDonald's is cheap because they drive a second hand Chevy.
If the Pirates go into the season with a payroll of under $40M, it will be a short term issue, so until it becomes something that we see hampering their acquisition of players long term, it is not a valid point.
Mark -- off topic, but I can't asp.net to install on a vista workstation, any ideas?
Their final payout for the MLB roster last season was way below 55 million. 2010's will be way short of your 55 million as well.
The payroll should actually be 75-85 million when taking into consideration the wefare money recieved.
Good afternoon Indiana -
You are more than welcome to a piece of the pie..... I am not greedy or cheap. Pizza for all!
"This just in: The source of the Biblical plagues has been traced to the corrupt regime of the pharaohs, and NEW data traces their royal line to the Ogden Nutting family in WVa."
NOW THAT IS FUNNY(probably true)...I DON'T CARE WHO YOU ARE.
I don't know of anyone who is saying NH has done everything perfectly right and nothing could be improved upon.
____________________
Unfortunately when there is a bump in the road it is major snafu by the FO on this blog site, things kind of get overblown IMO.
Mark,
Please do not make the mistake of using logic against NuHo and his minions (smary sidekicks), they do not understand progression of facts. I figure it is OK to pile on today as there has been no Steeler football for 7 days and it makes one weak.
I say we go after the following FA's
NOBODY
JH--<not how much the players union and agents can extort for his services>
Sounds like the other side of the coin to the Nutting is the root of all evil.
There seem to be plenty of people who think that the good old days were when the players had no bargaining power and the owners could pay them whatever they wanted because of the "reserve clause." Heaven forbid there be relatively equal bargaining power.
Guess what, mateys, the Yanks were winning then, too, because they had more money than everyone else and were willing to spend it.
If payroll doesn't equal value, there is no need for a salary cap.
IF -- The last couple of weeks have been rough on Indiana fans, my take is the Hawks came alive in the middle of the third quarter -- but a case might be made for the Hoosiers folding.
You're probably right about basketball -- although the Hoosiers have not been themselves in the post-Knight era. Iowa's basketball program has been in chaos since the end of the Tom Davis era. Alford seemed like a good guy, but fielded teams without much character. Licklighter lost all the Alford-era talent, and hasn't been able to recruit BIg-10 talented guys who like his system (those guys all seem to turn up at Wisconsin.)
I'll go with you on price/value provided we are talking in relation to payroll, not in relation to W-L. That won't happen until MLB puts its financial house in order with a salary cap/floor. I'd add that value is an individual perception -- that's why antique dealers go to garage sales.
You are using some incredibly faulty logic.
The fact that the players traded were paid more than the players received does not equate to a guilty verdict against the FO for salary dumping. I do agree that it is enough for an investigation and/or indictment...but it doesn't begin to prove them guilty of a salary dump verdict.
The facts of the matter are this:
1. There have been a decade + of horrible drafting leaving the minor league system barren of any real talent
2. The current major league team consisted of a majority of players that were impending or within a year of free agents
3. There is only one way to fix #1 in a rapid fashion
4. The end result of #3 will also result in a lower major league payroll
5. You cannot categorically state that your viewpoint is any more valid than mine
And for the record -
JAL is correct. If you or even NuHo want to make the claim that EVERY trade was a dump and even a single one is clearly not, then your statement is categorically wrong. No ifs, ands or buts about it.
__________________________
What will 75-85 win you? Since payroll equals value, your still 350mil behind the evil empire and going nowhere.
Even if you go to 75-85mil, you are getting what the evil empire is letting you have, the left overs.
Possibly Nutting is not the problem, possibly talent evaluation and the willingness to spend on young talent is the way to go.
I might add that Nutting has not pulled the strings back for any young talent since he took total control of the organization in 2007.
Good afternoon all. I'm sorry to see the same old arguement today when you would thing there would be some excitement over this report of the pending nontendered. I for one was not looking forward to the upcoming free agency period because of the lack of players at positions of need to the club. With this report we could all be speculating on who will become available that fit the teams needs. I did already see JJ Hardys name mensioned, and I know he has been mensioned in trade disguessions on this blog before. What about Hermedia? Who will be nontendered? Let's get away from the same old stuff, or is it easier to revert to the same familiar harpings. If so just start copping and pasting your arguements, if that's not whats already happening.
Terr
Let's get away from the same old stuff, or is it easier to revert to the same familiar harpings.
__________________
It is hard to get away from the same old stuff because some people have one track minds and can only talk about the same old stuff.
There is a lot to talk about besides money.
So Father Hadar it seems that the Pirates need to go to the MLB version of the garage sale.
Or the other side will tell you that the Pirates of the last 2 years have been the garage sale. Getting rid of all of our unwanted and worthless junk.
Tell NH to go to Steinbrenner's yard and look for castoffs (Ohlendorf is a prime example).
Indiana
He doesn't have the name "Dumpster Diver Neal" for nothing.
I wonder who's dumpster he is in now. He has been into the Mariners dumpster lately.
Indiana--I agree with you on the FO's. I disagree that the "other side," if by that you mean the anti-FOers, would take the position that the Pirates were getting rid of their unwanted and worthless junk. Quite the contrary, the pro-FOers have been the ones devaluing what was given away as worthless and unwanted (for example, being close to free agency makes any player worthless).
"BFD - I have shown that the Pirates' usual payroll - which is in the $55M range "
Check this out.....this is a skill I just learned from JAL this morning. Something about claim, data, warrant. - It's curious though that JAL did not elect to claim, data, warrant this particular comment?.
If by "usual" you mean not even once. ....then sure.
That is hardly their "usual" payroll. - In fact, they've never once opened a season with a team payroll that high.
Here is a list of the PBC opening day payrolls since 2001 according to figures published by the Associated Press....
01 - $52M
02 - $42M
03 - $54M
04 - $32M
05 - $38M
06 - $46M
07 - $38M
08 - $48M
09 - $48M
Notes:
With the exception of 2007, the season ending payroll actually ended up much smaller following mid season salary dumps such as 2009 when it ended the year at $25M following the salary dumps of McLouth, Sanchez, Wilson, LaRoche, Grabow, etc.
There is absolutely nothing "usual" about the Pirates spending $55M.
What was it JAL said this morning?
"Won't psost all the stats but please do some research before posting blanket statements."
Whatever that means?
You tell him JAL.
"I have shown that the Pirates' usual payroll - which is in the $55M range"
Oh wait, let me try Zisk's method .....
You are using some incredibly faulty data.
Arriba -- Okay, guilty of a little hyperbole with the use of "extort" -- but no I am not one of those folks who want to return to the days of the reserve clause -- nonetheless, I do feel strongly that the pendulum has swung too far the other way.
The financial disparity in baseball is obvious. And it affects the quality of teams. Admittedly, a few poorer teams can overcome the odds at times -- but there is a strong correlation between money spent and W-L.
<< If payroll doesn't equal value, there is no need for a salary cap >> Only in the most absolute sense of the statement -- but we have a system where a player is under the reserve clause for six years and then his "value" becomes a thousand or so percent of what it was the year before. Also, baseball has a system of multi-year contracts that was originally designed to compensate for the loss of control of the reserve clause, but has resulted in paying players not to play for years at a time like Bobby Hill, Pat Meares, and Matt Morris.
Something I have been kicking around in my head for some time is a cap on total spending. There would be a floor for spending at the Major league level, but the celing would be for total spending.
Fix the draft and incorporate the international signings into that. If the big spending teams decide to spend up to the limit at the top level they will be hand cuffing themselves in the draft. Teams at the lower end of the spectrum would gain an advantage come draft day.
You would have to forget about any kind of slotting system. Wouldn't it be great come draft day when the Yanks only have a fraction of there budget to work with. It would probably open up a lot more free agents for the smaller clubs too.
My apology but I can't be here every minute. Blanket statement means one that covers all--example--Bixler strikes out every at bat, Capps blows every save, the Pirates never win a game.
As for the payroll, you handled it very well so you did not need me :)
AW,
Please do not read much into what i write (type) I usually am being the rebel and post the exact opposite of what is being discussed, and you as always are right it is the pro crowd, as opposed to the evening crowd, that is undervaluing the players. On the flip side, the anti's usually speak only of a certain threshold that they wish to be met as far as the lowest possible amount of money that will give us the best chance of winning, IMHO they are both right and both wrong, but it is pure unadulterated pride that makes all of them unable to admit that the other side does have a point.
The anonymity of blogging makes that possible and certain, however if we were to all meet in a a dark alley behind an Isley's nobody would show up.
"You are using some incredibly faulty data."
NuttingHostage/Demery,
Remember when you said Jack never had more than 20 errors in the minors to further an argument?
This was the part that confused me...."psost".
You can count on me having your back in pointing out the faulty blanket statements such as $55M payrolls being "usual".
;-)
that confused me too :)
ants marching======================================
NoHu - I used 55 million as the figure becasue I see that number tossed around here often by the nutters as the payroll. It was more just to make a point about how far "their number" Nutting actually is spending
-------------
That being said, those are some pitiful payroll numbers NoHu posted. there is no defense of this! inexcuseable.... although I am certain some will find a way to do so.
NuHo so nice to see you and JAL playing nice, it warms this old mans heart to see you mature into a fine young lad.
Hope you can sense the sarcasm, but if not you can always have your alter ego answer for you *wink*
WHAT? WE CAN'T POST IN THE OLD THREAD ANYMORE?
FINE!
It's been awhile....I couldn't resist.
Where's JosePagan been?
"you can always have your alter ego answer for you *wink*
Indiana,
You're such a pathological liar.
JHader - are you installing .net studio? Is it a 64 bit version of Vista?
Sometimes what the team will spend also depends on what it's fan base will spend or the projections of what it's fan base will spend.
Of course with all the numbers that are thrown around here, a projection of what the fan base will spend is not one of those numbers. I would not be afraid to bet the Pirates have such a number.
Possibly in one of the arguments for more spending one might include the numbers that an 85mil payroll might mean as overall income figures for the PBC. I am not just talking about attendance, I am talking about all revenue streams.
That would justify or not justify an argument about spending more money.
After all isn't baseball still a business for every team first?