2016 MLB Regular-Season Thread

[JC]

No, you're missing the point. What I'm saying is his impending free agency motivated the move. If the Pirates had control, say by signing him to an extension, they wouldn't have traded him. They didn't want to risk losing him as a free agent, so the financial situation drove the need to trade him and weaken the team for 2016.

Signing a closer long term has worked well for so many teams.

Oops brilliance, team 3 games over 500 should trade prospects for rentals.

I'm glad you can say with such certainty that the trade has cost them the playoffs.

 

[LongTimeListener]

The Pirates knew they were going nowhere even if they did sneak into a wild card spot, which they were a long shot to do. They didn't have the depth to make any kind of run.

The 2014 Giants are a terrible comparison. The Giants controlled a playoff spot the whole second half of the season, the only question was whether it would be wild card or division. They coasted the final month, especially the final two weeks after the Dodgers swept them, and willingly yielded wild card home-field advantage so they could line up Bumgarner pitch that game. They were an 88-win team but could have gotten to 92 easily if it mattered. They also had a proven championship lineup and bullpen.

The Pirates holding on to the playoffs would be like a 4-7 team keeping the journeyman QB in instead of the rookie. You might pull off a miracle and get one playoff game, but who the fork cares?

 

[outofplace]

Signing a closer long term has worked well for so many teams.

Oops brilliance, team 3 games over 500 should trade prospects for rentals.

I'm glad you can say with such certainty that the trade has cost them the playoffs.

I never said that. I said that trade was one part of the approach that has them under .500 when they had a contending team. I have stated this often enough and clearly enough that I can only imagine you are intentionally misrepresenting my point of view because you can't win on the evidence.

The Pirates spent the offseason cutting payroll. They lost three members of the starting rotation in the offseason and their key addition was Jon Niese, and even that trade actually saved them money. They also lost two members of what had been one of the best bullpens in the major leagues last season and two every-day players in the lineup.

They overcame that to be in the race at the trade deadline, then made even more cost-cutting moves. The result is a team that has gone from three games above .500 and right in the race for a playoff spot to a game below .500.

 

[outofplace]

The Pirates knew they were going nowhere even if they did sneak into a wild card spot, which they were a long shot to do. They didn't have the depth to make any kind of run.

The 2014 Giants are a terrible comparison. The Giants controlled a playoff spot the whole second half of the season, the only question was whether it would be wild card or division. They coasted the final month, especially the final two weeks after the Dodgers swept them, and willingly yielded wild card home-field advantage so they could line up Bumgarner pitch that game. They were an 88-win team but could have gotten to 92 easily if it mattered. They also had a proven championship lineup and bullpen.

The Pirates holding on to the playoffs would be like a 4-7 team keeping the journeyman QB in instead of the rookie. You might pull off a miracle and get one playoff game, but who the fork cares?

Two games out with two months to go is a long shot? Even if they add help instead of selling at the deadline? There is no way you believe that.

Also, I didn't say they were comparable to the Giants. Once again, you are responding without bothering to understand the post. I brought that team up in response to Fart's claim that a Wild Card spot isn't worth pursuing and that wild card teams are losers. Clearly, the Giants put lie to that claim. I never meant it as a direct comparison to of the two teams.

To your last point, no, that isn't true. Fist of all, Melancon is no journeyman. Secondly, the Pirates didn't have a losing record at the deadline. By your thinking, we shouldn't bother with the playoffs. Just assume the Cubs will win it all and be done with it. No way an underdog could sneak in and make a run.

By the way, one major reason the Cubs are so dominant is that they did add veterans to support their young core. Now the Pirates can't spend on that level, but they could have brought in help. At some point, you have to try to take that next step, but that takes a financial commitment that the Pirates' ownership will not give.

It's funny how the Pirates earning wild card playoff spots was such a huge deal to the baseball apologists when it suited your arguments. Now that their shot at making the playoff again works against you, the story suddenly changes. What a complete load of bullshirt.

 

[outofplace]

Signing a closer long term has worked well for so many teams.

Oops brilliance, team 3 games over 500 should trade prospects for rentals.

I'm glad you can say with such certainty that the trade has cost them the playoffs.

There is no certainty in sports. There is only giving yourself the best chance to succeed, something the Pirates failed to do this season.

Funny how you question my certainty, but LTL can make up whatever outcome he wants and you let it slide. Sure, some of that is personal, but most of it is your inability to concede a point regardless of the growing pile of evidence.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

What time does the Steelers game start tomorrow? Maybe then we can get the thread back from OOP and his equally obsessive critics.

 

[JC]

There is no certainty in sports. There is only giving yourself the best chance to succeed, something the Pirates failed to do this season.

Funny how you question my certainty, but LTL can make up whatever outcome he wants and you let it slide. Sure, some of that is personal, but most of it is your inability to concede a point regardless of the growing pile of evidence.

What was the percentage for them to make the playoffs?

This was not the same team as the past couple years, smart teams make unpopular decisions.

 

[JC]

What time does the Steelers game start tomorrow? Maybe then we can get the thread back from OOP and his equally obsessive critics.

The thread he talks to himself in?

 

[outofplace]

What was the percentage for them to make the playoffs?

This was not the same team as the past couple years, smart teams make unpopular decisions.

No, it wasn't the same team. It was weaker because ownership forced the front office to cut costs in the offseason rather than build upon what they had. Aside from Burnett's retirement, what part of the team got worse due to age? They are taking a step back due to the lack of commitment from ownership. Again, I'm not just talking about dealing Melancon. I'm talking about the team's moves before and during this season.

Spare me the percentage bullshirt. A team that is two games out with two games to go has more than a fair shot at the playoffs. It would have been a better one without such a lousy offseason, but the Nutting family profit margin had to be protected at all costs.

 

[outofplace]

The thread he talks to himself in?

The thread where y'all whine about on-topic posts.

 

[justgladtobehere]

No, you're missing the point. What I'm saying is his impending free agency motivated the move. If the Pirates had control, say by signing him to an extension, they wouldn't have traded him. They didn't want to risk losing him as a free agent, so the financial situation drove the need to trade him and weaken the team for 2016.

You are still screwing up what free agency is. The Pirates risk of losing him and the chance of signing him are the same regardless of whether the team traded him.

Of course free agency was a factor, But trading him does nothing to change the economics of signing him in the offseason.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Dodgers' Rich Hill, 18 up and 18 down against Marlins. Nine Ks. Only 75 pitches.