OT: Raise the Jolly Roger: Offseason at the Crossroads

[DJ Spinoza]

Glancing at Biertempfel's feed, and it looks like that 2011-2012 line is going to be the talking point.

 

[Winger for Hire]

I guess I kind of get the whole "this team feels like the '12 team", but the whole having an MVP candidate in his absolute prime is missing and I think that was a massive part that got the '12 team to the heights they got to in '13 through '15.

Those teams had a solid middle of the lineup with Cutch, Pedro, Russ. Not amazing but solid enough to plug in and drive in runs.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

Read through the tea leaves -- it's right there in front of us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[td_ice]

I get keeping an eye on the future, but come on.

A $30m buffer for future arb seems a bit much and just a ****ty excuse.

I knew I should have stopped you from rolling the dice, we are indeed in the darkest timeline.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

The made up rumor on Pirates twitter now seems to be that we have a one-year, 30ishM offer on the table to Machado. I guess it's a decent angle to make up a rumor from, since he wouldn't have to vie with Harper next offseason. I've sort of never been able to decipher even my own sincerity in all of this, but I am about 70% convinced we have made an offer of some nature to Machado.

One angle from which I haven't overthought this yet is the very short-term one -- maybe a deal somewhat similar t0 the rumored White Sox one, which also has an opt-out after a year? In a market that stays weak, that could be an angle to try and take a competitive run at him, and then if he decides to stay, he's not quite as difficult to "afford" in 2020 and 2021, around which time a trade could be explored.

The other 30% of me is trying to have reason get the upper hand here, but as long as the market remains so weak, there's a lot of reason to doubt. Going to Chicago on the rumored offer would seem like a capitulation. Have to think he won't budge until either a higher suitor comes into the picture more firmly, or else some kind of opt-out or other complicated option. I don't think anything happens until Harper signs, honestly, and if Harper signs in Philly, I could even see a hold out.

 

[Winger for Hire]

I'm not impressed

 

[Empoleon8771]

Reading that they think Gonzalez and Newman are a young Galvis and Mercer (which seems like a really bad comparison for Newman, but w/e) disappoints me on numerous levels. That just tells me they're content with the upside of mediocrity, and even if they could get a better player, they'd go with the younger option because of that mediocre upside.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

Agree absolutely with both of you, but I do think that we still have to rigorously apply skepticism to anything NH says regarding the current roster. It's always, always, always just half-committed gibberish. From a sort of overall/WAR perspective, I can actually sort of see the logic, as opposed to someone like Iglesias, who would bring you elite defense as a tool. Galvis is more of an all-around type stopgap, maybe you could argue for the bit of power, but that's not a given.

Don't get me wrong, I'm more convinced that they really could go into the season with those two as the options, basically giving both a chance before it becomes Tucker's turn, but whether they do that or sign Galvis, it amounts to about the same bullshit for me.

Whether NH is just Lucy pulling the ball out from Charlie Brown with those comments about regretting not building the 2012 team after that season or not, the most frustrating thing in the present is going to be that we spent the resources we did on Kela and Archer only to halfway write off this season. We should be spending money on a Gonzalez or a Keuchel, or, yes, a Machado. I won't have too much trouble talking myself into accepting either Newman/Gonzalez or a cheap Galvis, but whatever they do amounts to spinning wheels.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Agree absolutely with both of you, but I do think that we still have to rigorously apply skepticism to anything NH says regarding the current roster. It's always, always, always just half-committed gibberish. From a sort of overall/WAR perspective, I can actually sort of see the logic, as opposed to someone like Iglesias, who would bring you elite defense as a tool. Galvis is more of an all-around type stopgap, maybe you could argue for the bit of power, but that's not a given.

I don't even have a problem in theory with going into next year with 2 guys like Newman and Gonzalez battling it out for the SS spot, the bigger issue I have is that they're admitting their upside isn't very high but they're still going with them. Maybe they think of guys like Mercer and Galvis higher than I do, but it's not reassuring to read that those two have the upside of 2 mediocre SS options.

What is the realistic expectation for guys like Mercer and Galvis, a 2.0 WAR season in a good year? I just don't like reading that they're happy with the guys they have because they're 2 young versions of 2 mediocre options.

 

[Winger for Hire]

To piggyback some, those are perfectly fine comps for players, especially if they're going to platoon-ish. But when inserted into the whole picture of the team lineup and makeup, it is wholly underwhelming and very low ceiling.

 

[DJ Spinoza]

Yeah, that makes sense. There's still value to having those kinds of players as depth, especially on the cheap, and they need to get some opportunities to show that they can bring that. I suppose there's an argument to be made that Tucker's ceiling is higher, but as with Hayes, that defers the window once again, beyond the current situation.

I think you can look at the big picture and the 2012 comparison in different ways. There's the lack of a guy like Cutch, but there's also more solid talent that's spread around, and somewhat reliable. I think what that amounts to is pretty much a safer path to finishing right where the 2012 Pirates finished, if not a couple games better, but it also means that there is almost no chance whatsoever for a boom above that. And pretty much, if it's not going to be Machado as an intervention into the SS spot, then the way to try it would be to try and weaponize the pitching even more.

Lyles seems exactly like Nicasio, and I think we might get a similarly uneven performance of flashes out of him. I guess time really is a flat circle...

 

[ChaosAgent]

To piggyback some, those are perfectly fine comps for players, especially if they're going to platoon-ish. But when inserted into the whole picture of the team lineup and makeup, it is wholly underwhelming and very low ceiling.

I feel you on that. This team just has no real upside, and management seems okay with that.

They don't understand the magnitude of the negative optics - sister markets in Cincinatti and Milwaukee going for it while we sit on our hands. Or they don't GAF.

The arbitration thing is a joke as well. Some of them - ahem, Josh Bell, may not be worth keeping around. Dropping Cervelli next year pays for 3-4 of those arbitration raises as well.

 

[Winger for Hire]

I'm on PR overload right now

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

I'm on PR overload right now

He'd waive him home on what should be a triple in the very first game and in a collision with the catcher he will be out for the year

 

[td_ice]

**** you NH, we had just talked ourselves out of this obvious bull****!!!

The thing I keep circling back to in all of this is the timing. He's certainly right in a sense concerning the percentage of payroll and how it could cripple you, but with the way the contracts are lined up, that would be somewhat mitigated within this current window. Or to put it in other words, there really should be the ability to both commit a huge amount of payroll and still have some money for raises and perhaps a reclamation or two as the filling in minor gaps/depth, and remain within the imposed payroll from Nutting. That's really the key to all of it; it'd be a slightly different story if you didn't have cost control with Marte, Polanco, and Archer.

At the absolute "worst" case, I guess you could have some serious escalations in payroll after the 2020 season if Taillon or Bell has played out of their mind for two years. But really, that's it -- I'm happy to cave if I'm wrong, but on the merits of a 90ishM payroll, the only small stumbling block would be this upcoming season, assuming the contract is 30M AAV.

The idea of it is also a bit of a way of skirting around the obvious lack of spending that's currently going on, and it can't be ruled out that the payroll is actually being limited to 75M by Nutting going forward. I'm a bit skeptical on that front, due to NH staying, but it certainly can't just be scoffed away. In any case, coming back to the idea of Machado, given the exact timing of this window, it just seems to harbor a lot less risk when compared with an alternative such as something like signing both Marwin and Iglesias and getting the payroll around 85-90 this year (and less next year).

We're stuck in the 78-83 win range right now. If we signed Machado to a huge contract and he got hurt, that would be really bad. But we're also just as screwed if we signed a couple guys like that and Marte or Marwin got hurt, and in the event that Marwin plays extremely well, the upside is probably that we're more firmly an 82-87 win team, and still on the periphery of the WC race, but maybe closer to being really in it. There's just no better timing, need, or gamble to take that kind of risk.

Thanks to Winger and your friend for the updates.

You had me at, "**** you NH".

 

[Winger for Hire]

 

[DJ Spinoza]

"The Update is Not Guaranteed: My Autobiography as the 14th Most Successful MLB GM During My Time with the Pittsburgh Pirates," by Neil Huntington

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

Did he say that with a straight face?

 

[Winger for Hire]

All I can think about now is

 

[td_ice]

I'm on PR overload right now

Is Jung-ho Kang Korean for Mike Trout???

 

[DJ Spinoza]

Kang putting up a 130 wRC+ is probably the highest ceiling type of thing that could happen with this offense, but his performance feels like even more of an unknown than when he first broke on the scene. He could be anywhere from barely rosterable to a useful depth piece to busting down the door from the start and forcing a playing time issue.

I'm still not quite persuaded by the SS talk, although I can see the gamble over most of the available options. I think there's still something slightly fishy afoot, but it could just as easy be that we have one or two very specific targets and are just waiting on them to make decisions. The PR train is basically worth ignoring, but I think SS and P are basically the only real viable places we'd sign anyone, and the options range heavily enough that we might just be done with these moderate tweaks. I am certain that the front office does not care one bit about fan perception.

 

[Empoleon8771]

If Kang somehow miraculously returns to form, I think you can deal with a Newman/Gonzalez SS platoon much easier, especially if Bell continues his second half success of last year (hit .281 and slugged .450 in his last 74 games, compared to .243 and .375 in his first 74 games). If Kang and Bell are both slashing .275/.350/.475 next year, who your SS is doesn't matter. Those are just massive ifs, that's the problem.

If everything goes right with this team, I think they're completely a playoff team. But when I say "if everything goes right", I'm talking about like 8 players having great seasons, which is a huge risk going into the year. I just don't get why they're unwilling to spend money to get less risky options. The only starters that I don't view as having much risk going into next year are Dickerson, Marte and Frazier. I wouldn't be concerned about Cervelli either, but I think Diaz may take over the starter's role and I think there is a risk with Diaz being the starter.

 

[Winger for Hire]

Fun thread with some interesting stuff

 

[DJ Spinoza]

If Kang somehow miraculously returns to form, I think you can deal with a Newman/Gonzalez SS platoon much easier, especially if Bell continues his second half success of last year (hit .281 and slugged .450 in his last 74 games, compared to .243 and .375 in his first 74 games). If Kang and Bell are both slashing .275/.350/.475 next year, who your SS is doesn't matter. Those are just massive ifs, that's the problem.

If everything goes right with this team, I think they're completely a playoff team. But when I say "if everything goes right", I'm talking about like 8 players having great seasons, which is a huge risk going into the year. I just don't get why they're unwilling to spend money to get less risky options. The only starters that I don't view as having much risk going into next year are Dickerson, Marte and Frazier. I wouldn't be concerned about Cervelli either, but I think Diaz may take over the starter's role and I think there is a risk with Diaz being the starter.

Yeah, I think this is spot on, and perversely why the front office takes the sort of cavalier attitude that they do. They've shown over and over again that they can assemble a competitive baseball team that can scratch their way into the mix during most seasons.

The thing I find especially frustrating with the current iteration of this plan is that they seem content to retread some things they've done before. Maybe they do have a handshake agreement with Lyles about the #5 starter job, but we have a much better likelihood of him being a big contributor in the pen, and if we're going to just sit on these options that we've got at SS and elsewhere, then it would take almost nothing to bolster the bullpen a bit more. Winger's post from above is especially interesting. Justin Wilson for $5M isn't going to break the bank, and gives us another power lefty. If Santana didn't get hurt, I could see being more cavalier with the bullpen as it is, and having a spot or two available, but we should be making that into even more of a strength.

 

[cheesedanish87]

Reading these quotes from Coonelly and NH from Pirate fest are depressing.

You either need to be a contending team or a rebuilding team, Pirates are neither, their right in the middle which is the worst place to be.