OT: Raise the Jolly Roger: The Condemned of Altoona Continued
- Thread starter Winger for Hire
- Start date
- Status
His away splits are excellent and his results per fangraphs ...'Gray’s struggles were directly correlated to a decline in the use of his fastball. The Yankees, after all, throw fastballs less often than any other team, and Gray had never thrown his fastball as scarcely as when he came to New York. On the surface, Gray’s been the recipient of poor fortune — his 129 ERA- is a far cry from his 100 FIP"
Winger for Hire
Praise Beebo
I wouldn't mind them taking a shot at acquiring Scooter Gennett. Under control for next season so you're not blocking anyone, just allowing for someone to ease into in as a backup MI next year while having actual production from SS. He won't be a budget buster or prohibit them from adding an arm or two. I would of course force them to make a move on from Mercer or SRod, which I'm not confident they will/would.
wheelz87
LGP
I was amazed when Gennett was a free agent a couple years back. Always thought he was a good ball player. Then man did he explode.
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,422
- 3,927
Can Gennett actually play a decent SS? I was under the impression that he's strictly a 2B.
Gray is pretty intriguing, and buying low from the Yankees has historically been great for us, but for that kind of deal to open up, I think the Yankees would need to undergo a pretty big shift. I don't think it's impossible, but my read is that they'll keep Gray as a 5th starter and move on from him in the offseason. If they are able to successfully land deGrom or Archer, then maybe he becomes a lot easier to acquire. I certainly would not be unhappy if we managed to work that out, but to me, Gray also falls into the camp of projection, like several current starters.
While I'm firmly convinced that the trade deadline in baseball gets so much hype because it provides intrigue in the midst of such a long ass season, and thus ultimately doesn't make a huge difference, I think the move to make is as big of an impact arm as we can shoulder the cost for. Instead of treating prospect cost like an abstract position, we need to assess what this group of young players is capable of and act accordingly. My guess is simply that Huntington will again holds his chips, hedging now towards that 2019/2020 window which will remain infinitely deferred. My only irrational hope of a major deal is that maybe the combination of more stress than usual, and a weird trade market, will open up the possibility.
In terms of pure rentals, Britton is definitely the biggest risk/reward. I don't think he'll get the Orioles a top-100 prospect, but he can probably garner a decent B prospect and a non-throw in second piece. I like the idea of it, but think it's the wrong kind of risk for a team chasing the WC spot. The cost is entirely predicated on having him as a playoff weapon- the rest of the season is a throw-in/time for him to stay sharp. The blockbuster for deGrom or Archer would be a move for a playoff weapon plus core piece for the next 2.5 years. It's difficult and a bit foolish to want to part with Keller, but at the end of the day, I look at the decision with a strong bias towards the current MLB players, and proven production. Huntington has built the all around solid team, and a playoff capable shutdown starter is one big missing link.
Gray is pretty intriguing, and buying low from the Yankees has historically been great for us, but for that kind of deal to open up, I think the Yankees would need to undergo a pretty big shift. I don't think it's impossible, but my read is that they'll keep Gray as a 5th starter and move on from him in the offseason. If they are able to successfully land deGrom or Archer, then maybe he becomes a lot easier to acquire. I certainly would not be unhappy if we managed to work that out, but to me, Gray also falls into the camp of projection, like several current starters.
While I'm firmly convinced that the trade deadline in baseball gets so much hype because it provides intrigue in the midst of such a long ass season, and thus ultimately doesn't make a huge difference, I think the move to make is as big of an impact arm as we can shoulder the cost for. Instead of treating prospect cost like an abstract position, we need to assess what this group of young players is capable of and act accordingly. My guess is simply that Huntington will again holds his chips, hedging now towards that 2019/2020 window which will remain infinitely deferred. My only irrational hope of a major deal is that maybe the combination of more stress than usual, and a weird trade market, will open up the possibility.
In terms of pure rentals, Britton is definitely the biggest risk/reward. I don't think he'll get the Orioles a top-100 prospect, but he can probably garner a decent B prospect and a non-throw in second piece. I like the idea of it, but think it's the wrong kind of risk for a team chasing the WC spot. The cost is entirely predicated on having him as a playoff weapon- the rest of the season is a throw-in/time for him to stay sharp. The blockbuster for deGrom or Archer would be a move for a playoff weapon plus core piece for the next 2.5 years. It's difficult and a bit foolish to want to part with Keller, but at the end of the day, I look at the decision with a strong bias towards the current MLB players, and proven production. Huntington has built the all around solid team, and a playoff capable shutdown starter is one big missing link.
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,422
- 3,927
Just glancing ahead at the schedule again, and although I'm a little nervous about stumbling vs the Mets or something, one thing that might generally play in our favor is that after the Mets game on Sunday, pretty much every single game until September is against an NL contender, other than two road games vs. the Twins. That should bode well for making up / conquering ground, and keeping the team on its toes. I don't have any grand theory, but I do think that Hurdle's team tends to be much much better when it is fighting for its life and unable to coast.
Then the month of September gets pretty interesting. After we finish a series vs Atlanta that carries over from the end of July, we have 12 games slated against the Reds, Royals, and Marlins, and 10 games against the Cards, Brewers, and Cubs (3, 3, and 4).
The Cubs schedule is a lot more difficult in September, with mostly NL contenders and 3 vs the Reds and 2 vs the White Sox. I'll say this now, probably still on the high from whatever we did vs Corey Kluber last night: a surge to catch the Cubs isn't totally insane. We'd have to pretty much own them in the remaining 10 games, but that would make up enough ground that they'd only have to stumble a little bit (in other words, they definitely have to stumble somewhat, but we have enough games remaining vs them to be a major cause, and if we have a good month vs the contending teams, then we certainly have the possibility of stacking wins in September and making that final 4 game series filled with some massive drama).
Soberly, it's worth constantly reiterating that this team has only been able to stay consistent for about a month and a half, and inconsistency has been a problem that's plagued us. However, we've done significantly better in divisional matchups, which are a huge amount of games remaining. It's easy for hesitation and skepticism to melt away when your team is threatening to bounce Corey Kluber in the second inning, but I'll be a little more confident if we can gain a couple inches of ground in the next two weeks or so, leaving us with 6/7 weeks remaining.
Not soberly, and on the heels of so many wild-eyed ravings and predictions, I'll wager this: if we win tonight's game, then we'll be facing the Cubs one week from today with a chance to get to 2 games back if we win both games in the mini-series. The winning streak and hot offense runs aground vs deGrom this weekend, and we spend the entirety of his start in this thread pining for a trade.
Then the month of September gets pretty interesting. After we finish a series vs Atlanta that carries over from the end of July, we have 12 games slated against the Reds, Royals, and Marlins, and 10 games against the Cards, Brewers, and Cubs (3, 3, and 4).
The Cubs schedule is a lot more difficult in September, with mostly NL contenders and 3 vs the Reds and 2 vs the White Sox. I'll say this now, probably still on the high from whatever we did vs Corey Kluber last night: a surge to catch the Cubs isn't totally insane. We'd have to pretty much own them in the remaining 10 games, but that would make up enough ground that they'd only have to stumble a little bit (in other words, they definitely have to stumble somewhat, but we have enough games remaining vs them to be a major cause, and if we have a good month vs the contending teams, then we certainly have the possibility of stacking wins in September and making that final 4 game series filled with some massive drama).
Soberly, it's worth constantly reiterating that this team has only been able to stay consistent for about a month and a half, and inconsistency has been a problem that's plagued us. However, we've done significantly better in divisional matchups, which are a huge amount of games remaining. It's easy for hesitation and skepticism to melt away when your team is threatening to bounce Corey Kluber in the second inning, but I'll be a little more confident if we can gain a couple inches of ground in the next two weeks or so, leaving us with 6/7 weeks remaining.
Not soberly, and on the heels of so many wild-eyed ravings and predictions, I'll wager this: if we win tonight's game, then we'll be facing the Cubs one week from today with a chance to get to 2 games back if we win both games in the mini-series. The winning streak and hot offense runs aground vs deGrom this weekend, and we spend the entirety of his start in this thread pining for a trade.
I wonder if maybe the Yankees would do something like Nova and a minor prospect for Gray? They know Nova and he did have some success there and as a number 5 he would still be a pretty decent option
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,422
- 3,927
I don't think it would be out of the question, but I'd suspect that they'd need to first acquire the front line starter, and also that they might need to try and move some cash around to stay under the luxury tax threshold.
Just for kicks, Walker + Gray would be the same amount of salary as Nova. If the Yankees did end up being a trade partner, Gray + Kahnle as buy low-ish candidates would make some sense.
There's an idea kicking around to see if the Jays would swap Nova and Happ if we included a lesser prospect. That makes some sense for clearing space/money for raises after the season, but I don't know that Nova is worth just writing off. He's slightly overpaid, but he does the job of eating lots of innings, and more often than not we have a chance to win in his games. Guys like Gray and Happ are intriguing options, and probably upgrades in some capacity, but IMO the only way to truly move the needle is front-line starter or the bigger gamble of an impact bullpen arm for the playoffs (though I guess a lesser gamble in terms of actual cost).
Just for kicks, Walker + Gray would be the same amount of salary as Nova. If the Yankees did end up being a trade partner, Gray + Kahnle as buy low-ish candidates would make some sense.
There's an idea kicking around to see if the Jays would swap Nova and Happ if we included a lesser prospect. That makes some sense for clearing space/money for raises after the season, but I don't know that Nova is worth just writing off. He's slightly overpaid, but he does the job of eating lots of innings, and more often than not we have a chance to win in his games. Guys like Gray and Happ are intriguing options, and probably upgrades in some capacity, but IMO the only way to truly move the needle is front-line starter or the bigger gamble of an impact bullpen arm for the playoffs (though I guess a lesser gamble in terms of actual cost).
pistolpete11
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2013
- 11,594
- 10,402
I resisted buying it through their good start because I wasn't a believer. I'm still not really a believer, but it's getting close. They do prorate it, right?
DanielPlainview
Registered User
- Apr 28, 2009
- 8,847
- 3,114
Who do you bump if you bring in Grey? Kuhl will be back eventually. Do you look to trade Nova as well and hope Holmes or Brault can stand pat in the interim? Is Grey superior enough to Nova to warrant making those trades? Seems too risky at this point in the season.
Anyone not named Taillon, Musgrove or Kingham.
Kuhls results havent been there, Nova is meh as meh gets, and Williams has been dancing through raindrops all season and can still only put up a 4.11 ERA.
Gray is on a completely different tier than these guys. Even in a bad year he is the same as those guys.
The attractive part about guys like DeGrom, Archer or even to a lesser extent Gray is that they have the ability to be a go to guy in the wild card game. We have seen the huge advantage having a go to guy to pitch in that scenario brings
Winger for Hire
Praise Beebo
They've had that before and ended up with Volquez as the WC starter. It's tough to have the one ace go in the 1 game WC when you're chasing a WC spot or divison because you're most likely going to have 1 or 2 must wins at the very end that can throw your WC plans into disarray.
Winger for Hire
Praise Beebo
Yeah, he's a 2B. I always have him playing SS in my mind for some weird reason. Still, I'd take the bat and glove upgrade at 2B and move Harrison to SS... but I'm moving into video game type lineup management now.
DanielPlainview
Registered User
- Apr 28, 2009
- 8,847
- 3,114
Kuhl has been fine. One disastrous outing against Arizona has skewed his ERA, but outside of that game he's thrown around a 3.79 ERA this season.
Similar situation with Williams. A really awful stretch in late May/early June (that shouldn't have happened; a competent manager would have sat his ass down for a week) has skewed his season. Outside of that 4-game stretch, he's tossed a 3.20 ERA.
So, again, that leaves Nova. I think this describes Nova perfectly:
Sonny Gray is having a really down year, throwing a 5.33 ERA (compare to his career ERA: 3.66). This isn't the first time he's had a season like this. In 2016 he tossed a 5.69 ERA with the A's. You would have to be sure he's going to rebound again to make the move.
Similar situation with Williams. A really awful stretch in late May/early June (that shouldn't have happened; a competent manager would have sat his ass down for a week) has skewed his season. Outside of that 4-game stretch, he's tossed a 3.20 ERA.
So, again, that leaves Nova. I think this describes Nova perfectly:
Sonny Gray is having a really down year, throwing a 5.33 ERA (compare to his career ERA: 3.66). This isn't the first time he's had a season like this. In 2016 he tossed a 5.69 ERA with the A's. You would have to be sure he's going to rebound again to make the move.
Winger for Hire
Praise Beebo
I think we've seen enough proof that pitch usage can really make a difference in pitcher's results (see Cole, Garrett and Morton, Charlie). Gray thrives when using his FB which NY isn't letting him do as much as he has been in the past. And some guys just don't do well in the spotlight that his NY.
Chad Kuhl - 4.55/4.70/4.30 with a career line of 4.37/4.30/4.51
Williams - 4.11/4.42/4.84 with a career line of 4.26/4.31/4.62
Ivan Nova - 4.28/4.57/4.10 with a career line of 4.27/4.32/4.04
NOVA the messiah of meh, has been the best guy in this group. They are all replaceable.
Gray - At his low end is has the best FIP and second best xFIP in the bunch (4.42/4.25). His career line of 3.66/3.75/3.71 blow these guys away. There is only one season between the three (Nova 2013) that is better than Grays career line, and Gray has the 3 best single seasons among the 4 guys.
BTW Gray away from Yankee stadium this season... 3.62/2.83/3.37
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
Until this team trades for a Degrom type talent (which is what real title hungry teams do, especially smaller market types) I won't trust them or put my money into their coffers.
People can spin it however they want. Nothing they did in 2013-15 was groundbreaking as it pertained to going hard for a title. Nothing.
People can spin it however they want. Nothing they did in 2013-15 was groundbreaking as it pertained to going hard for a title. Nothing.
Except the actual results of the player the acquired.
Happ pitched like a Cy Young canidate for us in that run.
Lee and Byrd mashed
Soria and Blanton were lock down relievers
But name value and contract value is more important i guess.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
Optics matter.
None of those guys are players you bring in to get over the hump. Sure, some of them produced very well. But you have to HOPE on them. Nobody expects JA Happ to pitch like he did. The Pirates, per the norm, traded for filler material (shit to wall and hope it sticks). The easily manipulated person probably thought (and obviously still does) that those deals were made to really make a big difference. They weren't.
If you want to impress me as a fan, make a deal around somebody like Degrom. Go get him. Give up Keller, and a few other unproven players for an elite front line starter. OR, do what you've always done. Trade for a JA Happ and hope he pitches way above the mean. None of those guys got us out of the WC or NLDS for those keeping score.
Except NOBODY cares if your impressed. NOBODY.
And talk about odd logic. The Pirates acquire player that don't impress but they are also not doing to get them over the hump? So what exactly are they making these moves for?
Maybe, just maybe, one of the things they do well is finding guys that can produce and upgrade their roster at the deadline that doesnt cost top end assets. They continually bet on positive regression to the mean and and continually get great value in doing so.
But yeah its probably to trade your top guys for big names just to impress you.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
Except I wasn't speaking in the literal sense. Of course the Pirates don't give a shit about the fan reaction to making deals. But their moves absolutely give us a good look at the inner workings of the team, behind the scenes. Those moves were slight of hand. Made to make it seem like the Pirates were taking winning seriously, when in fact, they were super budget buys, done to minimize any impact on the "system". It was total BS. Smoke and mirrors.
As I keep saying, CORRECTLY, none of those guys you or I have brought up were big acquisitions. None of them carried big salary. None of them were front line starters or middle order bats who could carry a lineup or rotation. We had an MVP position player in Cutch, but he never got a running mate who could mash and protect 22, and we sure as shit never went out and got a legit #1 (Cole never was while here) despite having enough talent to be a 90 win team and despite having the farm to make acquiring a high end talent, happen.
We usually aquired old, washed up talent, who we HOPED would play above the mean (average). Soemtimes that happened. Sometimes it didn't. But NONE of those guys were ever going to get this team into the NLCS or WS. They simply weren't that good. Period, end of story.
Coastal Kev
There will be "I told you so's" Bet on it
JimmyTwoTimes
Registered User
- Apr 13, 2010
- 19,958
- 5,281
Easy to look back on that now amd say they should have done more. Looked like we would be competitive for years with the top prospects we had. We also just saw teams like the Brewers and Reds go all in and fail.
Also, we had to play in 3 WC games. 2013 we probably would have beaten the Cards if we added more but go all the way? Doubt it. And the next two years we had to face the two best pitchers in baseball.
I do think if we get that close again to being a 95 win team, they will go for.it. This year is tough to judge. 26-17, then went 13-32 and now won 10 in a row. If they keep this streak going maybe they do think they have what it takes to compete. Or just make a few smaller moves , looking at 2019-20 as the years to go for it.
I agree with you we missed our chance those 3 years and maybe could have did what Houston just did last year, but cant really blame them for the approach they took. That was a time where we brought in any pitcher and basically turned them into a sub 3 era guy. To go along with one of the best farms in the league . So I can see why they were being patient.
But they should have learned from that and realize you have to take advantage of the year(s) you are having and go for it all. Not sure if this year is it, but we could be close.
To your point about not bringing in top names, we didnt really need to at the time because of how great they were at turning guys around. At least with pitching. They could have added a bat or two tho. Thats what we needed.
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,422
- 3,927
I'm not to interested in relitigating old deadlines, but in general I have wanted to see more caution thrown to the wind by Huntington. Even accounting for his bad moves, when you factor in the bad luck, he's done a good job of strengthening the organization as a whole. That's one thing that's generally been lost in this up and down season - when the lows got intense, skeptics wanted to come in and say we'll lose 100 games, but in reality we're on track to be about a .500 team, and might underachieve that mark, or now with the hot streak, overachieve it enough to take a run at the WC spots, or with some luck and critical wins, compete for the division.
That's a good thing for avoiding disaster team scenarios and an organization that's mired in hopelessness forever, but the flipside is the danger of being mired in the hopelessness of mediocrity. Based on past behavior, I don't expect Huntington and company to be self-critical enough or draw the lesson that pushing more chips into the center might have been worth it, but I also do think that Huntington was involved in discussions for Price, for example, so I don't think there's absolutely no chance he'll get more aggressive if the situation dictates it.
What it would take for the situation to dictate it is probably a condensed run of some more good luck. As I laid out last night, if the Cubs drop their series to the Diamondbacks and Cardinals, and we keep piling up wins, we could be in a situation on trade deadline day where if we win 2 game vs the Cubs, we get to within 2 games of them, with still 8 games remaining in the schedule against them. That would truly be insane given the situation literally 14 days ago, but it's where we're at. IMO the strongest frame of reference for being critical of risk-adversedness is whenever there's a chance to take the division, because taking the division automatically gives you a genuine shot to make a run at the World Series.
In other words, deGrom or Archer would clearly have a big boost on winning a wild card, but in a sense, the dependable rotation isn't absolutely in need of a lights out starter in order to be able to have the sustained success over the 50ish post-deadline games. The need is stronger to have an imposing starter who will potentially pitch twice in a five game playoff series. When looking at making a big move, Taillon or Musgrove might be that kind of pitcher, but it's not certain. The questions Huntington would have to answer are 1) does he generally think that the whole team can keep up its good play for 50 more games? and 2) if so, can he find a way to mortgage some of the future to maximize the situation should the playoffs be made?
This final point might be more sloppy, but I think another factor in play is that the composition of the current team isn't as much in the air as some of the older, a little bit more patchwork teams. On the assumption that Meadows would be a key part of a blockbuster trade, the main questions going into next season would be surrounding Newman/Kang/SS, Cervelli's future at C, and if Dickerson should be extended vs Reynolds and others in the higher minors. Harrison is still locked in at 2B, even Freese is around as the backup corner IF and bat. Even guessing that Kuhl or someone would be involved, there's a bunch of depth at SP, and while the bullpen can always use some tinkering, there are several guys locked in place.
I think this is a far cry from older situations, where the timing always was a little off, and you had more holes to fill. At the end of the day, the way I look at it is whether or not you can pull off a deal with Meadows/Keller as the cornerstones, and two more good pieces that hurt, but aren't really disastrous for the 2018-2020ish window. I think you absolutely can, and that the deal would be largely predicated on the idea of losing an unknown in Keller for 2.5 years of one of the better pitchers in baseball (if we're talking about deGrom).
This is all pure speculation, but I'll become more irrationally attached to it if we get even more condensed good luck and can shave off some more games in the division. There's an immense difference between being 7 games out of the division and 2 games out, and if we get so lucky to find ourselves in the latter situation next Monday, Huntington should be more cavalier in trying to get us over the finish line, lest we end up going down to the wire and staring down a wild card matchup of Williams or Nova vs. Scherzer or Strasburg or something.
That's a good thing for avoiding disaster team scenarios and an organization that's mired in hopelessness forever, but the flipside is the danger of being mired in the hopelessness of mediocrity. Based on past behavior, I don't expect Huntington and company to be self-critical enough or draw the lesson that pushing more chips into the center might have been worth it, but I also do think that Huntington was involved in discussions for Price, for example, so I don't think there's absolutely no chance he'll get more aggressive if the situation dictates it.
What it would take for the situation to dictate it is probably a condensed run of some more good luck. As I laid out last night, if the Cubs drop their series to the Diamondbacks and Cardinals, and we keep piling up wins, we could be in a situation on trade deadline day where if we win 2 game vs the Cubs, we get to within 2 games of them, with still 8 games remaining in the schedule against them. That would truly be insane given the situation literally 14 days ago, but it's where we're at. IMO the strongest frame of reference for being critical of risk-adversedness is whenever there's a chance to take the division, because taking the division automatically gives you a genuine shot to make a run at the World Series.
In other words, deGrom or Archer would clearly have a big boost on winning a wild card, but in a sense, the dependable rotation isn't absolutely in need of a lights out starter in order to be able to have the sustained success over the 50ish post-deadline games. The need is stronger to have an imposing starter who will potentially pitch twice in a five game playoff series. When looking at making a big move, Taillon or Musgrove might be that kind of pitcher, but it's not certain. The questions Huntington would have to answer are 1) does he generally think that the whole team can keep up its good play for 50 more games? and 2) if so, can he find a way to mortgage some of the future to maximize the situation should the playoffs be made?
This final point might be more sloppy, but I think another factor in play is that the composition of the current team isn't as much in the air as some of the older, a little bit more patchwork teams. On the assumption that Meadows would be a key part of a blockbuster trade, the main questions going into next season would be surrounding Newman/Kang/SS, Cervelli's future at C, and if Dickerson should be extended vs Reynolds and others in the higher minors. Harrison is still locked in at 2B, even Freese is around as the backup corner IF and bat. Even guessing that Kuhl or someone would be involved, there's a bunch of depth at SP, and while the bullpen can always use some tinkering, there are several guys locked in place.
I think this is a far cry from older situations, where the timing always was a little off, and you had more holes to fill. At the end of the day, the way I look at it is whether or not you can pull off a deal with Meadows/Keller as the cornerstones, and two more good pieces that hurt, but aren't really disastrous for the 2018-2020ish window. I think you absolutely can, and that the deal would be largely predicated on the idea of losing an unknown in Keller for 2.5 years of one of the better pitchers in baseball (if we're talking about deGrom).
This is all pure speculation, but I'll become more irrationally attached to it if we get even more condensed good luck and can shave off some more games in the division. There's an immense difference between being 7 games out of the division and 2 games out, and if we get so lucky to find ourselves in the latter situation next Monday, Huntington should be more cavalier in trying to get us over the finish line, lest we end up going down to the wire and staring down a wild card matchup of Williams or Nova vs. Scherzer or Strasburg or something.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE WATCH LIVE - FINGER LAKES RACE 1 - Farmington, NYWagers: 2Staked: $273.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-