DanielPlainview
Registered User
- Apr 28, 2009
- 8,810
- 3,084
OT: Raise the Jolly Roger: More of the same
- Thread starter ColePens
- Start date
- Status
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,333
- 3,854
Out of sheer boredom, I just went through the remaining schedule as though the rotation would remain the same. The NL wild card game is scheduled for Tuesday, October 2nd, which is two days after our season ends. If the rotation stays the same, Nova would pitch that final game, with Tuesday being Musgrove's turn in the rotation. Taillon would be on 4 days rest, and Archer on 3.
There are enough off days remaining that the rotation could easily be tweaked a bit more, since it's too hard to really predict this far in advance. Was mostly just curious how the extra day off would impact the rotation schedule - strangely, unless I miscounted, it would mean Taillon was bumped from potentially being slated for the day on regular rest, to being one day off because of the extra rest. However, there's no point reading too much into this exercise, because we don't know if the rotation will be shifted on one of the off days anyways, if a game will be rained out and cause a doubleheader, or if we'll see something else that throws it off.
I would guess that we might see some more minor tweaks, since all of Taillon, Musgrove, and Williams are still young pitchers in terms of innings pitched in a full season.
If I remain this bored I may try and do another "deep dive" (i.e., look at the schedule and matchups for a really long time and make some shit up) regarding the WC race and 90 wins or thereabouts. The best way to look at the race might be more in terms of isolating the W and L column, rather than the GB number. Three things immediately stand out: 1) The Cubs and Brewers have more wins than the other NL contenders, meaning we'll need to be very good against both in order to keep that number down, and simultaneously increase our own; 2) The Braves and Phillies have the advantage of having four or five games in hand on everybody else (they have a lot of games vs the Marlins and Mets remaining, and also play each other seven times between September 20 and September 30); 3) We have almost the most losses, which means we need winning streaks of some sort, even if they are just the three or four game variety.
I'm already part way into the random guesswork that looking at the race will entail, but my sense is really that the biggest question is whether or not we can shave the WC race down to being about 1.5/2 games back by the middle of September. We've five games out, and can't really fall much further without then needing to win 12 or 13 in a row again, but steady good play and a big sweep or something like that would probably do the trick towards just keeping us relevant. But we have to stack lots of wins to do so, and then if we are in that position by mid-September, we'll need to still play like one of the best teams in baseball to close the gap fully.
29-14 is the record we'd need the rest of the way in order to finish with 90 wins. We have 14 series left counting this two-game series vs the Twins.
There are enough off days remaining that the rotation could easily be tweaked a bit more, since it's too hard to really predict this far in advance. Was mostly just curious how the extra day off would impact the rotation schedule - strangely, unless I miscounted, it would mean Taillon was bumped from potentially being slated for the day on regular rest, to being one day off because of the extra rest. However, there's no point reading too much into this exercise, because we don't know if the rotation will be shifted on one of the off days anyways, if a game will be rained out and cause a doubleheader, or if we'll see something else that throws it off.
I would guess that we might see some more minor tweaks, since all of Taillon, Musgrove, and Williams are still young pitchers in terms of innings pitched in a full season.
If I remain this bored I may try and do another "deep dive" (i.e., look at the schedule and matchups for a really long time and make some shit up) regarding the WC race and 90 wins or thereabouts. The best way to look at the race might be more in terms of isolating the W and L column, rather than the GB number. Three things immediately stand out: 1) The Cubs and Brewers have more wins than the other NL contenders, meaning we'll need to be very good against both in order to keep that number down, and simultaneously increase our own; 2) The Braves and Phillies have the advantage of having four or five games in hand on everybody else (they have a lot of games vs the Marlins and Mets remaining, and also play each other seven times between September 20 and September 30); 3) We have almost the most losses, which means we need winning streaks of some sort, even if they are just the three or four game variety.
I'm already part way into the random guesswork that looking at the race will entail, but my sense is really that the biggest question is whether or not we can shave the WC race down to being about 1.5/2 games back by the middle of September. We've five games out, and can't really fall much further without then needing to win 12 or 13 in a row again, but steady good play and a big sweep or something like that would probably do the trick towards just keeping us relevant. But we have to stack lots of wins to do so, and then if we are in that position by mid-September, we'll need to still play like one of the best teams in baseball to close the gap fully.
29-14 is the record we'd need the rest of the way in order to finish with 90 wins. We have 14 series left counting this two-game series vs the Twins.
Last edited:
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,333
- 3,854
Ok, I took a look back at the long post I made which tried to break down the remaining stretch into small clusters of games, based on the idea that 90 wins puts us in decent contention for the WC game. At the all star break, we needed to go 40-25 the rest of the way in order to get to 90 wins. As I just noted here, that record is now 29-14, as we've gone 13-9 in the 23 games to start the break; we need to pick up that pace, but not as significantly as I had assumed. Three losses in particular loom pretty large: losing the Cardinals series, splitting the Mets series, and splitting the Giants series. In fact, by my back of the napkin math, had we won those three games, we'd be pretty much on pace for a 40-25 type of record in the remaining games, so depending on your perspective, we are either pretty close to the kind of pace we need, or condemned to fall just a few steps short.
In the records I had started mapping out, I had us needing 7-3 in the first ten games, 4-1 in the next five, and 6-3 in the following nine games, which we're still in the midst of. We went 7-3, 2-3, and are now 4-3. So if we take these next two games against the Twins, we'll be two games off the pace I was trying to set, which was 17-7. Our record since the ASB if we win the next two games will be 15-9.
I won't spin this out into a huge thing, because these numbers are spinning for me and I tried to draw up the original sketch. Looking ahead to the home stand and Brewers series that follows it, I had gone for a conservative route and predicted 5-5. Since we're off the pace just by a bit, and since the further away you are with less time remaining, the worse it is, we need to do better than 5-5 in that stretch, especially when you take into account that at least the Brewers and Braves are maybe our two most important direct competitors for the WC race. I'll return to them below, because I'd like to try and end this with a glance at what their records could be at the end of this next 12-game stretch period as well.
For now, I'll just note that -- and to be clear, this is a pretty tall order, as I keep saying to the point of exhaustion these days -- if we take the two Twins games, and then we win all the series' in this stretch, we'd be 7-3 in that stretch, which amounts to 22-12, which is coincidentally the exact record I was projecting we'd need in order to keep pace for 90 wins. If we can get to that point, then 18-13 the rest of the way is good enough for 90 wins; with 12 of those 31 games against the Reds, Marlins, and Royals, we should have a pretty solid chance at 90 wins.
However, and here I apologizing for twisting further into these numbers, but assuming we beat up on those four teams pretty bad, going something like 10-2, you also have to assume that a 8-11 record vs those other teams won't really help us out in the WC race very much, since unless we just got destroyed by the Cubs, we'd be giving away a lot of wins and ground to other WC competitors. Just looking schematically, if we took that record, and maybe dropped a series to the Brewers and split the big one with the Cubs, that puts us at 11-8 in the games vs competitors, good for a finish of 21-10 in the final stretch, or 93 wins. That's probably good enough for one of the spots, but it still might not be.
The tldr; version of what I just said is that, roughly speaking, to be competitive the rest of the way, we need to take the two Twins games, pull off a sweep or two of the bad teams we face, and win all but one or two of the remaining series vs our direct competitors. It's winning two out of every three with a little bit of luck on top of that. Certainly not impossible, but would definitely require being the best or second best team in baseball the rest of the way, and not really a whole lot different than the kind of pace that Washington, St. Louis, L.A., San Francisco, or Colorado would need to do to make it in.
So much of that is just guesswork looking at the schedule, so I wanted to try and round this off by being a bit more specific in analyzing the immediate road ahead. Let's stick with the same, really difficult parameters: we have to win these two vs the Twins, and then win the series' vs the Cubs, Braves, and Brewers. That's a 9-3 stretch, which would bring our record to 70-61. Here are the Braves and Brewers over the same stretch, assuming the Braves win again tonight vs Miami:
Braves (66-51): Marlins (2), Rockies (4), Pirates (3), Marlins (4)
Brewers (67-54): Cubs (2), Cardinals (3), Reds (3), Pirates (3)
Just guessing, with only a small amount of homerism, the Braves go 7-6 and the Brewers go 5-6, then that puts their records at 73-57 and 72-60. So we'd find ourselves two games behind the Brewers and three behind the Braves, and probably also the race in general, unless somebody goes on a massive winning streak. I think it's fair to say that if either of these two puts up a really good win total in this stretch, then they'll really solidify their place at the front of the race. Even if Atlanta does this, they still have three two in hand on a lot of other teams.
Another pretty big winning streak like 7 or 8 games would take matters into our own hands even more, but it really isn't necessary as long as we can stack wins over a longer period, like the 9-3 stretch we need to go on imminently. In some way, by the end of the month or so, we need to be about two games behind one of those WC spots. If that happens, then I think there's some genuine reason for optimism: our September is easier than the Septembers of the other teams, with only St. Louis being close and having 9 games vs weak competition (we have 12, as I noted above).
The primary reason I think we have to be optimistic about what lies ahead is the pitching: the only current starter who has pitched a bad game since the ASB is Nova; the others were Kingham (twice) and Holmes. They look to be grooving at the right time, and the bullpen is reliable behind them. To me the foundation to pull this off is there, but it will come down to luck, decision-making, and momentum. I don't think we'll be quite able to pull it off, and spinning out this extremely long yarn has been partly about convincing myself we might be able to, and though I've succeeded in doing that to some extent, I still think the kind of stretches we need are too difficult vs such good opponents. If we had more margin for error than the horrid stretch gave us, even 4 games or so, I think we'd be able to at least get 90 wins and see what happens. As it stands, I think we'll be good enough for 85 or 86, which is a decent season, but almost definitely too short with all these teams in the hunt.
In the records I had started mapping out, I had us needing 7-3 in the first ten games, 4-1 in the next five, and 6-3 in the following nine games, which we're still in the midst of. We went 7-3, 2-3, and are now 4-3. So if we take these next two games against the Twins, we'll be two games off the pace I was trying to set, which was 17-7. Our record since the ASB if we win the next two games will be 15-9.
I won't spin this out into a huge thing, because these numbers are spinning for me and I tried to draw up the original sketch. Looking ahead to the home stand and Brewers series that follows it, I had gone for a conservative route and predicted 5-5. Since we're off the pace just by a bit, and since the further away you are with less time remaining, the worse it is, we need to do better than 5-5 in that stretch, especially when you take into account that at least the Brewers and Braves are maybe our two most important direct competitors for the WC race. I'll return to them below, because I'd like to try and end this with a glance at what their records could be at the end of this next 12-game stretch period as well.
For now, I'll just note that -- and to be clear, this is a pretty tall order, as I keep saying to the point of exhaustion these days -- if we take the two Twins games, and then we win all the series' in this stretch, we'd be 7-3 in that stretch, which amounts to 22-12, which is coincidentally the exact record I was projecting we'd need in order to keep pace for 90 wins. If we can get to that point, then 18-13 the rest of the way is good enough for 90 wins; with 12 of those 31 games against the Reds, Marlins, and Royals, we should have a pretty solid chance at 90 wins.
However, and here I apologizing for twisting further into these numbers, but assuming we beat up on those four teams pretty bad, going something like 10-2, you also have to assume that a 8-11 record vs those other teams won't really help us out in the WC race very much, since unless we just got destroyed by the Cubs, we'd be giving away a lot of wins and ground to other WC competitors. Just looking schematically, if we took that record, and maybe dropped a series to the Brewers and split the big one with the Cubs, that puts us at 11-8 in the games vs competitors, good for a finish of 21-10 in the final stretch, or 93 wins. That's probably good enough for one of the spots, but it still might not be.
The tldr; version of what I just said is that, roughly speaking, to be competitive the rest of the way, we need to take the two Twins games, pull off a sweep or two of the bad teams we face, and win all but one or two of the remaining series vs our direct competitors. It's winning two out of every three with a little bit of luck on top of that. Certainly not impossible, but would definitely require being the best or second best team in baseball the rest of the way, and not really a whole lot different than the kind of pace that Washington, St. Louis, L.A., San Francisco, or Colorado would need to do to make it in.
So much of that is just guesswork looking at the schedule, so I wanted to try and round this off by being a bit more specific in analyzing the immediate road ahead. Let's stick with the same, really difficult parameters: we have to win these two vs the Twins, and then win the series' vs the Cubs, Braves, and Brewers. That's a 9-3 stretch, which would bring our record to 70-61. Here are the Braves and Brewers over the same stretch, assuming the Braves win again tonight vs Miami:
Braves (66-51): Marlins (2), Rockies (4), Pirates (3), Marlins (4)
Brewers (67-54): Cubs (2), Cardinals (3), Reds (3), Pirates (3)
Just guessing, with only a small amount of homerism, the Braves go 7-6 and the Brewers go 5-6, then that puts their records at 73-57 and 72-60. So we'd find ourselves two games behind the Brewers and three behind the Braves, and probably also the race in general, unless somebody goes on a massive winning streak. I think it's fair to say that if either of these two puts up a really good win total in this stretch, then they'll really solidify their place at the front of the race. Even if Atlanta does this, they still have three two in hand on a lot of other teams.
Another pretty big winning streak like 7 or 8 games would take matters into our own hands even more, but it really isn't necessary as long as we can stack wins over a longer period, like the 9-3 stretch we need to go on imminently. In some way, by the end of the month or so, we need to be about two games behind one of those WC spots. If that happens, then I think there's some genuine reason for optimism: our September is easier than the Septembers of the other teams, with only St. Louis being close and having 9 games vs weak competition (we have 12, as I noted above).
The primary reason I think we have to be optimistic about what lies ahead is the pitching: the only current starter who has pitched a bad game since the ASB is Nova; the others were Kingham (twice) and Holmes. They look to be grooving at the right time, and the bullpen is reliable behind them. To me the foundation to pull this off is there, but it will come down to luck, decision-making, and momentum. I don't think we'll be quite able to pull it off, and spinning out this extremely long yarn has been partly about convincing myself we might be able to, and though I've succeeded in doing that to some extent, I still think the kind of stretches we need are too difficult vs such good opponents. If we had more margin for error than the horrid stretch gave us, even 4 games or so, I think we'd be able to at least get 90 wins and see what happens. As it stands, I think we'll be good enough for 85 or 86, which is a decent season, but almost definitely too short with all these teams in the hunt.
Winger for Hire
Praise Beebo
DanielPlainview
Registered User
- Apr 28, 2009
- 8,810
- 3,084
So the Phillies have dropped into the wild card spot with the Braves' wins today/night. They're headed for a series against Boston starting tomorrow, so this may not be the worst thing in the short term.
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,333
- 3,854
I've thought about starting a blog or site, but if I went through all that, I bet I'd just not follow through on keeping it updated. Posting long diatribes in here for the benefit of four or five people seems better.
Atlanta looks like they are white hot right now. Hopefully the Rockies can cool them off before they come here. Barring something like injury, it will be Archer, Nova, Williams in that series. It's not going to be fun facing Acuna and Albies at 1-2 for three nights in a row.
I think we're still in an ok spot. I'd be a bit more confident had we managed to just take the Giants series, or not drop that Cardinals series, but it is what it is. I don't think we'd be in much different of a situation than needing to go 7-3 after this Twins series. If we had won Sunday, we'd probably be in a better position of hoping to nab both these games, rather than basically needing to. Archer vs. Berrios on Wednesday will be quite the showdown.
Atlanta looks like they are white hot right now. Hopefully the Rockies can cool them off before they come here. Barring something like injury, it will be Archer, Nova, Williams in that series. It's not going to be fun facing Acuna and Albies at 1-2 for three nights in a row.
I think we're still in an ok spot. I'd be a bit more confident had we managed to just take the Giants series, or not drop that Cardinals series, but it is what it is. I don't think we'd be in much different of a situation than needing to go 7-3 after this Twins series. If we had won Sunday, we'd probably be in a better position of hoping to nab both these games, rather than basically needing to. Archer vs. Berrios on Wednesday will be quite the showdown.
JimmyTwoTimes
Registered User
- Apr 13, 2010
- 19,958
- 5,281
Couldve won the Cards series and the Giants putting us at 63-56. Dbacks are now 65-55. Dodgers struggling too without Jansen.
Also, Cards are hot right now, 8 games above 500...that started with our series.
Too many games where we should have won this year. And Im not even looking at the whole year anymore...just the past week. Those 2 losses against Cards and first game against Rockies and two against Giants. One of those being the McRae game, another the Holmes game. And Musgrove not getting any help in his two starts. Williams either in that final game against the Cards(but who knows how that goes if the McRae game didnt happen).
5 losses that were winnable. 2 of them being a result of a horrible decision.
I just dont see those types of losses ending. Letting us go on a win streak and into the WC spot.
We keep hovering around 3 and 4 games above .500. Thats why I said the Holmes start was so dumb. No need to worry about resting starters right now...we needed to get a win streak going. We won 3 in a row before that game...if Williams starts that make it 4. Then who knows what happens. Maybe we sweep and are at 63-56 and on a 6 game win streak.
Little hard to get excited with Hurdle running things.
Also, Cards are hot right now, 8 games above 500...that started with our series.
Too many games where we should have won this year. And Im not even looking at the whole year anymore...just the past week. Those 2 losses against Cards and first game against Rockies and two against Giants. One of those being the McRae game, another the Holmes game. And Musgrove not getting any help in his two starts. Williams either in that final game against the Cards(but who knows how that goes if the McRae game didnt happen).
5 losses that were winnable. 2 of them being a result of a horrible decision.
I just dont see those types of losses ending. Letting us go on a win streak and into the WC spot.
We keep hovering around 3 and 4 games above .500. Thats why I said the Holmes start was so dumb. No need to worry about resting starters right now...we needed to get a win streak going. We won 3 in a row before that game...if Williams starts that make it 4. Then who knows what happens. Maybe we sweep and are at 63-56 and on a 6 game win streak.
Little hard to get excited with Hurdle running things.
JimmyTwoTimes
Registered User
- Apr 13, 2010
- 19,958
- 5,281
Cards are now 64-55. They did what we should have and easily could have.
3 wins instead of losses in that group of 5 losses I mentioned and we are 64-55. Right behind of the WC spot.
Have to sweep the Twins for sure. Finally putting us at 5 games above .500....63-58. Then win each series against the teams ahead of us to finish the month.
Id rather have series against the Marlins, Royals mixed in right now, making it easier. They may not matter in Septemember if we end our playoff hopes these next two weeks. Having those series in between now could get us on a long win streak again. Which weve been so close to getting back to but something goes wrong.
3 wins instead of losses in that group of 5 losses I mentioned and we are 64-55. Right behind of the WC spot.
Have to sweep the Twins for sure. Finally putting us at 5 games above .500....63-58. Then win each series against the teams ahead of us to finish the month.
Id rather have series against the Marlins, Royals mixed in right now, making it easier. They may not matter in Septemember if we end our playoff hopes these next two weeks. Having those series in between now could get us on a long win streak again. Which weve been so close to getting back to but something goes wrong.
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,333
- 3,854
Although at least two or three of us would die from a heart attack, I think I'd gladly take the result of us and the Cardinals being the hottest two teams in baseball for the final six weeks and facing each other in the WC game. Mikolaus vs Taillon... could be worse.
My random guess right now is that the Brewers will win the Central, the Phillies will take the East, and the Dodgers will end up winning the rest. I have no f***ing clue about the WC, but if I'm right about Brewers over Cubs in the Central, the Cubs will probably be one of the teams, and I think Atlanta has an extremely strong chance, as well as Arizona. I think we're a step below these teams realistically, but that can change if we actually do cut the deficit to two games in the next couple of weeks.
We all know the Cardinals have devil magic, but I think they are probably on similar footing as us, Washington, and the Rockies. Maybe I'm underselling Colorado a bit, but just based on the records and feels I have for the teams in the race, I think that's how it will play out.
My random guess right now is that the Brewers will win the Central, the Phillies will take the East, and the Dodgers will end up winning the rest. I have no f***ing clue about the WC, but if I'm right about Brewers over Cubs in the Central, the Cubs will probably be one of the teams, and I think Atlanta has an extremely strong chance, as well as Arizona. I think we're a step below these teams realistically, but that can change if we actually do cut the deficit to two games in the next couple of weeks.
We all know the Cardinals have devil magic, but I think they are probably on similar footing as us, Washington, and the Rockies. Maybe I'm underselling Colorado a bit, but just based on the records and feels I have for the teams in the race, I think that's how it will play out.
JimmyTwoTimes
Registered User
- Apr 13, 2010
- 19,958
- 5,281
Dodgers might blow it in the 9th again.
Jansen being out is gonna really hurt them. Altho theyve been lucky the Dbacks just lost 3 straight
And there it is...Giants take the lead in the 9th
Its big for those teams(Dodgers and Dbacks) to drop in the standings. We dont play them anymore and both beat up on us. 1-6 vs Dbacks. We just need one of Philly/Braves to pull away in their division...one of them winning most of the games they have left against each other.
Also need to go 5-1 against the Braves at this point.
Jansen being out is gonna really hurt them. Altho theyve been lucky the Dbacks just lost 3 straight
And there it is...Giants take the lead in the 9th
Its big for those teams(Dodgers and Dbacks) to drop in the standings. We dont play them anymore and both beat up on us. 1-6 vs Dbacks. We just need one of Philly/Braves to pull away in their division...one of them winning most of the games they have left against each other.
Also need to go 5-1 against the Braves at this point.
Last edited:
JimmyTwoTimes
Registered User
- Apr 13, 2010
- 19,958
- 5,281
Nats have to be regretting that trade last year sending Treinen and Luzardo(top LHP prospect) to the As for Madson(just blew last nights game to the cubs) and Doolittle.
This is what happens when you try to go all in sometimes. Fails more than it works. Thats why so many gms are hesistant. Unless you are a team like the Yankees or Dodgers who can afford it since they get all the top international signings anyway
This is what happens when you try to go all in sometimes. Fails more than it works. Thats why so many gms are hesistant. Unless you are a team like the Yankees or Dodgers who can afford it since they get all the top international signings anyway
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,333
- 3,854
Besides Atlanta and Miami, the matchups right now seem mostly decent for us: Colorado vs Houston, Philly vs Boston both may help us catch up in the win column a bit. Milwaukee vs Chicago and LA vs San Francisco are basically a wash, and while the Cardinals' star is definitely rising, them beating up on Washington and getting them more out of the race is probably fine for us. Having said that, if Washington and San Francisco pick up a couple of wins, then we could be heading into the homestand with everybody in the race basically having 62-65 wins, with Chicago, Milwaukee, and Atlanta being more around 67-70 wins.
If that's how it breaks down, then I guess in a sense the homestand and the series after provide a pretty good opportunity, since winning more than losing against those teams shaves off some distance from the echelon that seems just above us, while at least keeping pace with the other teams in the current echelon, and we have a nice series vs the Cardinals tossed into that mix as well.
That said, it just feels too much like a Pirates move to split this series against a mediocre-but-not-totally-pushover Minnesota team. We need the offense to take care of business if Taillon and Archer can do their part and keep the Twins to 2 or 3 runs. Berrios is very good, but he's coming off one of his worst starts of the year, and also just surpassed his innings total from last year. Archer faced the Twins twice this year, with one good start and one so-so start (only gave up 1 ER in 4.1 pitches, and had 7 Ks, but threw 93 pitches). Against a young lineup, hopefully he'll have the strikeout going.
If that's how it breaks down, then I guess in a sense the homestand and the series after provide a pretty good opportunity, since winning more than losing against those teams shaves off some distance from the echelon that seems just above us, while at least keeping pace with the other teams in the current echelon, and we have a nice series vs the Cardinals tossed into that mix as well.
That said, it just feels too much like a Pirates move to split this series against a mediocre-but-not-totally-pushover Minnesota team. We need the offense to take care of business if Taillon and Archer can do their part and keep the Twins to 2 or 3 runs. Berrios is very good, but he's coming off one of his worst starts of the year, and also just surpassed his innings total from last year. Archer faced the Twins twice this year, with one good start and one so-so start (only gave up 1 ER in 4.1 pitches, and had 7 Ks, but threw 93 pitches). Against a young lineup, hopefully he'll have the strikeout going.
Coastal Kev
There will be "I told you so's" Bet on it
My brother watched Austin Meadows tear it up in Durham, 2 homers, 4 for 6.
This trade will be an alltimer.....
This trade will be an alltimer.....
Winger for Hire
Praise Beebo
Still a fan of the trade (it had to be done), but I can't help to feel that this is a pretty big indictment of the Pirates amateur scouting and player development.
Last edited:
DanielPlainview
Registered User
- Apr 28, 2009
- 8,810
- 3,084
This trade is setting up to be an all-time disaster
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,333
- 3,854
My initial reaction is that I wonder who they were deciding between.
With Glasnow's good start in TB, I suspect the takes are going to start getting nuclear, but I can live with this, maybe even moreso than the various middle and corner infield options, given our lack of depth there. Baz is many years away, and neither Glasnow nor Meadows had yet emerged as part of the young core. We paid an extremely high price for an aggressive ploy that gives us a rotation anchor, and kept our best chips who are on the way as either hopeful core or supplementary players (certainly you can argue that Glasnow and especially Meadows are in that camp, but I'm talking about Hayes and Keller).
Certainly you can not like the price, or not like Archer's upside for the next 3+ seasons, but this was pretty much the exact kind of thing that Huntington was unanimously criticized for never doing. Anything else is revisionist history. And while I think there are more important things than to adjudicate this deal a month after it was made, I don't think it's that controversial to say that the Pirates of 2018 are in a much clearer situation regarding who is locked up as part of the core than they were in 2014 or 2015.
With Glasnow's good start in TB, I suspect the takes are going to start getting nuclear, but I can live with this, maybe even moreso than the various middle and corner infield options, given our lack of depth there. Baz is many years away, and neither Glasnow nor Meadows had yet emerged as part of the young core. We paid an extremely high price for an aggressive ploy that gives us a rotation anchor, and kept our best chips who are on the way as either hopeful core or supplementary players (certainly you can argue that Glasnow and especially Meadows are in that camp, but I'm talking about Hayes and Keller).
Certainly you can not like the price, or not like Archer's upside for the next 3+ seasons, but this was pretty much the exact kind of thing that Huntington was unanimously criticized for never doing. Anything else is revisionist history. And while I think there are more important things than to adjudicate this deal a month after it was made, I don't think it's that controversial to say that the Pirates of 2018 are in a much clearer situation regarding who is locked up as part of the core than they were in 2014 or 2015.
Winger for Hire
Praise Beebo
I'll get this out of the way now... just like Cole, there's a very big chance that the Glasnow we're seeing in Tampa was never going to emerge in Pittsburgh.
DanielPlainview
Registered User
- Apr 28, 2009
- 8,810
- 3,084
That doesn't even matter. For that package, we should have gotten deGrom.
Winger for Hire
Praise Beebo
DanielPlainview
Registered User
- Apr 28, 2009
- 8,810
- 3,084
Winger for Hire
Praise Beebo
A toolsy OF who can't stay healthy (ala Conforto)
A high ceiling pitcher with shaky command and mental block when starting (ala Gsellman-ish)
A rookie ball 1st round pick (yes, they would have wanted him)
With the Mets organizational needs, and not wanting to move deGrom, you're certainly going to have to add at the very least Craig/Hayes in place of Glasnow to get their attention to start a good negotiation.
DanielPlainview
Registered User
- Apr 28, 2009
- 8,810
- 3,084
Swapping out Glasnow for Craig or Hayes wouldn't move the needle the much for either team, but either way, that package gets deGrom, no question.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
DanielPlainview
Registered User
- Apr 28, 2009
- 8,810
- 3,084
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2003
- 25,333
- 3,854
Given that the Mets were unwilling to even sell high on Wheeler, I am pretty suspicious that the same package would have had the Mets moving to move deGrom, who wasn't even available in any case. He has a reasonable claim on the best pitcher in all of baseball, while Archer is clearly a tier or two below that, depending on how you want to carve it up.
From the perspective of risk and asset management, I can live with this trade all day. In the winter, both Glasnow and Meadows' values were absolutely nonexistent. Meadows shocked everyone by lighting the world on fire in Pittsburgh, but who knows how sustainable that will be, let alone whether he'll continue to be plagued by health issues. Baz is still not in full season baseball, but has a good shot to stick as a top-100 prospect, and a decent shot to be even more highly rated than that.
Glasnow is a total crapshoot, and I don't think this can even be emphasized enough. He could completely dominate for the rest of the season, and early next year, and then fall off a cliff entirely and be barely useable as a bullpen piece. Then he could resurrect himself again. I think he became instantly hyped as soon as he was out of Pittsburgh, and sure, there are some good reasons for that. But if we could go back in time to a week or so before the deadline, my sense is that people would probably not think too much of him being a headliner in a deal for Archer. Doubly so if the same idea was raised in January or February.
Bottom line for me is always that Archer is going to need to pitch like he's capable for this trade to be worth it, even if one or two of these guys busts completely. And more than that, Huntington is going to have to continue to be aggressive in order to address weakpoints on the current roster. But the direct result of this trade is that we have the strongest rotation locked in place for the next 3+ seasons, with the top prospect in the system still to be factored into the mix. This has always, always, always, always, always been the central flaw of the roster-building heading into every season, and it needs to be said here too that all of Taillon, Musgrove, and Williams need to establish themselves as dependable starters innings-wise still. All but Musgrove will get to career highs, and next year will still be a big test in terms of durability.
When you couple that with the Kela acquisition, locking in the back end of a bullpen, and similar to the starter situation, having a stable of controllable guys as options behind them, then look at Marte, Polanco, perhaps Diaz, perhaps Bell -- the conclusion to me is that the Archer deal puts us in the best position possible to take a run at things this year, next year, and the year after. Hoarding prospects is a recipe for remaining a .500 team. We need further acquisitions, and/or some players to still emerge from the system as contributors to really go for the next level, but why I'll defend the Archer trade resolutely is that instead of floundering around, it was a signal that we were going to take a run at winning.
From the perspective of risk and asset management, I can live with this trade all day. In the winter, both Glasnow and Meadows' values were absolutely nonexistent. Meadows shocked everyone by lighting the world on fire in Pittsburgh, but who knows how sustainable that will be, let alone whether he'll continue to be plagued by health issues. Baz is still not in full season baseball, but has a good shot to stick as a top-100 prospect, and a decent shot to be even more highly rated than that.
Glasnow is a total crapshoot, and I don't think this can even be emphasized enough. He could completely dominate for the rest of the season, and early next year, and then fall off a cliff entirely and be barely useable as a bullpen piece. Then he could resurrect himself again. I think he became instantly hyped as soon as he was out of Pittsburgh, and sure, there are some good reasons for that. But if we could go back in time to a week or so before the deadline, my sense is that people would probably not think too much of him being a headliner in a deal for Archer. Doubly so if the same idea was raised in January or February.
Bottom line for me is always that Archer is going to need to pitch like he's capable for this trade to be worth it, even if one or two of these guys busts completely. And more than that, Huntington is going to have to continue to be aggressive in order to address weakpoints on the current roster. But the direct result of this trade is that we have the strongest rotation locked in place for the next 3+ seasons, with the top prospect in the system still to be factored into the mix. This has always, always, always, always, always been the central flaw of the roster-building heading into every season, and it needs to be said here too that all of Taillon, Musgrove, and Williams need to establish themselves as dependable starters innings-wise still. All but Musgrove will get to career highs, and next year will still be a big test in terms of durability.
When you couple that with the Kela acquisition, locking in the back end of a bullpen, and similar to the starter situation, having a stable of controllable guys as options behind them, then look at Marte, Polanco, perhaps Diaz, perhaps Bell -- the conclusion to me is that the Archer deal puts us in the best position possible to take a run at things this year, next year, and the year after. Hoarding prospects is a recipe for remaining a .500 team. We need further acquisitions, and/or some players to still emerge from the system as contributors to really go for the next level, but why I'll defend the Archer trade resolutely is that instead of floundering around, it was a signal that we were going to take a run at winning.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE Bewitch Stakes (Gr. 3) - KEENELAND RACE 8Wagers: 7Staked: $2,750.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
Game 2 Belleville Senators @ Toronto Marlies -Belleville Senators leads series 1-0Event closes- Updated:
-