Joe Starkey's column this morning is hardly the first to point out how much is riding on Pedro Alvarez developing into a legitimate middle-of-the-order threat. But reading it sort of crystallized my thinking about the status of this team and prompted a few thoughts.
1. If Alvarez has a breakout year, this team is a contender as soon as next season. A lineup that starts off with Tabata, Presley, McCutchen and a productive Alvarez, followed by Walker, Jones/McGehee, Barajas and Barmes actually doesn't sound too bad -- especially with the addition of Cole to the pitching staff next season.
2. If Alvarez continues to flounder, though, you have to start thinking he's a bust -- in which case you have to seriously consider a major rebuild, starting with trading Cutch.
Why? Mostly because we've got a three-year, first-round talent gap to fill. Moskos, Alvarez and Sanchez were all taken as college players who would presumably be in the majors within two years of being drafted and productive within three. Thus far, only Alvarez has shown any glimpses of being a solid major leaguer, and he's currently our biggest question mark.
Simply put, if Alvarez can be what he was drafted to be, this team can be competitive in the short term and ride out the talent trough we're facing over the coming few years until the next big wave -- Taillon, Bell and Heredia -- starts to arrive in 2015 and 2016.
If he can't, this team is going to be as bad for the next three years as it's been for the past 20. In which case my suggestion would be to start dealing off people like Cutch, Tabata and Walker in hopes of acquiring the pieces you'll need to surround the likes of Marte, Bell, Taillon, Heredia, et al, with when that day comes.
Of course that would also make necessary my final point:
3. Neal Huntington would have to be fired and some other GM would brought in to oversee our next major rebuilding effort.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.
3 recs | 84 comments
I agree that Pedro is important
But I think this overrates his centrality. Cole and Taillon should combine for over 30 starts in 2013, which means the future is not now, but tomorrow.
And Cole and Taillon will be joining a team with very few holes, believe it or not. If Sanchez is decent (and despite his 2011, that’s still the way to bet), then we’ve got the middle covered, with elite talent at CF in place through 2015. The corner OF positions are solid for the foreseeable future between Presley, Tabata, Marte, and Grossman. Between McDonald, Morton, Burnett, Locke, McPherson, Lincoln, and Wilson (am I forgetting anyone?), there’s no reason to think that the rotation will be a weakness even before Heredia arrives.
Which means that the only positional holes, if Pedro fails, are at 3B and 1B. We have enough spare parts that we should be able to trade to fill one of those holes, and the other could well be filled internally or through FA.
The bottom line is that a complete failure by Pedro dooms 2012 and makes contention in 2013 a long shot. But 2014 and 2015 both figure to be 90+ win teams, Pedro or no Pedro. You can’t just keep discarding and drawing in hopes of having a royal flush; sometimes you need to play the hand you have, even if it’s just 3 of a kind.
JRoth95 - February 20, 2012
I get your point, but...
…someone has to hit home runs. Presley, Tabata, Marte and Grossman all project as solid players, but I don’t see any of them as 30-plus HR hitters. Nor would Cutch be if he’s extended.
If you’re already conceding we don’t have an internal power source at first or third, it’s asking quite a bit to expect we can acquire one with spare parts.
Moreover, if we’re both convinced a flameout by Pedro precludes a winning season until at least 2014 — Cutch’s last season before free agency — why not sell high and get a potential power-hitting corner infielder who should be ready by then instead of spending the next few years worrying about whether Cutch can be re-signed and how big an impact his absence would have on a budding winner rather than a perennial loser?
bucfaninwa - February 20, 2012
I have stated a few times
that I think Pedro is probably the biggest key to whether 2012 is another depressing season or if the team takes a big step forward. Having said that, it’s too soon to truly say that the team should be in firesale mode if he fails. There are just too many other moving parts in play here. Just a couple of examples:
1) Let’s say Pedro absolutely flops this year and can’t even hit minor league pitching. At the same time, what if Casey McGehee (under control for 3 more seasons) puts up an .800 OPS with 25 HRs and 100 RBIs like he did in 2010? At the same time Alex Dickerson rakes his way through Bradenton and Altoona and finishes the season strong for Indy. Now we go into next season feeling at least ok about having McGehee and Dickerson manning the corners starting in 2013. Are we still in firesale mode?
Maybe that’s too optimistic for you, though…how about:
2) Jones and McGehee form a decent platoon at 1B and Matt Curry hits well in Altoona and Indy. Dickerson is good in Bradenton and Altoona but doesn’t make it to Indy because of Curry so he still seems like a year or so away. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be any appealing internal options at 3B. However, the cache of OF prospects the Pirates have built up continues to produce. Couldn’t the team flip some combo of Marte/Grossman/Bell/Presley for a 3B prospect (talent level variable based on the deal proposed)?
As far as Moskos and Sanchez go, I dont’ think either can be lumped in with Pedro. Moskos is what he is. It was not a good pick. I would much rather have Matt Wieters. Blah, blah, blah. That doesn’t mean Moskos can’t provide some value. Maybe he becomes a really good LOOGY (an important role on a good team-Lopez and Scrabble played HUGE roles in the Rangers two WS losses). Maybe he becomes a closer. Maybe he’s just a middle reliever, but he’s not a total waste. Sanchez, we know even less about going forward. He was bad in 2011. However, that doesn’t mean he can’t still be an All-Star catcher. He could also wind up as a Kurt Suzuki-type, which may be a bummer from the #4 pick, but getting a 2-3 win player at a key defensive position has a lot of value. I don’t think you can really complain too much about that result.
KentuckyPirate - February 20, 2012
mostly off-topic
I was doing one of my trawls through past draft picks to see what you can expect out of the fourth overall pick (short answer: Kurt Suzuki isn’t such a bad outcome; from 1997-2006 the three best #4s were Ryan Zimmerman, Gavin Floyd, and Jeff Niemann, and there was a lot of bust).
And I found the horror that was the 2001 first round. Top five draft picks by bbWAR, not counting the sandwich round:
1. Chase Utley (#15 overall, 42.3 WAR)
2. Adrian Gonzalez (#1, 28.2 WAR)
3. Adam Wainwright (#25, 20.1 WAR)
4. Rocco Baldelli (#6, 6.4 WAR)
5. Sean Burnett (#19, 3.4 WAR)
That’s right, Sean Burnett was an excellent value pick for the 2000 draft.
WHYG Zane Smith - February 20, 2012
I was actually at Burnett's ML debut
I remember being really excited at the time…oh well…
KentuckyPirate - February 20, 2012
You ever read moneyball?
If you read the part about the 2002 draft it will make you cry. Lets see, BJ Upton, Grenke, Fielder (Although Billy the Omnipotent one missed on him too, they called Prince a player so fat the Athletics wouldn’t draft him), Matt Cain, Cole Hamels, and we drafted “our future number 3 starter” Bryan Bullington
http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?query_type=year_round&year_ID=2002&draft_round=1&draft_type=junreg
Everytime I think I can forgive David Littleyield, this draft convinces me otherwise.
Yung-Han - February 20, 2012
Aside from the fact that he took Bullington #1 overall, then projected him to be a #3 starter? That’s what’s always gotten me. And I never think I can forgive Dave Littlefield (and I’m SURE he’s wiping his tears with $100 bills hearing that I’ll never be okay with him).
SuperBaes - February 21, 2012
gotta admit that the LittleYield tag was awesome... well done
white angus - February 23, 2012
ha, and just today I read some poorly thought out article saying Burnett was a bad pick because we could have taken Wainwright.
Mr. E - February 21, 2012
I mean, he probably was a bad pick
but so were all the rest of the picks in that draft.
WHYG Zane Smith - February 21, 2012
*most of the rest of the picks
The Pirates probably got something like a top-20 player in the draft by drafting Chris Young in the fourth round. And… aaargghhh, I just looked at Matt Herges’ transaction log and now I’m all sad.
WHYG Zane Smith - February 21, 2012
oh and of course
They drafted one Jose Bautista in the late rounds. I read the retro on Matt Herges, then I read something about Littlefield’s handling of Brad Lincoln out of the draft, then I got reminded about Jose Bautista. I think I’ll get off the internet and start sticking forks in my eyes for fun instead.
(They also drafted Nate McLouth and Ian Snell that year, so I’d say that the problem really wasn’t with their 2000 drafting.)
WHYG Zane Smith - February 21, 2012
Why you gotta torture yourself, dude?
Isn’t just being a Pirates’ fan enough?
cocktailsfor2 - February 21, 2012
I bought my buddy's newborn daughter a Pirates onesie
He said to me “Haven’t they ruined our lives enough; why do this to my child?” Sadly, I think he was at least a little serious.
SuperBaes - February 21, 2012
just as a review of the 2000 draft
The Pirates’ draft yielded the second highest total WAR, with 52.6, though this includes Scott Baker who didn’t sign. They just edged out the D-backs at 51.4, who didn’t even have a first-rounder but drafted Brandon Webb in the eighth and drafted Ian Kinsler in the 29th, though he didn’t sign either.
The BBRef draft totals don’t let me break out people who didn’t sign, sorry; if the Pirates didn’t get to count Baker they’d probably drop a couple spots, but not behind the D-backs.
First by a huge margin was the Expos, with 98.6 total WAR, mostly from Grady Sizemore, Cliff Lee, Jason Bay, and Russell Martin (didn’t sign). It’s a good thing that these players turned into stars for the Expos and were not given up in ill-considered trades, or baseball might not be thriving in Montreal today!
Conclusion: Anyone who brings up the 2000 draft as an example of the Pirates’ poor choices needs to check themselves, unless they’re talking about what the Pirates did with the guys they got in it. Also, there are worse things than being a Pirates fan.
WHYG Zane Smith - February 21, 2012
How much is that from Bautista post-Pirates
CO_Bucs - February 24, 2012
Well, right
but the thing is that Bautista really was expected to be good. No one though 50-HR good, but if he’d put up his career WAR at a steadier pace (17.6 in 7 years, discarding the Rule 5 year), no one would have been at all surprised.
JRoth95 - February 24, 2012
16 WAR
Bautista had negative WAR with the Pirates (and with the three teams he played with before them). The value the Pirates got from the draft was 7 WAR from McLouth, 0.6 WAR from Burnett, and 3.4 WAR from Snell. (Plus their trade value.)
My point wasn’t that the Pirates didn’t screw up massively, it’s that the screw-ups took place after the draft that year. (And it was an anomalously successful year for their draft, and perhaps an anomalously poor year for everyone else.)
WHYG Zane Smith - February 24, 2012
this is bbWAR by the way
It’s easier to get the draft numbers for bbWAR. JRoth’s numbers are fWAR; Bautista only has 14.1 career bbWAR.
WHYG Zane Smith - February 24, 2012
"Only"
SuperBaes - February 24, 2012
as opposed to 17.6 career fWAR, I mean
WHYG Zane Smith - February 24, 2012
Just to be clear
His total career fWAR is 16.7, but IMO it’s meaningless (and sometimes dishonest) to include his numbers from his Rule 5 year – if Taillon had spent 2011 pitching 100 innings in Pittsburgh, he’d put up a negative WAR, but that wouldn’t say anything useful about his career as a whole.
JRoth95 - February 24, 2012
right
Not counting his rule 5 year his bbWAR is 14.9. By bbWAR his rule 5 year isn’t even his worst year; that’s 2006, when he had 0.5 offensive WAR but managed to have -1.4 total WAR due to his horrible defensive metrics. His CF rankings weren’t even that much worse than his 3B ratings this year.
WHYG Zane Smith - February 24, 2012
Sorry, noted the “only” because I’d been reading r.j. reynolds fanpost on Pirates shortstop development and impliedi listed the top WARS from players Pittsburgh drafted from 1985 on. Bautista’s only behind Bonds, Kendall, and Jeff King; he’s coming off of an MVP-caliber season (an award he probably should have won) and, at 31, probably has 4 more 6+ oWAR seasons left in his bat.
SuperBaes - February 24, 2012
And that depressed the crap out of me
SuperBaes - February 24, 2012
but it'll make the 2000 draft look even better!
WHYG Zane Smith - February 24, 2012
fWAR agrees
IIRC his Rule 5 year is -0.9, his 2006 -1.0. And his 2006 is part of the picture of what kind of player he was as a Pirate in a way that 2003 (?) shouldn’t be. That a 2×4 splinters under the weight of a highway bridge doesn’t tell you that the stud was worthless, it tells you that it was ill-suited to the job.
JRoth95 - February 25, 2012
McCutchen is a Pirate through 2015
Debuted in 2009, but played few enough games that his “first” professional season was 2010. The team controls his contract through 2015.
And, to clarify, by “spare parts” I mean that we have 5 OFs who, by mid-2013, could be starting for at least 20 other teams in baseball. For most teams, Grossman or Presley are welcome upgrades; for us, they’re spare parts. Same deal with the 4 “extra” SPs that we’ll have on hand by the end of 2013.
Finally, I don’t agree that a Pedro flameout precludes a winning season in 2013; I think it makes contention that year unlikely but, assuming that no one else loses a season, I think that 2013 looks like an 83-86 win season. If Cole comes out of the chute pitching like a legit ace, if Cutch has his career year, if Marte is a mini-Cutch in LF, then we could, in fact contend.
JRoth95 - February 20, 2012
it so evident that everyone is giving up pedro so quickly and ready to run him out of town just because he cant produce up to his potential YET. the guy is only 24 years old, he only played 1 year of minor league ball after being drafted and was rushed through the system fast, to say the least. HE HASNT EVEN PLAYED A FULL MAJOR LEAGUE SEASON YET!! give him a break geez. 95 and 74 games in 2010 and 2011, respecitively, doesnt constitute as full seasons. the guy hasnt even come into the “prime years” of his career yet! baseball guru Bill James, who i would side with over any of the people on here and every Pittsburgh sports media figure, says that players peak and are at their “prime years” from the ages of 26 to 29. so pedro still has 2 years until then. just because he was a #2 overall pick and was so hyped out of Vanderbilt, people have so much expectations and want them to met quickly in a heavy sports town like Pittsburgh. give the guy some time why dont you…..look at Alex Gordon of the Royals. he was even more hyped than Pedro coming out of Nebraska and was also a third baseman and was taken 2nd overall in 2005. just this past season in 2011, he FINALLY lived up to his bill and played like he was projected when he was drafted in 05, and not even playing his original position anymore cause he was so awful defensively at 3rd. THATS SEVEN YEARS!!! and people are already giving up on pedro after 3 years!?! give me a break
rinsana11 - February 20, 2012
It's not giving up, it's planning
I’m reasonably bullish on Pedro: I thinkit’s more likely that he becomes useful than that he flames out completely. But that doesn’t mean that it’s not sensible to think in advance how you handle a flameout. I disagree with bucfaninwa about how dire that situation is, but it’s certainly more consequential than, say, what do we do if Lincoln never pans out. One year ago, most of us had penciled in 3-5 WAR from Pedro in 2012, 2013, all the way through 2016. Most of us figured we’d even get one career year worth 6+ wins during that stretch. That’s a lot of WAR to replace, and it’s good to ponder in advance so we know whether or not to panic, should it come to pass.
JRoth95 - February 20, 2012
yeah
i agree with JRoth above… bucfaninwa paints a more dire picture than is the case probably, but unlike Roth, I don’t expect much from Tony Sanchez (when I say that, I mean I don’t expect him to be better than what we’ll have this year for instance, a .300 wOBA catcher… add in great defense, and min salary and that has value, but not great value).
If the Pirates think Pedro will have a Gordon like situation, that’s fine, but those are decisions that can lead to hirings and firings, because if he doesn’t we’ll have had both a (kind of) black hole at the ML level, and no trade value.
BurgherKing - February 20, 2012
I should clarify
While I’m generally pro-Sanchez, I didn’t mean in my above analysis anything more than what you’re saying. Since my point was that the 2013 club figures to be hole-free everywhere but 1B and (in the premise of this post) 3B, even modest production from Sanchez qualifies – if we get 1.5 WAR from him and another 0.5 WAR from a backup (we can hope), that’s a roughly league-average catching combo without us needing to do anything but ensure an above-replacement backup.
JRoth95 - February 20, 2012
The only way Cutch is a Pirate through the entire 2015 season...
is if he has signed an extension that gives up 1 or more free agency years. Otherwise he’s gone at the 2015 trading deadline, if not a year or two before that. Actually, without an extension, I don’t even see him starting the 2015 season here.
Thunder - February 20, 2012
Yes and no
Unless the FO is 100% convinced that Marte can replace virtually all of Cutch’s production, or unless a Cutch trade returns a lot of immediate help, I don’t think that the FO sends away ~6 WAR during what should be a division-contending (and, frankly, we should be division favorites) year. You’re going to throw away a WS run in order to get a couple of prospects?
Fielder and the Brewers is the obvious comp here. Emotionally I’m prepared for the idea that he gets traded away if he won’t extend. But in terms of actually trying to win pennants, that’s far from a safe bet.
JRoth95 - February 20, 2012
Really?? 2 years? and What do you expect out of Moskos?
Considering he’s been the only one that’s been given a chance. Tony Sanchez has shown he could hit until last year, everybody calm the F down. And Moskos only a BP option what do you honestly expect to see from him?
BigB2323 - February 20, 2012
I honestly expect nothing from Moskos.
If I’m wrong, I’ll be pleasantly surprised.
As for Sanchez, I’m somewhat optimistic he can still be a serviceable player.
The point is, both were taken in the fourth round of the draft, ahead of players who made it to the majors much faster and project as far better than merely serviceable.
Nobody’s perfect and every team makes mistakes in the draft. I’m just saying that if it turns out we had a three-year stretch where we drafted fourth, second and fourth, and the results were two busts and a serviceable-but-unspectacular pro, we might have to take some proactive steps to fill in those gaps.
bucfaninwa - February 20, 2012
“…….ahead of players who made it to the majors much faster and project as far better than merely serviceable”
that is the absolute worst thing to say right there when talking prospects and the draft, bud. you never know how a prospect will turn out with all sorts of different determinants when it comes to being a big league ballplayer such as simply making the necessary adjustments day by day, having the dedication and hard work all the time, and the will power. the whole sceme of the draft is picking AMATEURS!!!!!! hence thats why its called the AMATEUR DRAFT. you never know how a player is going to project, no matter where he was taken in the draft. WHAT ABOUT ALBERT PUJOLS????!!!! he was taken in the 13TH ROUND and every one of the 29 other teams couldve drafted him!! and look at him now. so dont even bring up the fact that there are guys taken after the likes of pedro, sanchez, and moskos that are contributing more to their teams now
rinsana11 - February 20, 2012
Moskos
Moskos is a different story; very few people thought highly of him, even at draft time. I remember some reports that he could reach back and hit 98 and the most optimistic writers pegged him around #8… but taking him at #4 was a reach. I imagine signability/cost was a concern, but it also seemed like a weird MLB need-based selection (Torres was leaving and they were looking for their “closer of the future”).
I remember, at the time, I obviously wanted Wieters. Barring that (clashing with Boras, the obvious expense he would be), I wanted Mesoraco or LaPorta. IIRC, Vlad was doing the mock over at BBTF and picked either Jason Heyward or Beau Mills.
SuperBaes - February 20, 2012
okay moskos is definitely a different story cause we all know that he was the “safe” pick instead of littlefield going for purely the best player available, which was Wieters. but majority of times, you will never know how a player pans out after drafted. that is absolutely one of my biggest pet peeves in sports is when people say years down the road that they “COULD HAVE HAD PLAYER X, hes doing better than they guy we drafted”. its stupid. and mesaraco didnt go til 15th so that wouldve been even more of a reach there. i mean look at that same year, rick porcello went 27th overall and went pretty much straight to the majors and hes having a pretty good career too. so YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN!
rinsana11 - February 20, 2012
Generally speaking
I don’t like the “could have had player X” debates. As you point out, though, the exception would be making an obviously poor selection based on financial constraints. Moskos over Wieters qualifies as one of these. Also, the Porcello pick is not a good example because he signed a $7M major league deal out of high school. He dropped because of major signability concerns kinda like Josh Bell. It’s great for the Tigers that they got him in (although you could make a case that his ML deal has hindered his development) but it’s harder to fault teams for not taking such a gamble.
KentuckyPirate - February 20, 2012
Well said. This may damn well be the case for some other draft picks in the DL era as well.
Another great post, as it is my understanding the Pirates STOLE Bell from…who? The Tigers. They didn’t have a 1st round pick this year, and I’ve talked with a few folks that think the “going to Texas” smokescreen was a ploy to drop him in Detroit’s lap….for a hefty bonus. For that reason, I am not impressed with paying him $5m to sign. I’m impressed with NH’s balls drafting him.
insane_sanity - February 21, 2012
Looking at it now
Those college arms not named David Price taken in the first round are really disappointing. Moskos might be the best of that (non-Price) bunch.
SuperBaes - February 20, 2012
Actually sorting by WAR, basically 40 players total from each draft become actual major leaguers, maybe 15 are 3+ war players. That is how much a crap shoot the draft is. Also the percentage of 1st rounders that make up those that make up actual major leaguers is very high, if you miss with your top 2 picks, your draft that year is likely worthless.
Yung-Han - February 20, 2012
I was just noting some of the crap names among the college pitchers taken in 2007
1. David Price 10.4 bWAR
4. Daniel Moskos 0.2 bWAR
6. Ross Detwiler 1.1 bWAR
8. Casey Weathers
19. Joe Savery 0.1 bWAR
23. Nick Schmidt
25. Aaron Poreda 0.3 bWAR
26. James Simmons
30. Andrew Brackman 0.1 bWAR
Those are the college arms taken in the first round of the 2007 MLB first year player draft. 9 pitchers combining for 12.2 total bWAR; 85% coming from Price and three of them with no MLB experience to speak of.
I was actually wrong; Detwiler and Poreda have both put up a higher bWAR than Moskos (aside from Price, obviously). Coincidentally, Poreda was DFA’d last year by SD and is now in the Pirates organization. The revealing thing to me is how effective Detwiler was last season; I had no idea he’d pitched that well.
SuperBaes - February 21, 2012
plus we have Poreda now
win win!
white angus - February 23, 2012
Speaking of Moskos
He pretty much shaved his head. He showed up yesterday at spring training with really long hair and a bald spot on top. Today he shows up sporting a buzz at about a 1 on the hair trimmer.
Hardly recognized him.
God Loves - February 20, 2012
Sure he did that for a reason. Did he not have a name on the jersey either? That might be a ploy to avoid the gomers that are down there who will heckle him.
pskell02 - February 21, 2012
Um…couldn’t they just sign a power bat if that’s all it would take to compete. Are you serial with this? An effing firesale just because Pedro tanks? I don’t gt your logic that they need to rebuild the whole team in order to replace the third baseman.
PensFan024 - February 20, 2012
Short answer, no
The Pirates can’t/won’t spend the untold millions of dollars it would take to sign a 30-homer guy, even if it was the only thing standing between them and contention. And even if they were willing, there’s no guarantee the free agent in question would sign with us. But you have to have someone like that, regardless of where he comes from.
Like it or not, Alvarez isn’t just another third baseman. He’s a home-grown player you expected to build your lineup around. If he isn’t that guy, you can’t just sign another, nor can you trade for a Major League-ready one without giving up your own best prospects.
So again, if Alvarez isn’t the guy, where do you find another? My point is that Cutch is your most marketable asset right now, but even he wouldn’t get you proven bopper in return. But he might get you a prospective bopper who might be ready to team with Marte, Dickerson, Bell, and Tabata in 2014 or 15 to form a pretty good lineup to go along with the influx of young arms we’ll see at that point.
We need a guy like that, and there’s really no other way to get him unless you draft one — and we can see how imperfect a science that is.
bucfaninwa - February 20, 2012
I agree that Pedro is not "just another 3B"
and if he fails, the Pirates aren’t going to find his replacement in free agency. However, it’s not completely and totally out of the question that Casey McGehee returns to ‘09-’10 form and can fill that role (at least partially). There’s also the chance of trading for a top-50 1B/3B prospect by dealing a top-50 OF prospect (Marte/Grossman/Bell?) isn’t there?
KentuckyPirate - February 20, 2012
Conceivably, but then you no longer have the prospect you traded
Nor do you have Cutch, who very likely left as a free agent as all this was playing out.
To be clear, I’m not saying with any certainty that Alvarez will fail. I’m certainly hoping he succeeds and I think there’s a reasonable chance he will.
I’m just pointing out that if we do have to consign him to the “bust bin of history,” we’re going to have a gap in between the Cutch,/Tabata/Walker crop we’ve harvested over the past few years and the Bell/Taillon/Heredia crop that’s coming in a few years. The presence of Alvarez (along with Marte and Cole) bridges that gap very nicely. Without him, we might have to be creative and take some risks for the future.
bucfaninwa - February 20, 2012
Whether Cutch leaves after 2015 is kinda irrelevant
Maybe Pedro fails to live up to expectations and the Pirates have to trade Marte for Will Middlebrooks (whether or not you like him as a prospect isn’t really the point, he’s a good hitting 3B prospect who will open 2012 in AAA). Yes, it will weaken the system’s OF crop but they still would have Bell and Grossman in the fold with AP, Cutch and Tabata. It’s not unreasonable to think that all 5 of those players plus 2012 draft option Victor Roache could all be ready to play in Pittsburgh by 2016 when Cutch would leave so I’m not sure it would really hurt us all that much. If Pedro does fail, we will need to do something but I don’t think it’s accurate to say that we NEED to deal Cutch or do anything that could even be considered a “firesale.”
KentuckyPirate - February 20, 2012
This was really well-written, Bucfaninwa
I really enjoyed this post.
For what it’s worth, I suppose my opinion falls somewhere between yours and JRoth. I don’t think that an Alvarez flameout necessarily forces a Cutch trade. But I do think if Pedro tanks we would need to have something reasonably surprising happen.
What do I mean by that? Well, most of us are expecting Cole & Taillon to be solid, most of us are expecting Sanchez to at least make the bigs in some capacity, etc. etc. But if we got one nice big surprise — maybe Sanchez breaks out this year, or ZVR really jumps forward this year or next, or one of d’Arnaud and Mercer takes steps forward — then I could see us having enough talent to cover the gap.
Garrett122 - February 20, 2012
Yep
IMO there’s plenty of talent lying around to basically close the talent gap if Pedro fails. No guarantees, of course, and Pedro producing is a better bet than, say, Sanchez turning into a 3.5 WAR guy as Marte becomes a 4.5 WAR guy, but Pedro is not as central to our chances as he seems. If he fails and nobody else steps up, then we’re short wins in ‘12, ’13, and maybe ’14 as well, but he’s not the only source for those wins.
I do understand bucfaninwa’s concern about power, but it’s a new era, HR-wise, and there’s certainly precedent for winning without a lot of boppers: witness the Ozzie Smith Cardinals, frex, not to mention the 2010 Giants. Given that the 2014 rotation should be loaded (I see us having basically 2 aces and 3 #3s), we really just need a league-average offense to contend.
JRoth95 - February 20, 2012
See this is the part I have real trouble with— if we have 1 ace, that would be awesome… to hope for 2 (at least from Taillon and Cole) is crazy. In the best case, it would be their first full years, and I’ll be shocked if either of them can post an ERA under 3. Ditto with the 3 #3s part.
Ideally, I’d hope that pretty much everyone in the rotation will have the ability throw sub 3.75 ERA ball, and hopefully not more than 1 will go higher than 4.1-4.2, and one will get the breaks and end up around 3.
BurgherKing - February 20, 2012
in fact, if Marte is 4.5 WAR guy
and Sanchez 3.5, then I think we should be looking to trade Cutch at that point for stud arms from AA.
BurgherKing - February 20, 2012
I wasn't saying either is likely
But they’re both in the realm of possibility. As opposed to 5 years ago when you had to hope that Duffy was going to be a 3+ WAR guy if you wanted the team to go anywhere.
I was going to say in one of these comments that I could see trading Cutch, but not as a firesale, but rather as a response to other guys blossoming. Trade him in mid-2014, and you should be able to plug any hole in the current team while adding another couple pieces to the system. But I highly doubt everything would be going that well.
Also, I suppose, if Cole and Taillon both have TJ surgery and Pedro collapses and none of the other SPs turn into anything interesting, you almost have to trade Cutch, but let’s hope it doesn’t come to that (or anywhere near).
JRoth95 - February 20, 2012
the added second comment was just a btw
if those do come true (and I agree they are possible) then trading Cutch becomes almost a no brainer…
BurgherKing - February 20, 2012
Don't be so realistic
Would it kill you to dream a little?
JRoth95 - February 20, 2012
haha
no, just pointing out that that’s a best case scenario…
BurgherKing - February 20, 2012
Nice post
Disagree a little bit, I guess. If Pedro flames out, you could reasonably add a couple pieces to make up for his expected production. First base is already somewhat of a problem position. The Bucs can’t just get an All-Star first baseman. And they can’t just get an All-Star third baseman.
But, they could reasonably get two guys with decent OBP and maybe 20 HRs, which, in the end would amount to, like, Perfect-World-Pedro and half of Garret Jones…or something.
I guess my point is that IF Pedro is a bust, you don’t have to replace his expected production with one super awesome guy, you could do it in other ways that don’t cause you to trade Cutch.
Of course, it’d be much easier if Pedro just mashes.
CTapps - February 20, 2012
Seems to me that there are 3 keys to the Pirates' future, over the next couple of years.....
…..in this order of importance:
1. Performance of the pitching staff (especially the rotation): This is key for every team in every season. If the starting rotation meets expectations, the Pirates have a shot at significant improvement. If they don’t, this will be another dismal year, regardless of what the team does on offense. It’s that simple.
2. Offensive development of the young core: If McCutchen, Walker, Tabata, and Presley show reasonable improvement, the offense should increase its run production significantly.
3. Alvarez (he’s an important factor, but not pre-eminent). If he succeeds, he becomes part of the “young core” mentioned in #2, certainly an important part. But he’s not there yet.
I see no reason for a fire sale, regardless of Pedro’s production.
On the other hand, if the Pirates cannot work out an extension which buys out a year or two of McCutchen’s free agency, THAT IN ITSELF becomes an incentive for trading him. The best time to trade him has been debated elsewhere….. and there are so many important factors involved that I don’t propose to re-hash them here.
IMO, the only certainty is that, as each day passes, the probability of an extension gets smaller and we get one day closer to Cutch being traded.
magnumo - February 20, 2012
I think Cutch will extend...
when he sees a commitment to winning and they offer him what he thinks he is worth $10+ mil per…I told everyone this winter (though I knew it was a pipe dream), “If the Bucs sign Prince, McCutch will extend in 5 minutes…and so will Walker”
PSRaptor - February 20, 2012
No offense, but I rank them in just the opposite order
I’m not saying pitching isn’t important, but it seems like the Pirates have enough interesting arms at various levels of the minors that they should have options even if only a third of them ever pan out. We’ve got at least three and maybe four potential aces in the pipeline. Pitching isn’t the problem moving forward.
Likewise, there aren’t quite as many position players in the system, but there are enough complementary pieces that you should be able to construct a fairly potent lineup around an elite bat. Assuming you have one. Unfortunately, with the possible exception of Bell, who’s still a long ways from Pittsburgh, Alvarez is the only player in the organization who profiles to be that sort of player — we hope.
Which brings me back to the point of the post. Pedro isn’t just another cog in this machine. He’s the single most important piece of the puzzle from the Pirates perspective — even more important that Cutch. And if he can’t be the type of player we need him to be — something we’ll find out fairly soon, I think — we may have to use our second-most important player to acquire what our most important player isn’t.
bucfaninwa - February 21, 2012
No offense taken. We can agree to disagree.
During the “next couple of years” time frame (2012 and 2013 seasons) which I mentioned, my expectations are:
- All the interesting arms and pitching potential in the system likely will have zero-to-little impact on the performance of the major league team.
- The performance of the Pirate’s major league pitching staff WILL be the primary determinant of the team’s fate, regardless of whether Alvarez becomes a star or a bust (or anywhere in between). Seems that the 2011 season provided vivid evidence of that.
- A productive Alvarez certainly will help the team, but reasonable development by McCutchen, Walker, Tabata, and Presley should improve the team’s offense, REGARDLESS of what Alvarez does.
Further, the 2012 and 2013 seasons should clarify our picture in many ways:
1. The starting rotation will perform….. or they won’t.
2. Our minor league arms will develop and sustain their promise….. or they won’t.
3. McCutchen, Walker, Tabata, and Presley will improve the offense….. or they won’t.
4. Alvarez will contribute….. or bust.
5. McCutchen will be extended….. or traded.
6. The Pirates will break their losing streak…… or they won’t.
We can probably agree that Pirate fans are living in interesting times.
magnumo - February 22, 2012
neither option in 5 may happen
Cutch is under team control for ’14 and ’15. I see no reason to trade him, unless for a monster haul…
BurgherKing - February 22, 2012
This is the drum I've been banging
Obviously I can see circumstances where you move him, but he’s a lot of wins to give up in peak contention years. Maybe Marte steps in and you only drop a win or two, while Cutch brings back immediate help in a hole and an impact prospect who’s a couple years away, but you’d better be awfully damn sure of yourself before you willingly downgrade from 93 to 91 wins.
JRoth95 - February 22, 2012
93 wins
the stuff that dreams are made of!
BurgherKing - February 22, 2012
rec’ed
karreemofwheat - February 22, 2012
I fully agree.....
…..that #5 is a non-sure-thing. I see extend-or-trade-McCutchen at perhaps 80% probabity during the next two seasons.
I’m in the camp which believes it makes little sense to extend McCutchen if he won’t sell a year or two of his free agency. Within the next two seasons, the Pirates’ front office should know whether such a deal is possible or even likely. Beyond 2013, I anticipate that McCutchen’s trade value will begin to drop (although perhaps not for all possible suitors). Of course, his trade value will depend on his performance, whether he marks time or continues to improve over the next couple of seasons.
Also, within the next two seasons, the team should have a much better handle on what they have in Gorkys, Marte, and Grossman.
magnumo - February 23, 2012
+1
karreemofwheat - February 23, 2012
Trade value
As has been noted, it’s probably not actually possible in 2012 for any team to provide fair value for Cutch – 3.5 years at 5+ WAR/year, with half a year at league minimum and an additional year at a severe discount. Most teams don’t have enough talent to provide fair value in 2013, either.
Which is to say that Cutch’s trade value isn’t going down in a linear fashion, because his current trade value is depressed by practical reality. Peak return for him probably comes in the first half of 2014, but of course that’s also the point at which the wins he provides should be most valuable to us.
JRoth95 - February 24, 2012
pitching will always "be a problem going forward"...
no other player gets hurt more than a pitcher. no other player is as over-priced as a really good pitcher.
the team should always go after stellar pitching when possible
white angus - February 23, 2012
Not a fire sale at all...
The Bucs have enough young talent that if Pedro busts you just rethink the strategy and use the young talent as trade chips for a bat. And you focus on FA market too. If Taillon, Cole, etc. are stud pitchers, then that is one less hole to fill…and you can spend $$$ on a bat
PSRaptor - February 20, 2012
Sweetleb is available. Just sayin’.
maguro - February 20, 2012 via mobile
Maguro...
Regarding the FO, I have only this to say to you.
cocktailsfor2 - February 20, 2012
Meh. I’ve seen teams get into the playoffs with strong pitching and average hitting (assuming we have strong pitching some time soon, which isn’t guaranteed). If we dont have plus hitting because of Alvarez not panning out, that wouldn’t kill playoff chances by itself (if the arms are strong). Especially in the Neuronal League.
Adam Reynolds - February 21, 2012 via mobile
No need for a firesale
When NH and company came in, the team was bad and the minors were awful. So they sold off every little piece they could in order to try and build something respectable for the future. Now they are in different situation. I am not saying that trading McCutchen is out of the question, but we are far from a firesale. If they look at the team and say you know what, “Marte looks like he is ready to play… Cutch has some of the highest stock in the league and we need power at the corners.” then yeah you can go ahead and look for a trade. Also Burnett or Bedard or Correia have good seasons and people are looking to upgrade at the deadline, then we can do that as well. But for the most part it is small moves that can be done, and this trend will continue until we break through. The idea of getting rid of a bunch of young talent because they aren’t all ready at the same time is kind of silly.
sidbreamslegs - February 23, 2012
Pitching
Defense
and timely hitting will get er done.
SmokyB - February 24, 2012
Firesale?? STUPID
I think I lost brain cells reading this stupidity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! First Alvarez will come around, he is young. But what your saying is lets trade him like we did Rameriez, Bautista and others and watch them blossom as players in other organizations. BAD IDEA
Second, Cutch will be resigned and won’t be going anywhere. If you are a real Pirate fan you would see a change in the tides of the Central and I believe the Buccos have a chance to make noise this year and if not chase the pennant at least come close to the 2nd wild card.
PiratesFanSince1980 - February 26, 2012
I don't think the Bautista comparison is fair
No sane person thought he would become the 8 WAR juggernaut that he is today. I hated the Ramirez trade (he was my favorite Pirate before Neil Walker), but that was more of a mandated “cut payroll” directive from above; trading now would be more of a reinvestment in the team.
I’m not completely confident that McCuthen will be re-signed. All indications I’ve seen point to Cutch’s unwillingness to include any FA years in an extension. If this doesn’t change, I’m starting to lean towards moving him for more/future pieces. Pittsburgh seems confident in the OF’s they have in the system, but suspect in the 1B and SS departments (possibly 3B as well, if Petey tanks). While Cutch is still a Pirate through 2015 without any deal getting done, I think he’ll be at the end of his Pittsburgh run (if that extension is not in place) and turning him into several good pieces doesn’t sound like such a horrible idea to me.
SuperBaes - February 26, 2012
Sorry to hear about your brain cells
Judging from your response, it’s evident you don’t have any to spare.
bucfaninwa - February 27, 2012
nice
karreemofwheat - March 1, 2012
It's still too early for Alvarez. Although, if he doesn't show at least some promise this year, it could be alarming.
Anthony Defeo - February 26, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bucs Dugout to post a comment.