Comments on: Winter Meetings Notebook: Platoons

By: Kevin_Creagh

Kevin_Creagh — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 11:41:00 +0000

I’m a day late on this piece, but let me explain my theory a little….
I’m probably repeating myself, but a farm system has 2 uses. The first is to supply cost-controlled talent to the major league team. Second is to use as trade chips to augment the major league team.
The Pirates are in an unusual (for them) position to contend right now, right here, in 2012. They have to make a move of some sort to auger the fan base for a playoff run.
Prospects are a little like fruit — you can’t keep them on the vine forever or else they will wither. To some extent, that’s what is starting to happen with Owens, Locke, and Wilson. Correia should have been replaced by 1 of these three at this point, but the Pirates are trying to squeeze every dollar out of him. Next year, two of the 3 should be starting, but most likely it will be only 1. So get someone value out of 1 right now for a Carlos Quentin type. (My offer was one of the 3 plus Willy Garcia in the conversation with Tim).

By: Dave Parker's Unfiltered Camel

Dave Parker's Unfiltered Camel — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 21:01:00 +0000

I’ll be clear on this: I’m not implying that your methodology is wrong. I’m just wondering if the organization looks at it a little differently. I have a feeling that they place even greater value in their prospects. I agree with your thought process with regard to building from within.

By: Tim Williams

Tim Williams — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:47:00 +0000

I think they’re available to be had, but only in the right deal. As I mentioned in the article, I wouldn’t deal them for a rental.

By: Tim Williams

Tim Williams — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:47:00 +0000

I think they’re available to be had, but only in the right deal. As I mentioned in the article, I wouldn’t deal them for a rental.

By: Andrew Smalley

Andrew Smalley — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:45:00 +0000

All good points. I’m not as high on the AAA-guys as you are, but I do still think they have value. However, I just think, while not expendable surely, they are available to be had, much easier than a Polanco/Hanson type that you can dream on a little more. That’s just my perspective in regards to prospects: if they *can* be stars – even if not likely – they have much more relative value – to me – than a guy that his future is relatively stable and easy to envision and, most importantly, easy to replace. Perhaps ‘shiny new toy’ syndrome, but it has always been my preference.

By: Andrew Smalley

Andrew Smalley — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:45:00 +0000

By: Andrew Smalley

Andrew Smalley — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:40:00 +0000

That’s true. I guess I’m stating, in my opinion, which is *most* likely. But, you’re right, that ceiling *could* be higher, particularly w/r/t Wilson, in my eyes.

By: Andrew Smalley

Andrew Smalley — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:40:00 +0000

That’s true. I guess I’m stating, in my opinion, which is *most* likely. But, you’re right, that ceiling *could* be higher, particularly w/r/t Wilson, in my eyes.

By: Tim Williams

Tim Williams — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:27:00 +0000

My approach to prospects has nothing to do with the site. It actually benefits me if they deal prospects, as that leads to incoming links from other teams learning about the prospects they just got. That’s what happened when they dealt Pounders to the Royals and Cayonez/Moreno to the Yankees.

The reason I’m protective with prospects is because of what I’ve been saying pretty much since starting this site in 2009. The Pirates need to build through prospects. They need to take the approach of the Rays. Bring up prospects, have them perform for their controlled years, then trade them before free agency hits and reload the system, ideally with a new prospect ready to take over. You don’t get to that point by making it a habit to casually deal prospects away.

I agree that each offer should be considered. That’s why I tried to outline some examples of when a guy would be untouchable. A major league ready prospect for a two month rental? I don’t do it. Dealing a guy with upside who hasn’t broken out? You’re selling low. Dealing a potential star who is close to the majors and can give you six years of cost-controlled production for three and a half years of an expensive option? Again, not the move the Pirates should be making.

By: Kirk Lee

Kirk Lee — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:09:00 +0000

Tim, I think you do a very good job of taking a level-headed approach when everyone in Pittsburgh is losing their heads and getting starry-eyed at the available upgrades… even if you may have a tendency to be slightly overly-protective of Pirates prospects at times (after all, it is the name of your website these days). I don’t think the Pirates should have to be blown away with a deal to pull the trigger on some prospects, but I do think they should have to truly believe they are getting the better end of it. Guys like Cole and Taillon should be untouchable with rare exceptions (such as when a superstar with several years of control is being discussed). Other guys should be dealt very cautiously. But no one should be untouchable. The Nats offer Bryce Harper and Stephen Strasburg (which they would obviously never do), you give them whatever they want in return. Hypothetical insanities aside, each offer should be considered before being rejected, and considered long and hard before being accepted.
On a side note, I don’t think it’s a certainty that Karstens is gone after 2013. He wouldn’t exactly break the bank to bring back in free agency, and Pittsburgh loves the guy.