Comments on: Why an Andrew McCutchen Deal Would Be Impossible

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 19:39:00 +0000

A lot of good hypotheticals there really.The only comment I really have to wonder about is that of Murray P. If you have been watching the Pirates for 40 years as you mention,what have you really been watching if you don’t think McCutchen is an above average talent ? Myself,having watched Marte for one full season at AA,I think he is already superior defensively,but a completely different type of offensive player.Now,you put McCutchen in left field,and Marte in Center,you will have a true outstanding defensive outfield.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 03:33:00 +0000

No trade with the Nationals would include Harper. What about swapping out Harper with Espinosa, and the players eeee12 mentioned. Espinosa’s first full year WAR was the same as McCutchen’s first year. Also, Espinosa could play short for the Pirates.

By: Tim Williams

Tim Williams — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 15:30:00 +0000

I looked at every team, but the point wasn’t to find a trade that would work. The point was to show that no trade would work because of McCutchen’s value to the Pirates. For the Nationals, a trade would have to include Harper plus more prospects. The Nationals probably wouldn’t want to give up more, because they see Harper as a future star. Why trade a future star and 3-4 more prospects for one player if you can just wait on that future star to arrive? From the Pirates side it wouldn’t make sense because they already have a star for four years at the least. So they’d need much more than Harper, otherwise they’re just trading a current star for a guy who has the potential to be a future star, which is pretty much a lateral move.

By: Murray Passarieu

Murray Passarieu — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 12:42:00 +0000

There is always one out there? Thanks for that. I’ve been a Bucs fan for 40 years and sorry, I look at Cutch and I love him, but he is our best player and he’s not as good as most other teams best players and unlike other teams, we don’t have as much to pick him up when he’s not doing well. I think Crawford at his best was way better than McCutchen. Hopefully next year he will be as good as everyone thinks he is now. It is possible that he would be better on another team where he would have more protection in the lineup. Maybe that’s what it will take for him to reach his potential, although I’d obviously rather see him do it in Pittsburgh.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 12:22:00 +0000

Did you consider the Nationals? I know Rendon can’t be traded yet but a Harper, Rendon and Peacock or Cole package matches your criteria pretty spot on, no? Of course Washington would never go for that but anyways..

By: Tim Williams

Tim Williams — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 22:12:00 +0000

The purpose of the numbers is to make the process as objective as possible. I can’t give McCutchen a higher trade value unless it was painfully obvious. I can only take his WAR, his projected salary, and enter it in to the calculator. From there I match up his value to the values given to prospects, which was calculated based on the historical value that prospects of each category have given throughout the years. It’s not meant to be exact. It’s just meant to be better than the usual process of “What about Players A, B, and C for Player X” deals, which have nothing to support why the trade proposal is a fair swap.

By: white angus

white angus — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 21:56:00 +0000

yes, i agreed at the years of control. that would be a huge bargaining chip with other teams. but i dont agree on putting an actual $ amount on each year. its more of a guess than estimation.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 21:17:00 +0000

IMO, an extension is not the right way to go for the Pirates.
If they can trade McCutchen for a very good starting pitcher and a hitter with power, say a 1st basemen, if I had to take the lineup they have now with McCutchen or a lineup without him and power hitting 1st basemen, a very good pitcher and Marte in Centerfield, it is a no brainer for me, I would part with McCutchen and I would not worry so much about what he could have brought, but what the team would look like without him.

By: Tim Williams

Tim Williams — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 20:28:00 +0000

I think with any extension you’re really talking about the risks involved with each player. McCutchen is getting less per year than he would by going year to year and staying healthy. That’s the risk he takes. The Pirates are taking a risk by guaranteeing that much money, when they could play it safe and go year to year. The benefit for McCutchen is that he gets guaranteed money. The benefit for the Pirates is that they get a value if McCutchen stays healthy.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 20:07:00 +0000

The number that is thrown around when talking about a possible extension is six years and $51.25 M.
——————————————————————————

When some one says 51mil for 6 years they are really saying 11mil for 4 years and 40mil for 2 years. Will McCutchen make 11mil the next 4 years if the Pirates do nothing? It is possble that he will make 40mil for years 5 and 6. In other words, how much would he make per year for the next 6 years if the Pirates do nothing?

Since they have one of the best centerfield prospects in baseball probably a 1/2 year to a year away, what do they do with him (Marte)?