Comments on: 2012 Indianapolis Indians Season Recap and Top 10 Prospects http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012/11/2012-indianapolis-indians-season-recap-and-top-10-prospects.html Your best source for news on the Pittsburgh Pirates and their minor league system. Thu, 13 Nov 2014 16:37:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0 By: Tim Williams http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012/11/2012-indianapolis-indians-season-recap-and-top-10-prospects.html#comment-22162 Mon, 12 Nov 2012 18:42:36 +0000 http://www.piratesprospects.com/?p=44004#comment-22162 The article you keep referring to was a two part article with over 4000 words evaluating the trades. You’re looking at one line from that article and drawing a huge conclusion.

First, here is a summary paragraph from that same article showing my overall evaluations for the trades.

“The track record of trades isn’t perfect, but at the same time it’s hard to say that the track record is bad. That’s especially hard to say when you look at the current roster, and see that most of the top players (Jeff Karstens, Charlie Morton, James McDonald, Joel Hanrahan, Jose Tabata) were all acquired via trade. Huntington’s trade record seems normal for a General Manager. You win some, you lose some. You have some disasters, and you have some big wins. You trade some guys away who go on to surprise, and you get guys for next to nothing who surprise you.”

That’s not exactly “propping up Huntington’s trade record”.

Second, that article was written in early July, 2011. At the time Fryer was in the majors, had been hitting well in the minors, and looked like a guy who could be a strong backup catcher. You’re arguing his value a year and a half later, with the benefit of hindsight.

Maybe “huge win” wasn’t the best term. Maybe “huge bonus” would have been better. And in fact, looking back, I said “huge victory”, not “huge win”. But it’s semantics. The overall point was that Hinske had no trade value, yet they got someone who, at the time, looked like he could have a major league future. I still think that’s true of Fryer, although less likely than when the article was written.

And if you notice, when I was doing my long summary of the trades in those same articles, I barely even mentioned the Hinske deal, since it wasn’t significant. I even said that the deal was a minor one:

“As for the minor deals, with bench guys and relievers (Eric Hinske, Javier Lopez, Jesse Chavez), the results haven’t been huge, although the expectations shouldn’t have been that great to begin with.”

So perhaps you need to drop the whole “Eric Hinske trade” argument. You’re clearly trying to make something out of nothing.

]]>
By: battlingbucs http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012/11/2012-indianapolis-indians-season-recap-and-top-10-prospects.html#comment-22154 Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:07:06 +0000 http://www.piratesprospects.com/?p=44004#comment-22154 Hate to get on you about a minor point here Tim but d’Arnaud did not have prospect eligibility coming into this season. He had 143 AB last season which is above the 130 AB limit.

]]>
By: emjayinTN http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012/11/2012-indianapolis-indians-season-recap-and-top-10-prospects.html#comment-22150 Mon, 12 Nov 2012 11:09:05 +0000 http://www.piratesprospects.com/?p=44004#comment-22150 Tim: Nice revue – like to see the Pirates commit to Jeff Locke at the No. 5 spot in the Rotation. He came up earlier than expected in 2011 from AA and a cup of coffee at AAA because there was not anything else to consider. Last year he was brought up after pitching 142 innings at AAA, and leading Indy to the Playoffs. His record, ERA, 3/1 K/W Ratio, and .215 average against have earned him the opportunity. In fact, I think all of the Top 5 will see considerable time at PNC in 2013.

]]>
By: beatembuccos21 http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012/11/2012-indianapolis-indians-season-recap-and-top-10-prospects.html#comment-22148 Sun, 11 Nov 2012 22:08:14 +0000 http://www.piratesprospects.com/?p=44004#comment-22148 Agreed – no one is or should be judging Huntington on this one move.

My concern is that a web site like yours – with a bunch of readership – is telling its readers that Huntington’s trade record is good (not just this trade, but the entirety of his trade record). It clearly is not. This trade is a microcosm of the problem – Huntington has had multiple failures in dealing players and this web site has propped up his trade record as being successful (with this trade in particular somehow being tabbed a ‘huge victory’). That’s what my concern is – you reach a lot of Pirate fans and yet are telling people that this move was ‘big’. That seems unjustifiable and speaks poorly of your credibility to judge other trades that are actually significant.

]]>
By: Tim Williams http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012/11/2012-indianapolis-indians-season-recap-and-top-10-prospects.html#comment-22147 Sun, 11 Nov 2012 21:59:01 +0000 http://www.piratesprospects.com/?p=44004#comment-22147 I don’t think anyone is basing their evaluations on Huntington based on the results of the Eric Hinske deal.

]]>
By: beatembuccos21 http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012/11/2012-indianapolis-indians-season-recap-and-top-10-prospects.html#comment-22146 Sun, 11 Nov 2012 21:43:50 +0000 http://www.piratesprospects.com/?p=44004#comment-22146 I don’t so much care about this deal – as I noted in our previous discussion on this, I consider this to be a minor deal (although a big failure at that). What I do care about is that a web site that gets approx. 1 million page views per month taking the view that Neal Huntington has a stellar trade record. He does not. I think you have an obligation to your readers. Do you seriously think this trade was either a huge victory or big?

I’ve been told we should trust Huntington’s process. If that’s the case then his trades shouldn’t be gauged in a vacuum (you suggested in a previous conversation that they should be or at least that what Hinske did after the trade and what his replacement did after the trade has no bearing on your assessment of it). And even if they are considered as stand alone events, the vast majority of his trades have still been bad.

But looking at this as a process:
1. Huntington got a waiver wire catcher (Fryer) and a minor league pitcher who never made it past A+ (Casey Erickson) for a competent MLB hitter (Hinske), something that the Pirates lacked
2. In Overbay, Huntington signed a less competent and less versatile replacement for Hinske for about three times what Hinske was making
3. While Huntington was making the Hinske deal, the Nationals were welcoming Mike Morse to the team, whom they got for a lesser player (Ryan Langerhans) than Hinske.

A huge victory? Not even close. One (a minor one at that) in a series of bad trades.

]]>
By: Tim Williams http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012/11/2012-indianapolis-indians-season-recap-and-top-10-prospects.html#comment-22144 Sun, 11 Nov 2012 16:47:32 +0000 http://www.piratesprospects.com/?p=44004#comment-22144 Wow. You’re still going on about the Hinske deal? You might be the only person who cares about that trade.

]]>
By: beatembuccos21 http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012/11/2012-indianapolis-indians-season-recap-and-top-10-prospects.html#comment-22143 Sun, 11 Nov 2012 16:35:18 +0000 http://www.piratesprospects.com/?p=44004#comment-22143 Speaking of the Indians, both Eric Fryer and Tim Wood are gone (http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20121110&content_id=40236968&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb)

Can someone from this site explain to me, again, how the Fryer for Hinske deal was a huge victory for Neal? I have a hard time seeing it that way.

]]>
By: jlease717 http://www.piratesprospects.com/2012/11/2012-indianapolis-indians-season-recap-and-top-10-prospects.html#comment-22136 Sun, 11 Nov 2012 00:48:56 +0000 http://www.piratesprospects.com/?p=44004#comment-22136 Cabrera has the great blessing of youth, and maybe Sanchez is coming around. The Indians obviously won with pitching. Not much there that hasn’t already been in Pittsburgh yet.

]]>