moonslav59

John Farrell (probably with DD's input) chose Shaw over Pablo. That's not a common choice made by any manager, and clearly shows JF is willing to play the younger player over the expensive vet.

In hindsight, yeah- end of discussion, but at the time of making the choice on the option, there's no way saying no vs saying yes then trading him was the right choice, and certainly was far from "end of discussion" merit in foresight.

I don't think the choice is always about who is better or who the manager likes more. It's about roster construction and depth. If we kept Vazquez on the 25 man roster, we'd have lost Hanigan on the depth chart. You may not value that all that much, and it's hard to argue that point based on Hanigan's 2016 performance, but Hanigan doesn't have to be Wright's caddy-catcher. Leon did fine with Wright, so put Hanigan in against lefty starters only.

So, you don't want at least a decent single-A prospect for free?

Many SP'ers signed hefty contracts with recent and/or long standing injury histories. Like I said, I'd have settled on a good single - A prospect.

But, you know, even weak hitters look like stars when their on a hot streak. As far as I know, Leon has never had a sustained stretch of good offense, so with me, I'm with holding judgment. I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade, but a 45 PA sample size is really rather tiny.

Man O Man this kid keeps on hitting like a freakaziod! It's still a sample size of less than 50 PAs, but still...

I'm a big believer in Swihart too, but I've been saying for a long time- his value to a team in need of a good catcher (about 70% of MLB teams these days) is worth more than his value to us. If that's not a major piece of a foundation for a trade, I don't know what is.

Let's hope so, but as you pointed out, our pen may need a lot of work. Good thing RP'ers are plentiful around the deadline.

"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play." It's kind of how I feel about playing the game of high stakes free agent signing.

I too disfavor long-term contracts and agree that most don't produce value in the end. Very true, but a surprising amount of the big signings over history didn't even produce expected values early in the contracs.

True, and his team control ends this year, but Smyly and Adames are still "alive". I'm not saying it was a bad trade, it looks very good right now.

Years Amount Brett Anderson 1 $15.800MM Brandon Beachy 1 $1.500MM Joe Blanton 1 $4.000MM Trevor Cahill 1 $4.250MM Bartolo Colon 1 $7.250MM Marco Estrada 2 $26.000MM Doug Fister 1 $7.000MM Zack Greinke 6 $206.500MM J.A. Happ 3 $36.000MM Rich Hill 1 $6.000MM John Lackey 2 $32.000MM Mat Latos SP 1 $3.000MM Mike Leake SP 5 $80.000MM Colby Lewis 1 $6.000MM Tim Lincecum 1 $2.500MM Kenta Maeda 8 $25.000MM Hector Noesi 1 $1.700MM Bud Norris 1 $2.500MM Mike Pelfrey 2 $16.000MM Jeff Samardzija 5 $90.000MM Yaisel Sierra 6 $30.000MM Alfredo Simon 1 $2.000MM Jacob Turner 1 $1.500MM Ryan Vogelsong 1 $2.000MM With opt out: Wei-Yin Chen 5 $80.000MM Johnny Cueto 6 $130.000MM Scott Kazmir 3 $48.000MM Ian Kennedy 5 $70.000MM David Price 7 $217.000MM

My point was that even after the Miley trade, we could have traded Buch somewhere for something good, then signed someone like Fister and/or Hill. I know many suggested Hill and some suggested Fister, but many other names were floated about that are having awful years. It is very difficult to strike gold on FA pitchers. I commend those who strongly suggested we sign Hill or Fister. Even some of us who thought taking Buch's option was the right move, still thought signing Hill for $8M/1 would have been a good idea, but there looked like plenty of "good ideas" out there as mid-level free agents, and the season is still not over with Hill and Fister. Remember, we wanted someone we could count on for 28-30 solid starts instead of Buch. There's still a half season to go, and Hill has already been on the DL once, and Fister may be faltering down the stretch. We'll see.

The jury may still be out a little on that trade as Austin Jackson & Drew Smyly had years of control left on their new teams (Jackson 2.3 years/ Smyly 4.3 years). Willy Adames was also ranked in the top 50 by Baseball America and currently has an .810 OPS in AA.

How about Owens & Johnson for Hill?

His reputation is not giving up prospects that bite him in the butt later on. Well, the Tigers were pretty awful for his first 3-4 years with the Tigers. His definitive trade was giving up Cameron Maybin, Badenhop, Andrew Miller and others for Miggy and Willis. Surely, none of those guys ever came back to bite him in the ass. The next "biggie" was Prince Fielder for Kinsler. Other trades I remember were Jair Jurrjens for Edgar Renteria, Ivan Rodriguez for Farnsworth, Edwin Jackson for Max Scherzer, Granderson for Austin Jackson & Phil Coke, Jacob Turner, Brian Flynn & Rob Brantly for Anibal Sanchez & Omaar Infante, Doug Fister for Robbie Ray, Ian Krol and Lonbardozzi, Porcello for Cespedes and then Cespedes for Fulmer & Cessa. Not a bad record at all on trades.

True, but IMO, your criteria is flawed. Your criteria neglects to take into account career norms, injuries and trends.was not a SP'er all of 2015. How is that not a factor in deciding to sign him or not? The guy has been the poster boy for the DL and DFA over his whole career. Like Buch, he's always had nasty stuff when healthy and in form, but his career has been more spotty than anyone I know. Of course, in hindsight Hill was a much better choice. Of course, there were plenty of people who said so last fall/winter, but just because Hill has done better this year, does not prove anything about what criteria should be used by GMs. Your criteria worked this time in history. IMO, the longer view (with more emphasis on recent performance) has a better success rate. Buch was pitching very well last year. That's pretty recent. Note: the no-brainer was to accept Buch's option. To me, even hindsight hasn't changed that. I'd do it again and again under the same circumstances. The part that was not a no-brainer was deciding to keep him, instead of trading the risk/gamble to another team. Had we done that, then signing a guy like Hill, Fister or both would have made more sense. There's a reason Hill

Kelly and Buch were both supposed to be part of the rotation. Wright was the 6th starter who basically took ERod's slot. In all fairness to DD, the last two slots were supposed to be by Buch & Kelly along with a slew of also-rans/ projects, prospects and promising guys: Wright, Elias, Owens, Johnson. Injuries are part of the game, and we should have counted on one of Buch or Kelly struggling PLUS another SP'er getting hurt or injured (or Both Buch & Kelly not producing). That's where we messed up, IMO. We relied on too much quantity and not enough quality from the 4 slot to the 6 slot. We were hoping we'd find 2-3 out of 6 that would shine. We ended up needing 3, but found just one (Wright).

Oh well. We c ould have had Hill and Fister for Buch's money, but hindsight is 20-20.

Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post Agreed. Hence the need to eventually trade everyday prospects for pitching. Free agency is a mirage. I'd overpay, but only for a SP'er under 27 or 28 with 3 1/2+ years of inexpensive team control. I know that's asking for a lot, and acquiring any pitcher has some risk, but I don't see any other way to build up our staff. That's asking for the pitching equivalent of Mookie Betts or Xander Bogaerts. I'm not saying the guy has to be an ace right now. We can look for a solid number two.We can look for a pitcher with risk like maybe Matt Moore, and maybe not pay as much due to the risk factors. (Note: if we got Moore, I'd still like to get another 2/3 slot starting pitcher.

No, I've suggested countless trades involving our prospects. I've said over and over, I'd float Swihart, Devers, Holt, Travis and Kopech for a fine, quality, young, cost & team controlled SP'er. I just haven't found the right team and pitcher that matches up...yet. I wanna keep Moncada, Benintendi & Espinoza, but if we have to part with one of the latter two, I'd strongly consider it...for the right guy.

A rental may not "gut the farm", but I'm not even for giving mid levels for a rental.

My roommate in college was a chess master. Maybe a game of "go fish"? LOL

Like when he wanted to demote Mookie last spring just before he caught on fire?