Nothing Going On in Pittsburgh in the 9th

For god's sake, no one cares.

The Pirates suck, and it's not baseball's fault. Move on.

 

Here is the beauty of being the Pirates - Garrett Jones has likely played himself into a much bigger paycheck.
So he will be gone.
Hanrhan? A luxury they can't afford, he'll be gone.

Correia is gone.

Travis Snider was just good enough that they will convince everyone he is good enough in corner outfield spot. Ditto Marte.

Neil Walker will likely demand a trade when he isn't given a long-term deal.

Barmes is locked up for a lot of money next year so he will be a starter, again.

The two catchers combined for about 25 HR's or whatever, so hey, bring them back.

And then they will convince themselves that Karstens and Morton will be healthy again, so they will be back.

So what the Pirates will be is the same team again, except without the nearly automatic (today notwithstanding) closer and Garret Jones, who is one of the few guys in the lineup who can actually hit.

 

The Brewers are sitting at home for one, and only one, reason -- their bullpen was a dumpster fire for a significant part of the season, especially in late July when they blew five saves in a week.

Yet they're still going to finish over .500.

 

Actually, it is part baseball's fault. The only question is how large of a percentage. Even you have stopped apologizing for baseball long enough to admit that in the past.

Again, I didn't go there. You and Bubbler did. I just agreed with a column blaming the team's ownership for playing a large role in the Pirates' collapse. As I said, your reaction and Bubbler's prove that I had to at least acknowledge the overall financial issue because y'all would throw it at me anyway.

 

You went there when you said "salary floor and salary cap". Don't be fatuous.

 

Re-read the post. Try paying attention this time. I said whether you agree with me or not on those issues, there is no doubt ownership is holding the Pirates back. I assumed, correctly, that I couldn't make a post about baseball with a reference to money without the apologists going there. I believe your response proves me right.

And to answer your other point, are you seriously saying that a full season of Prince Fielder and holding on to Zack Greinke wouldn't have made a difference for the Brewers? Yes, the bullpen was a disaster, but Milwaukee was close enough that it is fairly clear that upgrades elsewhere could have nudged them into the post season. If you aren't going to at least acknowledge that payroll limits have some impact on the game, you should just ignore all posts on the subject because you just aren't ready to face reality.

 

You make it too easy.

Grienke with the Brewers pre-trade: 9-3, 3.44 ERA.
Grienke's replacements in the rotation: Mark Rogers (August) 3-1, 3.92; Wily Peralta (September) 2-1, 2.48.

Not a discernible difference at all. Other than his last start, Peralta was lights out when he came up. Grienke is great, but his absence obviously didn't affect the Brewers as they were the best team in baseball from mid-August to the last week of September, long after he was in Anaheim. Oh ... and the Brewers got their SS of the future from the deal too.

As for Fielder ...

Fielder's stats in Detroit: .309, 29 HR, 106 RBI
The man who replaced Fielder in the order, Aramis Ramirez: .299, 27 HR, 103 RBI.
The man who replaced Fielder at 1B, Corey Hart: .273, 30 HR, 83 RBI.

The Brewers actually increased their offensive production in 2012 because they got an upgrade at third base (Ramirez over Casey McGehee), plugged Hart in at first base and didn't skip a beat, and put Norichika Aoki in right field, who turned out to be an under-the-radar producer and multi-tool player (hit for average, had speed, could cover ground in OF).

Godspeed to Fielder and Grienke (whom the Brewers may still kick the tires on during the offseason), I bear no ill will towards either of them, but the Brewers are just fine without them and are in better shape financially too.

 

Greinke didn't get to face the matchups those two pitchers faced in his place, so the comparison doesn't hold up nearly as well as you think it does. What we do know is by track record and talent, he is better than either of them. Sorry. It's not nearly as easy as you want it to be.

The outfield is better offensively if Hart stays there. You make it sound like he wasn't going to be in the lineup. And other than Braun, Fielder is a better hitter than any of the guys the Brewers played in the outfield this year.

Of course they wouldn't have signed Ramirez if they hadn't lost Fielder. Of course, that just points to the offensive limitations I mentioned. Third base was a huge problem for the Brewers, but they were only able to address it successfully because they took a major loss elsewhere. We all know there are franchises that don't have to make those choices.

Also, for all the talk of Fielder not aging well, so far he has been remarkably consistent and durable. Ramirez is older and has a much more extensive injury history. The loss of Fielder and Greinke has an impact beyond just this one season, in which their absence contributed to your team missing the playoffs.

Keep twisting it any way you like. The Brewers face financial restrictions that larger markets don't. That is the reality. The rest is just baseball apologists who can't stand admitting that the deck is stacked in favor of some teams over others.

 

And Bubbler, I'm still waiting for you to admit that you were wrong about my point from your very first post on this thread. Of course, I doubt you can bring yourself to admit that, either.

 

Sounds about right. Blame the finances of the game, ownership or both, but they will just keep on disappointing. Personally, I put most of it on ownership, which goes back to the column I linked. The Pirates were in it at the deadline. It was time to step up and spend, to take advantage of the opportunity to make a real run and bring in some fans. Of course, the wallet remained closed and the product on the field suffered for it as always.

 

Blah, blah, blah, blah! You're wrong, oop. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Keep moving chess pieces around the board to fit your argument, but it all leads to checkmate in the end. The Brewers didn't tank after losing Grienke. It had no effect on them at all, other than to get Jean Segura and put themselves in good financial shape.

As for, "they wouldn't have signed Ramirez if they lost Fielder", well, part of your argument over the years is that teams can't sign replacements for players they've "lost". Seems the Brewers put the lie to that, and basically, chugged along and hit HRs as they had in the Fielder years.

I explained, quite clearly, why I am not wrong. Remember this?

I read your post crystal clear, my friend. You can wave your finger at the Pirates, but we all know your real point buried underneath.

Desperate effort to get last word in coming in ... 5-4-3 ...

 

Ah, the last word foolishness. The hiding place of posters who know they are tired of trying to support an argument when they know they are losing. Nice try, Bubbler.

Just because the Brewers didn't tank when they traded Greinke doesn't mean he wouldn't have helped him. Another logical failure on your part in a desperate attempt to prove that money never holds the Brewers back. Even the most dedicated baseball apologists on this board can admit that small markets have to overcome financial disadvantages in MLB, but you are apparently just too stubborn to admit the reality.

You read my post wrong. I don't need to hide the salary floor and cap arguments. If that's the point I wanted to make, I'd just make it. I'm not shy about it. My posting history proves that. This time, my focus was on what ownership is doing to hold the Pirates back.

You were wrong on this one, Bubbler. Try admitting it for once.