Q&A with Bucs Dugout about the Pirates

by Chris McShane on Jun 10, 2011 1:00 PM EDT

Charlie of Bucs Dugout kindly agreed to answer some questions about the Pirates ahead of the Mets' visit to Pittsburgh, and I answered some questions for them about the Mets, which I'll link to here as soon as they're available.

Andrew McCutchen is having a great year, which comes as no surprise, but is anyone else in the lineup playing far better or worse than expected?

Most of the surprises are on the pitching side. Pedro Alvarez was a lot worse than expected, and is currently on the DL with an injured quad muscle. He just aggravated the injury, and he's typically a slow starter, so the chances of the Pirates getting anything at all out of him this year appear remote, unfortunately. The catching tandem of Ryan Doumit and Chris Snyder has been better than expected, probably because both were getting a lot of rest. They're both on the DL now, however, along with Class AAA catcher Jason Jaramillo, so the Pirates' current catching tandem is a pair of minor-league nobodies in Dusty Brown and Wyatt Toregas.

What are some things we might not know about the Pirates' starting pitchers for the series: Charlie Morton, James McDonald, Kevin Correia, and Paul Maholm?

Since May 15, those four have had 17 starts, and have allowed more than three runs in only two of them. The entire rotation is on an incredible hot streak. The Mets have seen all four already, but for anyone who missed them, watch out for Morton, in particular - the Pirates' coaches completely remade his delivery in the offseason, and now nobody can hit the ball in the air against him. He allowed three runs, one earned, and 11 hits in six innings against the Mets a couple weeks ago. That that outing qualified as one of his most frustrating of the year really says a lot. I also would be inclined to trust McDonald's recent performances, which have been excellent, rather than the poor ones he had at the beginning of the season, when he was recovering from a side injury he had in Spring Training.

Correia and Maholm are garden-variety innings-eater types - or maybe a bit better than that - who have had a fair amount of luck this year keeping their ERAs low.

Do you see the Pirates keeping up their current level of play? Do you think they'll be active on the trade market before the deadline?

They're 30-30 right now and they're right in line with their Pythagorean record, but some of their pitchers, such as Correia and Maholm, are overachieving. They definitely appear to be a better team than in years past, but I think the pitching will take a step backward. Also, if injuries keep forcing them to give playing time to guys like Brandon Wood and Dusty Brown, that will probably catch up to them.

They could be active at the trading deadline, but I doubt they will be as enthusiastic as they typically are. Their farm system currently has plenty of depth, so there's less incentive for them to add the kind of C+ prospects they've mostly gotten when they've traded their veterans. There is still the possibility they trade someone like Maholm or Joel Hanrahan, though, which will make it hard for them to maintain their current pace.

But just to make things more confusing, I also wouldn't rule out the possibility of some kind of creative trade to improve the big-league club, like they made with Snyder last year. They probably won't sell the farm to do that, though, since the front office has repeatedly said that a .500 season is not, in itself, a priority.

In short, I really don't know what they're going to do, but I wouldn't expect a bunch of crazy activity either way.

Even though the Pirates have already won more than half as many games as they won in 2010, attendance at PNC Park is still very low. What will it take for fans to head out to the ballpark?

Better weather would help. Spring weather in Pittsburgh usually is atrocious for baseball, and this year has been no exception. That said, the Pirates will never lead the league in attendance. Upcoming home weekend series against the Red Sox, Cubs and Cardinals should help, however.

Tweet Comment 25 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I love all the remarks about Dusty Brown

Based on what we saw in the last series, it is amazing that that guy is somehow playing for a major-league team. If even Pirates fans are tired of a player’s ineptitude, you know he’s something special.

And it’s interesting that the fans seem to have gotten tired of deadline trades just because the organization is so bad at getting a decent return. I mean, if you can trade a guy like Maholm at the deadline, you pretty much always should do so, for any minor-league talent — and something like half the Pirate roster is totally replaceable in this way. If the front office could even make it a crapshoot for talent, rather than just guaranteeing that they lost every trade, almost any deal would be worth the gamble.

by anonymous on Jun 10, 2011 1:13 PM EDT reply actions

Is Paul Maholm really thaaaaat bad?

I’d think your two C+ prospects have a lower chance than Paul Maholm of giving you . . . (younger, cheaper) Paul Maholm, and a miniscule chance of giving you a significant upgrade, although I suppose it depends on what you think a “C+” prospect is. A lot of these guys turn out even worse than “replacement player.”

by tmu on Jun 10, 2011 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions

yeah, I agree

My point is just that if you’re the Pirates, players with a nonzero chance of being good and a nonzero chance of sucking completely are always the ones you should be taking over sure-thing replacement-level players. Deadline deals sending middling-to-acceptable players away in exchange for prospects are always the right thing for a non-contender to do.

by anonymous on Jun 10, 2011 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions

The hitch

is that the Pirates have serious 40-man issues, issues that are only going to get worse. This past winter they lost Nathan Adcock in the Rule 5ª, and the next couple winters figure to be much tougher. They’ve been drafting and signing a ton of HS arms, and they’re coming up through the system, needing to be protected. Which is why a fresh couple of C+ prospects don’t help us much – they either get lost before they spend any time in our system, or they drive out other prospects of roughly equal talent.

On preview, I see that Charlie beat me to this point. But the bottom line is that you only get to protect 15 guys in the minors (except for the youngest of course), a few of whom are going to be non-prospect spare parts like a 3rd C or spare IF or spot starter; I could already tell you a dozen prospects they’ll need to protect, but that we can’t and shouldn’t expect to be on the 25-man. The discussions we’ve been having at BD are about packaging a couple of minor league arms to get a single, better player partly just to thin the ranks a bit (and fill holes, obviously – catcher is a desperate need at the moment). Maholm’s not expensive enough to justify trading him for fungible pieces.

ª this was arguably a front office screwup, in that a couple mediocrities were left on and then cut before ST, but still

by JRoth95 on Jun 10, 2011 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions

I freely admit to nitpicking

but it also depends a bit on the timeframe for contention, doesn’t it? If you have some studs on the cusp in the minors (and I don’t know that they do, of course) or a young staff, etc., it might be worth keeping your slightly-better-than-AAAA mediocre fourth starter, because losing him arguably downgrades the team until the C+ prospects — even the better ones — ripen, and you can end up in a bit of a self-perpetuating state of mediocrity. Granted, if your “on the cusp” players are really good, the “downgrade” from Maholm (One win? Two?) isn’t going to look all that bad on balance.

by tmu on Jun 10, 2011 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions

The Pirates are pretty close

The consensus before this season started was that there’d be a significant improvement this year, with full seasons of improved performance from the 4 young position playersª, potential improvement in the rotation (McDonald and a non-awful Morton), and some help from SPs in the minors. Then 2012 would see the team finally cross the .500 barrier, and 2013 would see legit contention as some of the really promising MiL arms arrived, plus Tony Sanchez providing above-average play behind the plate.

In the event, there’s been a vast improvement this year, mostly driven (as noted by Charlie) by really solid starting pitching. But even if they end up at .500 this year, there’s no real reason to expect 2012 to be a contending year, because there’s not enough help in the minors – the impact players are mostly in AA or below right now. The argument for keeping Maholm is that he’s reasonably-priced insurance to keep the team from backsliding and/or relying on guys who simply can’t hack it.

There are 5 SPs in AA or AAA right now who were viewed before the season began as being potential callups in 2011 (Lincoln, Owens, Locke, Morris, Wilson); Lincoln is the only one of the 5 who’s really stepped up, but he probably has the lowest ceiling of the 5. If Maholm were traded and Lincoln came up, he’d have a 20% chance of providing comparable production (assuming Maholm regresses some, as he’s likely to), a 30% chance of being ~1 win worse over 2-3 months, and a 50% chance of simply failing.

ª McCutchen, Walker, Tabata, Alvarez

by JRoth95 on Jun 10, 2011 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions

This was a really great snapshot of the organization

Thanks

by TheBigStapler on Jun 10, 2011 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions

yeah, seconded

I really appreciated all these comments about the Pirate farm system — a lot of depth in a few paragraphs.

by anonymous on Jun 10, 2011 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions

My point was not that the Pirates do a terrible job in deadline trades. They’ve had their ups and downs, but they didn’t have a lot to work with in most of those trades, and some of them (like the Jose Tabata and James McDonald deals) have turned out really well. My point was that, for the most part, teams aren’t willing to give up much better than C+ prospects for players like Maholm. Those kinds of prospects have value, but right now, the Pirates’ farm system is jammed with them, to the point where it’s already going to be very tricky for them to set their 40-man roster this winter. They really don’t need more. If someone offers another Tabata or McDonald, though, that’s a different story.

by Charlie Wilmoth on Jun 10, 2011 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions

Okay, I see what you're saying

But I guess I still think having too many prospects is the kind of problem it’s good to have, for an organization like Pittsburgh — if the worst-case scenario is that some of them are playing in the big leagues before they’re ready, or some are unprotected from the Rule 5 draft or whatever, it’s still better than paying more money to players without any remaining upside.

by anonymous on Jun 10, 2011 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions

No doubt more prospects is better than fewer. But I think the Pirates will be more inclined to drive a hard bargain because those prospects just don’t have the same value to them they had a couple years ago. Also, most of their tradeable players are under control next year, so there shouldn’t be much urgency to trade them unless they get something they really want.

(And I say all this as someone who in the past has been a big fan of veterans-for-prospects trades.)

by Charlie Wilmoth on Jun 10, 2011 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions

If Charlie is reading this, I have a question about Moskos.

How effective has he been since joining the big club? I remember when I was working in Trenton last year when they faced Altoona in the EL Championship seeing Moskos become lights out in the series. Wondering how well he’s transitioned.

Proud supporter of a New York baseball team and a Boston football team. Yeah, deal with it!
"We don’t listen to the hype. I don’t think we ever have. We really take after our coach and he says ‘When you win, say little. When you lose, say less.'"--Tom Brady
The 2011 New York Mets: I don't know what to describe them as...
Staunch Parishioner Of The First United Church of R.A. Dickey

by R_Adragna on Jun 10, 2011 2:20 PM EDT reply actions

So far he's been surprisingly effective

I mean, not really 0.90 ERA effective, but his FIP of 3.84 is probably about right. Moskos took a long time to work his way through the minors, and the fanbase hates him for not being Matt Wieters, so expectations were very low. But so far he’s looked like a solid relief pitcher who’s more than a LOOGY.

Almost certainly not closer stuff, and maybe not even setup man stuff, but he looks like he’ll stick and provide some valuable quality depth in the bullpen.

by JRoth95 on Jun 10, 2011 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah, that seems reasonable. I’ve never been a big fan of his stuff, but he’s good enough to be a decent middle reliever.

by Charlie Wilmoth on Jun 10, 2011 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions

What will it take for fans to head out to the ballpark?

They need to draft a better

DEFENSE

and then come up with something equivilant to

THE TERRIBLE TOWEL

change their name to the

STEELERS

Any task BIG or small, Do it well or not at all

by Rickfansince76 on Jun 10, 2011 2:25 PM EDT reply actions

FWIW

Attendance is up more than 20% from last year, and that’s with an extraordinarily cold and wet April and first half of May, plus the Penguins playoffs costing them thousands of fans during each of 3-4 home games (I was at one game when there were literally fewer than 5,000 people, on a lovely night – but the Pens were in town, so…).

If they maintain this increase over the season (and the NFL lockout could help on that front), they would end up approaching 2M for the year. PNC only holds a bit over 3M if they sold every ticket all year, so that’s really not a bad tally.

by JRoth95 on Jun 10, 2011 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions

It's a shame that park is more full on a regular basis.

I love PNC. It’s my favorite non-Mets ballfield.

Now, kids, being eaten by a crocodile is just like going to sleep; in giant blender.

by meigs1414 on Jun 10, 2011 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions

have you ever been to Wrigley?

Because I don’t know how anyone who’s ever attended a game there can have a different favorite ballpark.

by anonymous on Jun 10, 2011 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions

No I have not

My plan is to one day to do so.

Now, kids, being eaten by a crocodile is just like going to sleep; in giant blender.

by meigs1414 on Jun 10, 2011 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions

I like Wrigley

but I’ve never been on one of those perfect summer days, and I hate the Cubs, what with a Dad who hails from the South Side. Still partial to Camden Yards and Petco as favorite non-Mets parks. As among the last of the historic parks, Wrigley has to get special consideration, though.

by tmu on Jun 10, 2011 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions

PETCO is way underrated, in my view. Yeah, it’s kind of a poor man’s PNC or Camden Yards, but it’s still really nice, and it’s right downtown. I love the Western Metals building, and the weather’s always perfect. Plus you can get great views in the upper infield seats for very reasonable prices.

by Charlie Wilmoth on Jun 10, 2011 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Petco is great, yeah

Sure, it’s a Camden clone, but on the other hand, it’s not in Baltimore.

by anonymous on Jun 10, 2011 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions

It’s kind of apples and oranges. It’s just a question of whether, for you, the history in a place like Wrigley is worth the mediocre ballpark food, having to pee in a trough, etc. Personally, I prefer the modern parks, but I obviously understand and respect the view that Wrigley is better, and I had a good time there.

by Charlie Wilmoth on Jun 10, 2011 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions

for me it's not "the history" that makes Wrigley a great place

It’s the experience of watching a game there, uninterrupted by PA noise and video-screen nonsense and unsurrounded by screaming advertising. When you go to a game at Wrigley, you go there to see the game. It’s just amazing how different it feels from the distraction-drenched, casual-to-non-fan-centered “modern” stadium experience.

by anonymous on Jun 10, 2011 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions