This is both brutal and spot-on. And at this point, you're right that Cherington should have lost the benefit of the doubt on the wait-and-see moves. They're gonna bring this guy back next year and it just absolutely sucks.
I thought when he was hired Ben Cherington looked promising. The Pirates need someone better to right the ship. Your evaluations were spot on 😞 unfortunately
Can we believe anything Ben says? Last year the deadline was about being better in '24 and the big move was BDLC. This year the deadline was about being better in '26 and the one acquisition who might help next year is Flores, and that would be as a role player platooning with Horwitz and/or backing up Davis. Who thinks Flores will help us more in '26 than Bednar would have? And if Ben is retained, I expect he'll further weaken the team for '26 by making a bad deal involving Keller.
Now that the trade deadline has passed, Nutting needs to fire Cherington and start the process of finding the next GM to give that person as much time as possible to get settled in before the offseason gets going in November.
I just don't see Bob making any "irrational" moves with a looming lockout. It would cost more to can Ben and hire someone new. I think Bob wants to pad his lockout stashed cash as much as possible.
I originally gave it an F, then changed it thinking, well, Cook, Yorke, IKF (who cost nothing really) and Jimenez aren’t zeroes. And I wasn’t sure how much I should grade the C & Y trades on BC losing interest in those guys afterwards. But, yeah, based strictly on BC’s stated goal, it’s an F.
Jack had 2 decent above replacement MLB seasons, so don't think 2021 can be an F. And he's still on the active roster. No issues with the other grades. 2025 on paper is a D, but Devanney or Flores could find their way to the 26-man (or 28-man in Sept. for Devanney). I'm mildly interested in Flores being a plus DH......still tbd.
Pirate management incompetence goes way back. They let Barry Bonds walk and got nothing in return for him. Management wouldn't offer him a contract because they thought no other major league team would sign him for more money, as a result they lost the player and did not get an extra draft choice as compensation. Look this team has been terrible since the 70's and one has to conclude they are doing this on purpose.
The problem with keeping Santana is he will paid next year and will be your closer. But his strike out per nine innings ratio does not indicate closer stuff. His biap will return to normal and he will be a just a guy reliever for about 4.5 million. But he could have put that money towards a middle of the order bat and start using the good young arms for more high leverage. Ps also could of got a nice prospect in return at the trade deadline.
Official page still says not yet reported. He’s on the bridge league roster and not listed as injured, but I don’t know whether that necessarily means he’s there.
Sometimes stuff at MiLB.com doesn’t get updated. Ian Farrow wasn’t shown on IL until he was activated from IL, then they added a backdated entry showing him going on IL.
Or maybe something bizarre is going on. That’d be a typical Cherington blunder.
"He should have sold high on Dennis Santana instead of trading Bednar, but, oh yeah, Bednar will be making more money."
A team with an owner who was serious about contending in '26 absolutely would have held on to Bednar. And it seems a good GM could have gotten a similar return for Bednar a year from now, assuming Bednar pitches well (which I'm guessing was Ben's concern).
"Compared to what other closers brought back, the return seems light, especially with Bednar having two more years of control left."
Bednar just has one more year of control unless you're counting the remainder of this year. In any case, I agree the return seemed light, mainly because it seemed like a quantity over quality trade. I tend to go with the old adage that whoever gets the best player in a trade wins the trade, so quality for quantity is rarely going to lead to a win.
Giving Cherington a D for this deadline is incredibly generous. The only possible benefit that I can see is the sliver of possibility that Flores actually solves that catching situation. There’s what, a 5% chance of that happening?
If we operate on the assumption that trades are intended to improve the performance of the baseball team, then they failed on the tactical front - they did not get the level of return one would expect for the biggest piece they traded away. They failed on the strategic front - nothing they did gave any indication that they even have a strategic plan or aware that such a thing as “strategy” exists. And it’s especially disappointing because it seemed like a perfect strategic opportunity given what they had available (potentially good bullpen pieces and lots of expiring contracts) and what else seemed to be on the market (it didn’t look like there would be many deals at all until suddenly things went crazy the last day).
The only thing that could salvage the Bednar trade is Perez becoming an MLB DH. His hit tool is his calling card, it seems very unlikely he can catch and throw. He was the Yankees Milb 2024 player of the year. As with all trades, it's going to take a season or two to further evaluate.
Even if the Pirates get extremely lucky and one of these guys turns into a major leaguer, it still changes little in my mind. Bednar was an asset, that had a value. It should have been utilized to obtain a fair (or better than fair) return. At present, the value received is completely insufficient. If Bednar unexpectedly has an issue (poor performance or injury) or if one of these lottery tickets succeed, it does not change the fact that the Pirates were fleeced on this deal. And they are fleeced on almost every deal.
If a blind squirrel finds a nut , we still lose in the long run. Yes. If you depend on getting absolutely lucky every time with trades, you lose in the end. We should have gotten 2 highly regarded players for Bedbar. With a much higher chance of success. Not a 19 year old catcher that has a 5% chance of contributing in 5 years. It is a terrible trade.
Well, there was a strategery. Dumping payroll. Period.
Even at this stage I think folks underestimate the extent to which Nuttin is suffocating the baseball operation, not that that excuses Ben’s incompetence. What especially doesn’t get enough discussion is the terrible impact of Nuttin severely restricting future obligations.
I’m convinced this deadline was all about Nuttin saving money next year to position himself for a 2027 shutdown. Perrotto (yeah, I know) reported the other day that payroll is not going up next year and may get cut.
Anyway, anybody who thinks the Hayes money is going toward adding talent needs to put all their assets in receivership before the scammers get them.
I frame the Hayes trade differently (more of an additional comment). I agree I have no confidence the $ will be used for anything more than possibly covering arb increases etc. or it will not get spent at all. But I do like the elimination of the Risk Analysis of Hayes future especially for any incoming (hopefully) GM. My personal amateur analysis follows (and assume it gets worse each year). Next years range of outcomes (you can put your own odds on this) are from he has learned how to stay on the field as an elite defender and with another off season can now adjust his swing to not hurt his back and becomes a slightly below league average hitter and still elite/special on D. That is a very playable player and Pirates would look bad next year. The other end of my analysis says he reverts to 2024 defense (good but not elite) because he can't year over year repeat this years health. Along with that he is still a very bad hitter - that is basically unplayable if you want to compete. By getting rid of him ( I really didn't care about the return - that is gravy) this annual dance is over and hopefully opens up more creative (ie. better) options for a NEW GM.
Can’t disagree really. They had to move on. I see it as a choice between an almost-straight-up salary dump or getting a bigger return by including a chunk of Hayes’ salary.
This is both brutal and spot-on. And at this point, you're right that Cherington should have lost the benefit of the doubt on the wait-and-see moves. They're gonna bring this guy back next year and it just absolutely sucks.
I thought when he was hired Ben Cherington looked promising. The Pirates need someone better to right the ship. Your evaluations were spot on 😞 unfortunately
Wouldn't this past deadline have to be an incomplete because it is.
It _could_ get worse over time. I don't see how it could improve though.
2024 gets a bold F------------- from me, especially considering it was done with "being competitive in 2024" as a driving motive, and they got worse.
Can we believe anything Ben says? Last year the deadline was about being better in '24 and the big move was BDLC. This year the deadline was about being better in '26 and the one acquisition who might help next year is Flores, and that would be as a role player platooning with Horwitz and/or backing up Davis. Who thinks Flores will help us more in '26 than Bednar would have? And if Ben is retained, I expect he'll further weaken the team for '26 by making a bad deal involving Keller.
Now that the trade deadline has passed, Nutting needs to fire Cherington and start the process of finding the next GM to give that person as much time as possible to get settled in before the offseason gets going in November.
I just don't see Bob making any "irrational" moves with a looming lockout. It would cost more to can Ben and hire someone new. I think Bob wants to pad his lockout stashed cash as much as possible.
Yep, this is a factor that’s getting totally missed.
Sadly, I think you're right.
I originally gave it an F, then changed it thinking, well, Cook, Yorke, IKF (who cost nothing really) and Jimenez aren’t zeroes. And I wasn’t sure how much I should grade the C & Y trades on BC losing interest in those guys afterwards. But, yeah, based strictly on BC’s stated goal, it’s an F.
Help me - why did IKF cost us nothing?
Just McAdoo. I wouldn't trade Cook or Yorke for him, so it's no loss.
Jack had 2 decent above replacement MLB seasons, so don't think 2021 can be an F. And he's still on the active roster. No issues with the other grades. 2025 on paper is a D, but Devanney or Flores could find their way to the 26-man (or 28-man in Sept. for Devanney). I'm mildly interested in Flores being a plus DH......still tbd.
I didn’t give 2021 an F with the idea Jack is a zero. It was because of the extreme difference in value between what they gave up vs what came back.
Pirate management incompetence goes way back. They let Barry Bonds walk and got nothing in return for him. Management wouldn't offer him a contract because they thought no other major league team would sign him for more money, as a result they lost the player and did not get an extra draft choice as compensation. Look this team has been terrible since the 70's and one has to conclude they are doing this on purpose.
So you do not buy the "grossly inept" explanation? If not, we have to give them credit for making such idiotic moves and still keeping their jobs!
The problem with keeping Santana is he will paid next year and will be your closer. But his strike out per nine innings ratio does not indicate closer stuff. His biap will return to normal and he will be a just a guy reliever for about 4.5 million. But he could have put that money towards a middle of the order bat and start using the good young arms for more high leverage. Ps also could of got a nice prospect in return at the trade deadline.
Santana’s a good reliever, but they shouldn’t just default to him as closer. That’d be a typical, knee-jerk Shelton move.
Good point - we have about 2 or 3 possibilities so possibly a Closer by Committee operation that will help the team in the long run?
Cherington stated goal of improving for '26, absolute failure, the organization got worse currently and into the future.
They got prospects back that have to overcome red flags just to take the next step forward.
Has Jeter Martinez even reported yet? I'm hoping he does soon, probably get an update in November that he's having TJS knowing this outfit.
Official page still says not yet reported. He’s on the bridge league roster and not listed as injured, but I don’t know whether that necessarily means he’s there.
Sometimes stuff at MiLB.com doesn’t get updated. Ian Farrow wasn’t shown on IL until he was activated from IL, then they added a backdated entry showing him going on IL.
Or maybe something bizarre is going on. That’d be a typical Cherington blunder.
"He should have sold high on Dennis Santana instead of trading Bednar, but, oh yeah, Bednar will be making more money."
A team with an owner who was serious about contending in '26 absolutely would have held on to Bednar. And it seems a good GM could have gotten a similar return for Bednar a year from now, assuming Bednar pitches well (which I'm guessing was Ben's concern).
"Compared to what other closers brought back, the return seems light, especially with Bednar having two more years of control left."
Bednar just has one more year of control unless you're counting the remainder of this year. In any case, I agree the return seemed light, mainly because it seemed like a quantity over quality trade. I tend to go with the old adage that whoever gets the best player in a trade wins the trade, so quality for quantity is rarely going to lead to a win.
Giving Cherington a D for this deadline is incredibly generous. The only possible benefit that I can see is the sliver of possibility that Flores actually solves that catching situation. There’s what, a 5% chance of that happening?
If we operate on the assumption that trades are intended to improve the performance of the baseball team, then they failed on the tactical front - they did not get the level of return one would expect for the biggest piece they traded away. They failed on the strategic front - nothing they did gave any indication that they even have a strategic plan or aware that such a thing as “strategy” exists. And it’s especially disappointing because it seemed like a perfect strategic opportunity given what they had available (potentially good bullpen pieces and lots of expiring contracts) and what else seemed to be on the market (it didn’t look like there would be many deals at all until suddenly things went crazy the last day).
The only thing that could salvage the Bednar trade is Perez becoming an MLB DH. His hit tool is his calling card, it seems very unlikely he can catch and throw. He was the Yankees Milb 2024 player of the year. As with all trades, it's going to take a season or two to further evaluate.
Even if the Pirates get extremely lucky and one of these guys turns into a major leaguer, it still changes little in my mind. Bednar was an asset, that had a value. It should have been utilized to obtain a fair (or better than fair) return. At present, the value received is completely insufficient. If Bednar unexpectedly has an issue (poor performance or injury) or if one of these lottery tickets succeed, it does not change the fact that the Pirates were fleeced on this deal. And they are fleeced on almost every deal.
So if Perez excels with the Bucs, they still lose the trade. Got it.
If a blind squirrel finds a nut , we still lose in the long run. Yes. If you depend on getting absolutely lucky every time with trades, you lose in the end. We should have gotten 2 highly regarded players for Bedbar. With a much higher chance of success. Not a 19 year old catcher that has a 5% chance of contributing in 5 years. It is a terrible trade.
Well, there was a strategery. Dumping payroll. Period.
Even at this stage I think folks underestimate the extent to which Nuttin is suffocating the baseball operation, not that that excuses Ben’s incompetence. What especially doesn’t get enough discussion is the terrible impact of Nuttin severely restricting future obligations.
I’m convinced this deadline was all about Nuttin saving money next year to position himself for a 2027 shutdown. Perrotto (yeah, I know) reported the other day that payroll is not going up next year and may get cut.
Anyway, anybody who thinks the Hayes money is going toward adding talent needs to put all their assets in receivership before the scammers get them.
I frame the Hayes trade differently (more of an additional comment). I agree I have no confidence the $ will be used for anything more than possibly covering arb increases etc. or it will not get spent at all. But I do like the elimination of the Risk Analysis of Hayes future especially for any incoming (hopefully) GM. My personal amateur analysis follows (and assume it gets worse each year). Next years range of outcomes (you can put your own odds on this) are from he has learned how to stay on the field as an elite defender and with another off season can now adjust his swing to not hurt his back and becomes a slightly below league average hitter and still elite/special on D. That is a very playable player and Pirates would look bad next year. The other end of my analysis says he reverts to 2024 defense (good but not elite) because he can't year over year repeat this years health. Along with that he is still a very bad hitter - that is basically unplayable if you want to compete. By getting rid of him ( I really didn't care about the return - that is gravy) this annual dance is over and hopefully opens up more creative (ie. better) options for a NEW GM.
Can’t disagree really. They had to move on. I see it as a choice between an almost-straight-up salary dump or getting a bigger return by including a chunk of Hayes’ salary.
I was scrolling slowly so I could guess your grade and nailed every one lol...even the B+
A whole mess of failure put to words.