So if it's great for the Pirates and great for the Yankees, as Griffin says it is, what's the problem? The best trades are the ones that help both teams.

It’s great for the Pirates because they are not a real contender and now have a short-term starting ace who won’t get attached and be looking for something awkward — like, say, an extension. It’s great for the Yankees because now they can add in other areas and win it all again. No risk for the Yankees and plenty of reward. Something doesn’t make sense.

Seems to make perfect sense. Great for both teams; what's the problem?

and now have a short-term starting ace who won’t get attached and be looking for something awkward

Well, that part's pretty funny, both the idea that Burnett is an ace, and the use of a relationship metaphor.

Investing salary dump deals when it's baseball's richest team offloading the expensive contract on the small-market team would seem to be a very unusual place to start.

It isn't the money sent to Pittsburgh - it's the rest of the money not sent to Pittsburgh.

It isn't the money sent to Pittsburgh - it's the rest of the money not sent to Pittsburgh.

Pardon? The Pirates are paying Burnett like a 1-1.5 WAR SP, which is in line with his last two seasons.

No decent FAs will give them the time of day, and they need reliable IP from the rotation. I don't see the problem.

What's good for the Yankees is good for baseball. I'm glad the Pirates understand this.

Ace he says. What a jokester.

Despite my snark in the other Burnett thread, he does have some conceivable upside, and the Pirates could sneak into contention sometime in the next two years if he (and several of their younger players) realize it. That's a lot of "ifs," but it's not like 2/13 is very much for a starting pitcher anymore. If Burnett had been a free agent and signed for that much with Pittsburgh, people would have said, "eh, they're trying something at least."

This is good for both teams -- clearly this is unacceptable.

Something doesn’t make sense, indeed.

Nothing about that column made sense until I went to the link and saw that Griffin is a writer for the Toronto Star. It now makes perfect sense.

Nothing about that column made sense until I went to the link and saw that [Richard] Griffin is a [the] writer for the Toronto Star. It now makes perfect sense.

Fixed.

Nothing about that column made sense until I went to the link and saw that Griffin is a writer for the Toronto Star. It now makes perfect sense.

If that's to impugn the good name of the Toronto Star sports section...well, then that's pretty much okay with me.

They are also the originators of the ridiculous "White Jays" article, and Griffin is probably the dumbest baseball writer in the city country planet.

While I'm not so sure this is a good deal for the Pirates: (a) you can certainly make the case that it is OK for them and (b) it's certainly better than the Matt Morris deal and nobody squawked about invalidating that one (except Pirate fans).

No risk for the Yanks? Of course there's a risk -- they're giving up a viable ML starting pitcher which is fine until one or two of their starters gets injured.

No matter how you slice it, it's just the modern-day (read big contract era) version of trading a guy for a bag of balls.

They are also the originators of the ridiculous "White Jays" article, and Griffin is probably the dumbest baseball writer in the city country planet.

That's a pretty deep hole to be at the bottom of.

And isn't best for Burnett and the minor leaguers too? I believe the minor leaguers will get a longer look, like a first round draft choice always does, because the Yanks would like to have "something" to show from this trade.

I agree with Walt that this looks like a bad deal for the Pirates. Worse, I think it's terrible, and would be terrible if they were giving up no prospects of any caliber at all. What, exactly, is A. J. Burnett going to do to help the Pirates win a division title, ever? Nothing. He won't be around by the time they've recovered to that extent. And the Bucs will be out $13 million bucks that they could spend on scouting and signing kids who might actually help them a few years down the road when they might get back into contention. It's a great deal - a ripoff - for the Yankees, who have just saved $13 million that they were on the hook for attached to a player they weren't going to use except, as Walt mentions, as an injury fallback or middle relief. But, then, I always think that weak teams should get rid of veterans and save money to build up a group of kids who may, one day, bring them a title or two. They can use the money they've saved to buy a mid-career big bat or big arm when the kids finally start to look good and they need just one more hitter or starter. - Brock Hanke

So if it's great for the Pirates and great for the Yankees, as Griffin says it is, what's the problem? The best trades are the ones that help both teams.

Baseball is a zero sum game. There will be exactly* 2430 regular season wins next year. So if this trade is good for both the Pirates and Yankees, then logically it has to be bad for the other 28 teams.

*unless a rainout is not made up, or a game 163 is needed, etc.

Brock - I generally agree with you, but you're not going to spend $13 million on scouting, and the new CBA curtails your draft spending now. You need someone to pitch those innings but you can't convince even mid-level free agents to come to Pittsburgh. Maybe the kids develop quickly, and maybe Burnett finds his way back to a 110-120 ERA+ against NL lineups and all of a sudden you're a lot closer than you thought you were, and a lot more respectable in the eyes of the Edwin Jacksons out there.

Every win is valuable in turning around a moribund franchise, every win is a step towards respectability and convincing fans to get bak on board and free agents to sign with you.

And every team has the potential of a breakout year. If AJ rebounds he might be the 3 wins that help them squeek in to the playoffs.

Or if AJ rebounds and the team still sucks, they end up flipping him for some decent prospects. The positive variance of the deal can be pretty significant for the Pirates.

AJ actually has a good chance of Turning himself into trade-bait. He's leaving the tougher league for a team in a weaker division with no DH, superficially his stats should look much better.

But even if he just putters along as a mediocre starter eating up innings, that has value beyond wins in giving the club more time and options to develop their younger pitchers.

interestingly enough I dont consider a baseball season or any sort of contest with more than two players to be zero sum. that is because if you look at it as "world series or nothing" which I as a fan do, then there are 29 losers and one winnner. Same with a horse race, etc.

of course, for an individual two team game then "yes" it's zero sum. If that makes any sense..

I agree with Walt that this looks like a bad deal for the Pirates. Worse, I think it's terrible, and would be terrible if they were giving up no prospects of any caliber at all. What, exactly, is A. J. Burnett going to do to help the Pirates win a division title, ever? Nothing. He won't be around by the time they've recovered to that extent. And the Bucs will be out $13 million bucks that they could spend on scouting and signing kids who might actually help them a few years down the road when they might get back into contention.

*facepalm*

The Pirates spent $17M on the draft last year, and have spent more on the draft the last four years combined than any other team in baseball. They've also greatly increased spending on Latin amateurs, including $2.6M for Luis Heredia a year ago. They don't need AJ's purely $5M this year or $8M next year for amateur talent acquisition - those kinds of signings are capped now in the new CBA, and even before that they were fast approaching the point of diminishing returns on that kind of spending.

What they needed this offseason was 200 innings of relatively decent SP capacity, so they could cover for the inevitable Bedard injury and kick a useless slug like Kevin Correia out of the rotation. And now they have it (in theory).

I'm somewhat sympathetic in theory to arguments that Burnett in particular was not the right player to target, but that's a question of scouting, rather than one of organizational strategy, and not really the case you seem to be trying to make here. The Pirates' ZiPS just came out on Friday. Take a look at what the team would be rolling out in this year's rotation without Burnett. He addresses what had been by far the team's largest area of weakness, an area that the team was not able to address on the FA market. Unless you don't see any value in trying to put a respectable team on the field, I'm not sure how you can oppose a move like this.

interestingly enough I dont consider a baseball season or any sort of contest with more than two players to be zero sum. that is because if you look at it as "world series or nothing" which I as a fan do, then there are 29 losers and one winnner. Same with a horse race, etc.

Figures someone named Sunday Silence would have this point of view.

8-)

DB

interestingly enough I dont consider a baseball season or any sort of contest with more than two players to be zero sum. that is because if you look at it as "world series or nothing" which I as a fan do, then there are 29 losers and one winnner. Same with a horse race, etc.

of course, for an individual two team game then "yes" it's zero sum. If that makes any sense..

That's still zero-sum. There's one World Series championship. If one team gets it, then the other teams don't get it. That's exactly what zero-sum is.

--

I have as little time for Richard Griffin as anyone around here, but every now and then I feel like pointing out that he is capable of good work. Often in spring training he'll interview a player and do a column about the guy and how he got where he is, and it'll be perfectly good. When he writes about the Expos, he's often very good. But, see, he likes the Expos, and he doesn't like almost anything else. It's become pretty obvious over the years that he can't stand the Blue Jays, for instance, and would like nothing better than for them to be contracted. That's the kind of guy I'd hire as my baseball columnist if I was the Toronto Star.

Pardon?

Go F yourself.

The Pirates are paying Burnett like a 1-1.5 WAR SP, which is in line with his last two seasons.

This what you think AJ would command on the FA market?

This what you think AJ would command on the FA market?

From the Pirates? He probably wouldn't sign with them at any price, like most decent free agents. Which is why the Pirates had to make a trade if they wanted to get more pitching help for the rotation.

Repoz' excerpt from the article doesn't do Griffin justice. Here is (literally) the money quote:

Now, the Yankees are cavalierly buying their way out of trouble, refinancing happiness, manipulating the long-suffering Pirates’ fans and the baseball system that permits big mistakes to become smaller mistakes, maxing out on the money-back they can save on the final two years of a bad-for-baseball deal, while accepting two less-than-mediocre prospects they don’t want and don’t need just so Selig would approve it as a baseball-first deal.

A long sentence, indeed. The paragraph before, where Griffin is complaining about the impact that the Burnett deal had on salaries when it was signed is also key to understanding his moan.

So, far from being his apparently normal, 'I hate the Blue Jays' self, Griffin is voicing what might be the opinions of the Toronto front office, and if so doing them a favour. The Yankees bought themselves into trouble by signing Burnett in the first place, and now are escaping trouble by manipulating their wealth and the poverty of others to their advantage once again.

Not that I agree with Griffin that the Yankees are not acting in the best interests of baseball. But I wouldn't rely on excerpts giving one the whole story.

I thought - like some above - that this was screwing the Pirates the first time around, but I admit that if Vlad's in favor of it, I'm rethinking.

Just for reference, here's Correia's 2012 ZiPS projection:

142 1/3 IP, 5.00 ERA (77 ERA+), 86/43 K/BB, 20 HR

Burnett doesn't have to be all that good to be significantly better than Correia. Szym sees him as good for a 4.22 ERA (91 ERA+) in Pittsburgh, which doesn't seem particularly unreasonable for a guy who put up an 86 ERA+ last year, and even at that level of production he'd represent a huge upgrade for the team.

From the Pirates?

From anyone. His ERAs the last 2 years have been well north of 5. I have a hard time imagining the "bidding" taking him out of the Saunders/Chen range.

I'm with Vlad on this. In fact, if the Pirates could find three or four more pitchers on the back end of big FA contracts they haven't earned and pick those guys up on similar deals, they might be able to put a .500 team on the field while waiting for their kids to develop. Having guys like Burnett around for two years at $6-7M per isn't going to block anybody or prevent important investments in the team that you hope can contend three or four years from now. OTOH, not having guys like AJ on the staff could lead to the Pirates rushing (and ruining) some of their young pitchers.

and now are escaping trouble by manipulating their wealth and the poverty of others to their advantage once again.

This makes no sense.

The other thing is this. If Griffin's problem with the deal is that the Yankees are buying their way out of trouble, then what would his reaction be if the Yankees just ate Burnett's contract and released him? Would that be better? I don't think it would necessarily be better for the Pirates. This deal may be the least obnoxious way for the Yankees to rid themselves of Burnett.

The Yankees bought themselves into trouble by signing Burnett in the first place, and now are escaping trouble by manipulating their wealth and the poverty of others to their advantage once again.

To add to what everyone is saying, my initial impression of the deal is that the Yankees made a mistake, and that the Pirates came out the winners.

From anyone. His ERAs the last 2 years have been well north of 5. I have a hard time imagining the "bidding" taking him out of the Saunders/Chen range.

And yet, he still probably wouldn't be willing to sign with the Pirates, since virtually no free agents of quality are.

The Pirates shouldn't care what free agents would get if they signed with other teams. The Pirates should only care about what it costs to attract free agents to the Pirates.

What, exactly, is A. J. Burnett going to do to help the Pirates win a division title, ever? Nothing. He won't be around by the time they've recovered to that extent

There are two intertwined "warrants" in this claim: like other posters, I admit the first one (Burnett might be deeply terrible) but reject the second (never acquire a mildly helpful player unless you're on the cusp of contention). It seems to me that the second warrant equates to never trying to improve; if you follow it through logically, you'll never get better and never have a reason to sign mildly helpful players.

And yet, he still probably wouldn't be willing to sign with the Pirates, since virtually no free agents of quality are.

The Pirates shouldn't care what free agents would get if they signed with other teams. The Pirates should only care about what it costs to attract free agents to the Pirates.

Fair enough. My initial post was only half serious (at most).

Vlad is more right than people give him credit for.

For a team like the Pirates, they can't just have a long-term plan or appear to be competative or moving in the right direction; they have to actually be competative while not screwing up the long-term plan, which is what a deal like this does.

My Reds are a perfect example. They won the division in '10 behind the league MVP, making the playoffs for the first time in 15 years; yet, they drew just 2M fans (finishing 12th in attendence). In '11, with Votto having another good year and featuring a lineup with just one "regular" (if 65 games made Rolen a regular) older than 30 and one pitcher with any starts over 29, they drew 2.2M (10th). With their off-season moves, they have to be considered favorites in the division this year, but will they even be league-average in attendence (2.55M last year)?

One or two bad years don't hurt much; for a team like Pittsburgh or Cinci, they have to prove they're trying every year for a number of years before the fans come back.

So, far from being his apparently normal, 'I hate the Blue Jays' self, Griffin is voicing what might be the opinions of the Toronto front office, and if so doing them a favour. The Yankees bought themselves into trouble by signing Burnett in the first place, and now are escaping trouble by manipulating their wealth and the poverty of others to their advantage once again.

That was exactly my reading of his column. It sounded like little more than a typical Yankee hater's complaint that the mean old Bronx Bullies were somehow using their money to gain an unfair advantage, and as such it was highly predictable, and scarcely worthy of any additional comment.

"the problem" seems to be that the Yankees are contenders and this trade helps them. It seems since Pitt is not a contender, the fact this trade helps them too is irrelevant to the writer. It's like he treats this like fantasy baseball where teams in the bottom of the league are sometimes barred from making deals with teams in the top of the league.

It's a bit cheeky complaining about the Burnett trade when you have benefited from the wholly absurd Wells trade.

"the problem" seems to be that the Yankees are contenders and this trade helps them. It seems since Pitt is not a contender, the fact this trade helps them too is irrelevant to the writer. It's like he treats this like fantasy baseball where teams in the bottom of the league are sometimes barred from making deals with teams in the top of the league.

That's exactly right, and it reminds me of the brief period (one year, IIRC) where the seven non-Yankee AL teams at the time (1941 or 1942) agreed informally not to trade with the Yankees. It was a blatant attempt to conspire against them, but after a year it kind of died of its own weight, as it was obviously non-enforceable.

Just about the only objection I can think of to this deal takes the following form:

That the Yankees can afford to pay to make a mistake go away, but if a smaller budget team had signed Burnett to the same contract and gotten the same performance, would they be so constrained that releasing or trading Burnett would be out of the question, as the small chance he returns to form be worth more than him not being on the roster, given that he's getting paid anyway?

In other words, is 90% chance of bad Burnett at 16.5M per worth more than no Burnett at full price, or $10M per? I don't think any MLB teams are so constrained, but I've been wrong before.

Pardon?


Go F yourself.

I didn't understand what you wrote. Get the stick out of your ass and lighten up.

Pardon?

Go F yourself.

I didn't understand what you wrote. Get the stick out of your ass and lighten up.

What is it about these Pirates threads that evoke such crassness?

What is it about these Pirates threads that evoke such crassness?


Everyone's still pissy about the '27 World Series.

Everyone's still pissy about the '27 World Series.

I can sorta understand that, the Dempsey-Tunney "Long Count" was in '27 as well and I'm still a bit peeved.

What is it about these Pirates threads that evoke such crassness?

Arbitol's response has nothing to do with the Pirates. Come over to a Mets thread sometime.

This is a case of a poor team buying the "talent" from a rich one. Isn't it the other way around that is normally complained about?

This is a case of a poor team buying the "talent" from a rich one. Isn't it the other way around that is normally complained about?

Exactly.

When the Yankees pick up an expensive player from a team that isn't going anywhere this season (and is looking to off-load money), and then send two meaningless prospects to the poor team as part of the trade, then everyone throws up their hands in anger.

Example:
July 30, 2006: [Bobby Abreu] Traded by the Philadelphia Phillies with Cory Lidle to the New York Yankees for C.J. Henry (minors), Jesus Sanchez (minors), Carlos Monasterios and Matt Smith.

I remember all the hand-wringing and teeth-gnashing by writers how the Yankees were abusing the Phillies situation.

When the Yankees pick up an expensive player from a team that isn't going anywhere this season (and is looking to off-load money), and then send two meaningless prospects to the poor team as part of the trade, then everyone throws up their hands in anger.

Burnett isn't an "expensive player". The Pirates are only paying him $13M over the next two years combined.

Griffin is going about it backwards, but we all get what he means - it's unfair that teams like the Yankees have a ton of money and can buy their way out of mistakes, while teams like Pittsburgh have to be happy with the scraps. This particular deal might work out okay for the Pirates. The vast majority of them do not.