If you were Manager & GM what would you do differently?

[Lou]

45 minutes ago, JustATroutFan said:

Fat Mike needs to take leadership and tell Calhoun to bunt here and there and the shift will be gone when he is up to bat. Calhoun probably got called by Fat Mike as a "home run hitter" before this season began behind the scenes. 

[Stradling]

Just now, Lou said:

I don’t care for your use of the singular form of idiot.  

[Angelsfan1984]

I'd buy as low as possible on Kenly. I'd even reach out to the Rays about Colome. We also need someone who isn't allergic to getting on base in front of Trout.

[Stradling]

I wouldn’t want Jansen but I’d be happy with Colome 

[stormngt]

34 minutes ago, Warfarin said:

For an elite performer who is under five years of control (Vazquez) - yes.  A very tough pill for me to swallow, and I do not do it with ease.  But Suarez's ceiling is a mid-rotation starter - who knows if he reaches that ceiling.  Soriano has talent but he is a wild card - very far away, who knows if he will ultimately develop.  This is not to say he won't, but the further away from the big leagues they are, the more risk involved.

Vazquez is signed to the following deal:

• 2018: $2.5M, 2019: $4M, 2020: $5.2M, 2021: $7.2M
• 2022 Team Option: $10M ($1M buyout)
• 2023 Team Option: $10M ($0.5M buyout)

Acquiring him would give us 5.5 years of control of a young (26yo) elite power lefty reliever.  

Looking at how teams have used their closers in the post-season (Jansen last year, Chapman in 2016, etc)... a power closer can make a HUGE difference in the playoffs.  We routinely see them used for 2 innings at a time in clutch situations.  So yes, while I am not eager to trade prospects, that would be a worthwhile investment to me.

It has been argued that relievers are very volatile and risky to be consistent year in and year out.  How do you respond to that argument?

[stormngt]

40 minutes ago, stormngt said:

If I was the GM

I would extend Scioscia for another ten years

Yea I posted that just get a reaction...lol

[Warfarin]

1 minute ago, stormngt said:

It has been argued that relievers are very volatile and risky to be consistent year in and year out.  How do you respond to that argument?

That is a great point, and it is why I said i do not do it with ease.

My counter to that is there are various levels of risk in the deal.  First - I am assuming we are making this deal at the deadline, so at least we know how Vazquez is performing this year at the time.

Another factor is there are several option years built into the deal.  If he falls apart, at least we have the option of not picking up the options.

Moreover, I will also say our prospects carry just as much risk.  Trading a guy who just reached AA + two other guys who haven't even cracked AA yet = lots of risk for the Pirates.  So there is plenty of risk involved on both sides of the equation, I would say.