A different kind of Trade Deadline Strategy

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

I’d still say, it’s all a matter of playing the odds in a given situation given your evaluation of the player.   We can all think of trades where the prospects turned out to be worth many multiples of the veteran player and the team that traded for the vet got absolutely fleeced.   And then again, we can remember trades where the prospects never did anything and the veteran had a lot of value.   And some teams/GMs are really good at knowing when to hold and when to fold.  It’s not an easy task.   It’s probably a little easier if you have a really deep system and can trade away good prospects because you’ve got someone equally good at the same position in the system.  

Right, which is my point,  You stick to your plan and your philosophies.  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

This is the hardest team sport to be successful at, so no matter how good you are or how much you know, you will fail more often than not.

[Aristotelian]

23 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Seems to me you can win or lose either way.   You keep guys until they succeed or fail, some of them will fail.   You trade guys before they succeed or fail, some of those you trade will succeed and the other team will win the trade.   Other times they’ll fail and you’ll win the trade.  

I think the real key is, don’t get overly attached to the talent on your own team.   View everyone objectively same as you would if they were another team’s prospect.   As a fan, I find it really hard to do.   But a GM needs to do that.    
 

 

It's not just a matter of being objective about your guys but also about the overall situation of your rebuild. IMO we are nowhere near ready to be trading from the long term talent pool to get guaranteed wins now. We don't know who our core is or even if we have a core. I have no idea whether DL Hall is undervalued or overvalued but I know we are not in a position to trade someone with Ace potential for two year of Ramirez.

[Moose Milligan]

23 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Shame Means didn't stay healthy and keep pitching at a high level.  Means for Abrams could have been possible IMO.  I don't think it is now.

You getting the sneaking suspicion that the spider tack crackdown is leading Means' demise?  Me, too.

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

You getting the sneaking suspicion that the spider tack crackdown is leading Means' demise?  Me, too.

Not at all.   I thought he pitched well yesterday.  I think he will finish the season well.   As good as April/May?   No, but I never would’ve expected him to do that, spider tack or not.   

[billw76]

3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

You getting the sneaking suspicion that the spider tack crackdown is leading Means' demise?  Me, too.

I think it is as well. I was all for moving him before his DL stint, even more now.

 

[Sports Guy]

2 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

You getting the sneaking suspicion that the spider tack crackdown is leading Means' demise?  Me, too.

I don’t know yet.  On one hand, he seemed to pitch well the other day.  The Nats were attacking early and that could be the reason he didn’t get a lot of Ks.

Otoh, he hit 3 guys and only missed 3 bats.  He will not be successful if he isn’t missing bats and striking guys out.

I just need to see more.

I just think it’s an adjustment.  Fry struggled but he is settling in now.