The New-Look Buccos

There's going to be a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth if the reported deal of Nyjer Morgan and Sean Burnett to the Nationals for Lastings Milledge and Joel Hanrahan goes through, particularly from the ill-informed. Milledge deserves more than the time I have to give him right now, but as for Hanrahan, he's not nearly as bad as his stats look.

First, go here to see his current year and career statistics.

The first thing other than the 7.71 ERA that jumps out at me is his insane .451 BABIP, way off his career norms, and the norm for any pitcher. As you may already know from my earlier post on this subject, BABIP for pitchers tends to fall very close to .300. Hanrahan's FIP (Fielding Independent Pitching) is 3.56 for the year, actually better than last year when his ERA was 3.95.

What that tells you is that he's had some very bad luck, and his numbers should return to a much reasonable level in the second half of the season. ZiPS has him going with a 3.80 ERA the rest of the way, with 47 K's in 45 IP. His K/9 numbers have been very good since being promoted, and he's cutting down on his BB/9 as well as his HR/9. The guy is a good reliever, he just hasn't had the fortune to show it yet.

More Tony Sanchez

Erik Manning over at the invaluable FanGraphs has a solidly-reasoned take on the Pirates selecting Tony Sanchez with the fourth selection of this year's draft. Money portion:

So what sort of a big league future do scouts envision for Sanchez? In a nutshell, they see a defense-first catcher with slightly above average hitting skills. Being a catcher is about as physically and mentally demanding job as you can imagine, making them harder to come by. That’s why they get a +12.5 run adjustment when figuring their WAR. And most catchers really suck at hitting; the average regular catcher posted a .315 wOBA last year. Say Sanchez meets expectations by being good for a .320 wOBA and half a win on defense every season. We’re talking about a 2, 2 ½ win per season player. Is that really so awful?

After playing it safe with their highest and most expensive pick, Pittsburgh then loaded up on some high-upside arms, including some potentially tough to sign players. Seems to me Huntington executed a well-laid out plan. Play it safe first with a college position player, then load up on pitching when the distinct advantages disappear.

I realize that it's difficult for the casual fan to appreciate the logic behind taking a player with marketable skills that are likely to be preserved, despite the fact that the player in question does not have the best potential or "upside," highest ceiling, whatever at the spot he was taken. However, particularly if the Pirates invest a lot of money in Miguel Angel Sano, this is precisely the draft strategy that makes sense for Team Neal.

2.5 WAR a year is nothing to shake a stick at, particularly if you're strong at other positions. Just keep that in mind.

Andrew McCutchen has just hit his first career major league home run off the Twins' Francisco Liriano in the top of the third with Jack Wilson on base to put the Pirates up 2-0.

More Draft Feedback

More from Keith Law (ESPN Insiders only) on the Pirates' work today in rounds 4-30 of the first year player draft:

Pittsburgh's selection of Tony Sanchez at No. 4 overall on Tuesday was the most controversial pick of the day, but the Pirates did do one thing they promised, taking some tough-sign high school pitchers on Wednesday. Their philosophy is that high school arms are so volatile that paying premium prices in the first round is a poor strategy, and that the value of that first pick (when you might get a premium bat or college arm) is too high to surrender, so try to stockpile young arms in later rounds. Whether Sanchez was the best pick for slot is another question -- I don't think he was -- but the idea of adding young arms who fell due to signability reasons is a sound one, and they added four good ones, two from my top 100 in Jordan Cooper and Zach Von Rosenburg and two who would have ranked in the next 50 or so players in Colton Cain and Trent Stevenson. Stevenson and Cooper both looked like top-two-round picks last summer, but neither had a good spring, with Stephenson losing a little velocity and Cooper pitching very inconsistently until late in the season. If the Pirates sign three of those four kids, it's a great draft, and if they sign two, it's still a good one.

Also, John Perrotto (a name you should have known before his days at piratesreport.com) has some thoughts that roughly echo KLaw.

Some Draft (and other) Thoughts

Before everyone goes all "Same old Pirates" on you, let's consider for a second that Tony Sanchez is universally considered to be the best college catcher in an admittedly much weaker draft than last year, and someone who by all accounts should contribute at the major league level within three years. This is not a situation where the Pirates passed up someone like super-mega-phenom Matt Wieters with a pick like Danny Moskos. They chose a bona fide prospect at a position higher than he probably should have gone. Keith Law's thoughts are (as usual) pretty accurate on this matter.

There's also some criticism being leveled by various sources regarding the Pirates being constrained by budgetary concerns, and wanting to conserve some money on their first round pick (again, in an admittedly weak draft), so that they can spend more money to sign other picks. This would seem to me to be sound business strategy, since the Pirates are short on minor league talent, and would do well by themselves to try and sign as many of their draftees as possible. However, it seems as though many fail to recognize the fact that the Pittsburgh are in fact a business venture. EVERY SINGLE TEAM IN MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL HAS A DRAFT BUDGET. I believe the Pirates spent more money last year in the draft than just about every other team, yet you still hear the same complaining that the club doesn't want to open its checkbook even before the draft and signing period are over. Can we at least wait to see what happens before we pass judgment? Please?

Part of my whining here stems back to the McLouth trade, so I should probably be a little more open about my motivation here: I'm sick of the constant complaining about the Pirates. I've been a fan of this team as long as I've been alive. I hated Dave Littlefield as much as the rest of you, and I've watched as my favorite baseball team was basically bludgeoned to death over the last decade and a half just as much as you have. I get why the vast majority of the people who follow this team are frustrated, and I get that there is a certain "guilty until proven innocent" attitude that they take with the front office as a de facto position, but the constant negativity and rushing to judgment by this fan base is, quite frankly, maddening.

Pittsburgh is a spoiled sports city. I say this as someone who has vociferously and unwaveringly supported the Steelers, Penguins, and Pirates for my entire life, despite the fact that I haven't lived in Pittsburgh since I was a small child. I've supported them in Columbus, for four years while I went to school in (of all places) Cleveland, and while I was wandering in the great Southwest. One thing has never changed about Pittsburgh fans: They feel that winning every game, every year is their birthright. They take losing as badly as any fanbase, and the current situtation of the Pirates has compounded that frustration to almost unimaginable levels. What it's created is an angry, pessimistic, almost wholly negative group of followers for something that is supposed to be an enjoyable diversion from the things that really matter.

After 16 years of futility, the fans of the Pirates are ready to criticize anything that doesn't produce immediate positive results. On a certain level I understand that, as I want to be in attendance for playoff games at PNC Park before I get my first Social Security check, but baseball is not the NFL or the NHL. Developing talent takes years, not just one training camp. Sometimes judging these decisions immediately is obvious, like Moskos over Wieters, but that does not apply to the McLouth/Nady/Bay trades, and it certainly doesn't apply to Tony Sanchez.

Personally, I think Neal Huntington and Frank Coonelly have earned at least a little bit of trust in their first (almost) two years on the job. Can we please put the torches and pitchforks away for a little while?

The pick is officially Jorge "Tony" Sanchez, the catcher from Boston College. Great defense, and considered to be the best college catcher in the draft. Hit over .300 with an OPS over 1.000, but the strength of his bat is the concern. If he can hit, he should be on a fast track to the majors.

Didn't see that coming, did you?

Well, Team Neal pulled a fast one on us yet again, trading starting center fielder Nate McLouth to the Braves for three prospects: AAA pitcher Charlie Morton, AA outfielder Gorkys Hernandez, and high-A pitcher Jeff Locke. Replacing McLouth will be highly-touted prospect Andrew McCutchen, who will make his debut in about an hour against the Mets at PNC Park. McLouth was signed through the next three years for just under $16 million, so this couldn't really be construed as a salary dump; at least from the perspective of the Pirates' front office, this move was strictly baseball-related.

And you know what? I agree with it. As Keith Law tweeted, from 6/1/08 through 6/1/09, McLouth has hit .256/.327/.447 in 630 PA. That's basically a full season's worth of mediocre performance. I realize he's hit 9 HR this year, and was second on the team with 0.68 WPA/LI (behind...gasp...Freddy Sanchez), but that slash line does not justify the Bucs keeping him throughout the rest of his contract. Nate came out of the gates really fast last year, and didn't play nearly as well down the stretch. Nyjer Morgan's defense has helped McLouth look much better (giving up only 1 run in the field for every 6 he contributes with the bat, as opposed to 1 for 2), but he is still a defensive liability without a good LF next to him. The bottom line is that his current performance is much closer to his true talent level, and at 27, he has a lot less use to the club than three good prospects who each have a higher ceiling.

Of course, Nate's departure also gives us the opportunity to see what kind of asset the club has in Andrew McCutchen. I'm sure you've read the party line that said McCutchen would play when he's "ready," but apparently what that really meant was "as soon as we trade McLouth." My unabashed appreciation for McCutchen has been documented here and elsewhere, so I won't go crazy, but just let me say that I thought about calling off work today so I could make the three hour drive to be in Pittsburgh for the game (which I did Tuesday night to see Santana). McCutchen's current line of .303/.361/.493 shows he's about as ready as he's going to be, and at 22, I'm tempted to say the sky's the limit with him. Can you tell I'm excited?

It's a tough move to swallow on June 3rd, particularly because the Pirates' pythagorean record is 26-26, meaning they've lost a couple games they shouldn't have (and would probably get back later), but there's no way this team is jumping all four or even three of the Milwaukee-St. Louis-Cincinnati-Chicago group currently blocking them in the standings. It might mean the difference between finishing with 73 and 76 wins to make this deal now, but who really cares about that? In the end, I think this trade will be looked upon quite favorably.

Huntington on MLB Network now defending trade. He says Charlie Morton is not far away, and all three are potentially above-average major leaguers. Mentions Hernandez, Morgan, and McCutchen as a potentially great defensive outfield.