Pittsburg Pirates

BillW · #1 07-11-2008, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GBBob

I'd like to see the Royals numbers over the same period...Two great 70's franchises and early 80's

In the Pirates case, from the 1870's (well almost

)

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/PIT/

ddthetide · #2 07-12-2008, 11:30 PM

i was 8 yrs old when Clemente lead the Bucs over the orioles in the 71 WS. i turned into a Pirate and Clemente fan during the NLCS that year.
when they split up the team in the late 90's (and the last strike) i'd finally had my fill of baseball period. about once a month i check to see how many games out the Bucs are.
the Pirates are nothing more than a AAA team for the rest of the major league. this team should have been moved out of Pittsburgh years ago or folded all together. instead they screw the people of Pennsylvania and build a new stadium? this organization is a disgrace but (IMO) all of baseball is a disgrace anymore. there should be 4-6 teams folded.

BillW · #3 07-12-2008, 11:48 PM

The other day they lost a 2002 1st round pitcher who typically as of late, didn't pan out. To replace him on the roster they had to call up a guy from double-A with an ERA over 5.00. Truly sad.

ddthetide · #4 07-13-2008, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillW

The other day they lost a 2002 1st round pitcher who typically as of late, didn't pan out. To replace him on the roster they had to call up a guy from double-A with an ERA over 5.00. Truly sad.

they used to have a really good farm system.

#5 07-13-2008, 03:37 PM

I remember Manny S., Willie Stargell, that whole crew.

They revenue share in baseball, correct? How can the other
owners stand to share with a team determined to fail?

Does anybody actually go to the games? They cant be pulling
a profit on their own.

Cannon Shell · #6 07-13-2008, 04:12 PM

They have poor management and cheap ownership but that is no reason to get rid of the team. The fault is MLB's and the other owners for not making these guys is the smaller markets try to win and for management of these teams failing to hire people who know what the hell they are doing. As shown by Minnesota, Oakland(screw you Scuds), Tampa (finally), Florida, St Louis, etc. it is possible to compete in a smaller market and not by going after expensive free agents. Because baseball's draft is dealing with players that very few of us have ever seen it is not nearly as publicized as the other sports. Yet the teams that draft well and build within are the ones that succeed. And teams like Pittsburgh and KC which have good picks every year and get compensation picks for losing free agents (good picks) they cant afford still manage to screw it up.

3kings · #7 07-13-2008, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

They have poor management and cheap ownership but that is no reason to get rid of the team. The fault is MLB's and the other owners for not making these guys is the smaller markets try to win and for management of these teams failing to hire people who know what the hell they are doing. As shown by Minnesota, Oakland(screw you Scuds), Tampa (finally), Florida, St Louis, etc. it is possible to compete in a smaller market and not by going after expensive free agents. Because baseball's draft is dealing with players that very few of us have ever seen it is not nearly as publicized as the other sports. Yet the teams that draft well and build within are the ones that succeed. And teams like Pittsburgh and KC which have good picks every year and get compensation picks for losing free agents (good picks) they cant afford still manage to screw it up.

You are correct Chuck.......They have not taken advantage of their high draft picks because management did not want to spend the money. They have shied away from the can't miss prospects(usually repped by agent Scott Boris) because they had too much leverage and were afraid they were not sign-able. The picks they have made that were sign-able either were busts or threw their arms out.....When they have made the proven talent for prospect trades, they have somehow never got the talent other teams have received. Management has sucked for 15-20 years, but they are only part of the blame because the ownership has refused to spend the money. When they have signed players they never take the guys with huge upside, they take the Derrick Bells, Matt Stairs etc... Mistake, too cheap, mistake.....20 yrs. of misery

Cannon Shell · #8 07-13-2008, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgardn

I remember Manny S., Willie Stargell, that whole crew.

They revenue share in baseball, correct? How can the other
owners stand to share with a team determined to fail?

Does anybody actually go to the games? They cant be pulling
a profit on their own.

Baseball is a very profitable business. TV contracts, merchandising contrcts, tickets (attendance has never been better) make for stuffed pockets for these owners.

Cannon Shell · #9 07-13-2008, 04:26 PM

I keep reading that the Mets are interested in Matt Holliday. I have 2 questions. #1 What do the Mets have left to trade for him? #2 Will Scuds head just explode if the Rockies "dump" Holliday for a bunch of prospects? Because depending on what they get in return, this could be a much bigger transaction that the Cubs or Brewers trade.

3kings · #10 07-13-2008, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Baseball is a very profitable business. TV contracts, merchandising contrcts, tickets (attendance has never been better) make for stuffed pockets for these owners.

Your right they are making a profit because of revenue share without fielding a descent product. PNC park is fabulous, that is why people show up, along with fireworks and bobbleheads

ddthetide · #11 07-13-2008, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgardn

I remember Manny S., Willie Stargell, that whole crew.

They revenue share in baseball, correct? How can the other
owners stand to share with a team determined to fail?

Does anybody actually go to the games? They cant be pulling
a profit on their own.

i listen to a radio discussion last summer that KC and Pitt. both are making money through revenue sharing BUT the owners are pocketing the revenue instead of putting into the teams.
attendance is avg. 18,000 for this season.

31lengths · #12 07-13-2008, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ddthetide

i listen to a radio discussion last summer that KC and Pitt. both are making money through revenue sharing BUT the owners are pocketing the revenue instead of putting into the teams.
attendance is avg. 18,000 for this season.

...that's exactly how the previous Rays' owner was....