Still confused about Prior

[srbin84]

Ok, so people say his non-accident injury problems and delining production since 2003 is Dusty's fault for overusing him three years ago. The same people say we shouldn't trade him. So, either Dusty ruined him and he's not the same anymore or that overuse isn't a reason for what he's doing anymore. If it's the first, even though it's not Prior's fault, we need to trade him because even though his value is bad now, it's not going to get back up to where it was because of what Dusty did to him in 2003. If it's the second, it's not Dusty's fault anymore. That's not to say Dusty didn't do anything wrong but that Prior has recovered from that wrong. In that case, I can see why people would want to keep him and see what happens.

[Banedon]

Ok, so people say his non-accident injury problems and delining production since 2003 is Dusty's fault for overusing him three years ago. The same people say we shouldn't trade him. So, either Dusty ruined him and he's not the same anymore or that overuse isn't a reason for what he's doing anymore. If it's the first, even though it's not Prior's fault, we need to trade him because even though his value is bad now, it's not going to get back up to where it was because of what Dusty did to him in 2003. If it's the second, it's not Dusty's fault anymore. That's not to say Dusty didn't do anything wrong but that Prior has recovered from that wrong. In that case, I can see why people would want to keep him and see what happens.

 

What if people believe that Dusty helped cause his injuries, but that he can still be a very good pitcher with the right managerial staff in place? Maybe it's not a black and white thing?

[srbin84]

Ok, so people say his non-accident injury problems and delining production since 2003 is Dusty's fault for overusing him three years ago. The same people say we shouldn't trade him. So, either Dusty ruined him and he's not the same anymore or that overuse isn't a reason for what he's doing anymore. If it's the first, even though it's not Prior's fault, we need to trade him because even though his value is bad now, it's not going to get back up to where it was because of what Dusty did to him in 2003. If it's the second, it's not Dusty's fault anymore. That's not to say Dusty didn't do anything wrong but that Prior has recovered from that wrong. In that case, I can see why people would want to keep him and see what happens.

 

What if people believe that Dusty helped cause his injuries, but that he can still be a very good pitcher with the right managerial staff in place? Maybe it's not a black and white thing?

 

If he can still be a very good pitcher, he himself should be criticized for his performance when it's bad and praised when it's good.

[MPrior]

Ok, so people say his non-accident injury problems and delining production since 2003 is Dusty's fault for overusing him three years ago. The same people say we shouldn't trade him. So, either Dusty ruined him and he's not the same anymore or that overuse isn't a reason for what he's doing anymore. If it's the first, even though it's not Prior's fault, we need to trade him because even though his value is bad now, it's not going to get back up to where it was because of what Dusty did to him in 2003. If it's the second, it's not Dusty's fault anymore. That's not to say Dusty didn't do anything wrong but that Prior has recovered from that wrong. In that case, I can see why people would want to keep him and see what happens.

 

These two statements are not mutually exclusive - it's certainly plausible (even probable) that Dusty's overuse contributed to Prior's injury problems, but that doesn't mean that Prior's value is only going to decline. Trading Prior is only a good idea if the right deal comes along, because unless we can be absolutely certain that he is completely and permanently ruined, what he can contribute to this team is of greater value than anything you're likely to get for him right now.

[srbin84]

Ok, so people say his non-accident injury problems and delining production since 2003 is Dusty's fault for overusing him three years ago. The same people say we shouldn't trade him. So, either Dusty ruined him and he's not the same anymore or that overuse isn't a reason for what he's doing anymore. If it's the first, even though it's not Prior's fault, we need to trade him because even though his value is bad now, it's not going to get back up to where it was because of what Dusty did to him in 2003. If it's the second, it's not Dusty's fault anymore. That's not to say Dusty didn't do anything wrong but that Prior has recovered from that wrong. In that case, I can see why people would want to keep him and see what happens.

 

These two statements are not mutually exclusive - it's certainly plausible (even probable) that Dusty's overuse contributed to Prior's injury problems, but that doesn't mean that Prior's value is only going to decline. Trading Prior is only a good idea if the right deal comes along, because unless we can be absolutely certain that he is completely and permanently ruined, what he can contribute to this team is of greater value than anything you're likely to get for him right now.

 

He's been on and off injured since 2003 and declining in performance since then. If this continues, when will you be convinced? If it continues the rest of the year, and you decide he's ruined, everybody else may have reached that conclusion by then too. If you keep him in 2007, and it's still continuing, I highly doubt you will get anything of value for him. At some point you have to make a decision. Other teams aren't going to cater to you and let you wait a long time and still get something for him.

[goonys evil twin]

Ok, so people say his non-accident injury problems and delining production since 2003 is Dusty's fault for overusing him three years ago. The same people say we shouldn't trade him. So, either Dusty ruined him and he's not the same anymore or that overuse isn't a reason for what he's doing anymore.

 

Why either/or?

 

It's not necessarily permanent ruination. Who knows, maybe he is done. I doubt it. What I don't doubt is that the way they used him early on played a significant role in his later problems.

[badger1679666666]

Can you go three days without making a trade prior thread? Or just use one of the 124398745 trade prior threads you've made this year?

[srbin84]

Ok, so people say his non-accident injury problems and delining production since 2003 is Dusty's fault for overusing him three years ago. The same people say we shouldn't trade him. So, either Dusty ruined him and he's not the same anymore or that overuse isn't a reason for what he's doing anymore.

 

Why either/or?

 

It's not necessarily permanent ruination. Who knows, maybe he is done. I doubt it. What I don't doubt is that the way they used him early on played a significant role in his later problems.

 

Because if Dusty ruined him, he ruined him. If he didn't, he didn't. I think it's asinine to say Dusty ruined him, but only for 3-5 years, then he'll be healthy and mowing people down again.

[goonys evil twin]

If he can still be a very good pitcher, he himself should be criticized for his performance when it's bad and praised when it's good.

 

He should be blamed for getting injured?

 

You don't make any sense. The theory is that Dusty's use hurt Prior. It may not have completely ruined him. And he might be able to come back from those problems and get better. Just because he has a chance to recover from the abuse related setbacks earlier in his career doesn't mean he should be criticized for not being great right now.

 

Seriously, you don't make any sense whatsoever.

[srbin84]

Can you go three days without making a trade prior thread? Or just use one of the 124398745 trade prior threads you've made this year?

 

Well, learn how to read first because this isn't a trade Prior thread. Secondly, I've probably made 5 or 6, with the last one being a month or so ago.

[srbin84]

If he can still be a very good pitcher, he himself should be criticized for his performance when it's bad and praised when it's good.

 

He should be blamed for getting injured?

 

You don't make any sense. The theory is that Dusty's use hurt Prior. It may not have completely ruined him. And he might be able to come back from those problems and get better. Just because he has a chance to recover from the abuse related setbacks earlier in his career doesn't mean he should be criticized for not being great right now.

 

Seriously, you don't make any sense whatsoever.

 

Seriously, you don't make any sense whatsoever. You want to give Prior the benefit of the doubt when does bad but praise him when he does good. That's b.s. Hold him accountable for his actions or blame it on Dusty, accept what Dusty did and get rid of him.

Edited June 28, 2006 by srbin84

[goonys evil twin]

Because if Dusty ruined him, he ruined him. If he didn't, he didn't. I think it's asinine to say Dusty ruined him, but only for 3-5 years, then he'll be healthy and mowing people down again.

 

Just because you want it to be black and white doesn't mean it is black and white. The word ruin isn't necessarily the right word anyway. He ruined the early part of his career, that's for certain. But he didn't necessarily ruin him to the point where he's done. It's called a setback. Injuries are setbacks, they aren't always career enders. Misuse today could hurt you tomorrow, but it doesn't mean you will never regain the form.

[srbin84]

Then just tell me how much time he gets to recover because it obviously is more than 3 years.

[goonys evil twin]

Seriously, you don't make any sense whatsoever. You want to give Prior the benefit of the doubt when does bad but praise him when he does good. That's b.s. Hold him accountable for his actions or blame it on Dusty, accept what Dusty did and get rid of him.

 

What are the actions I'm supposed to hold him accountable for? Not being great? Being injured? Having setbacks after being overused at a very young age?

 

Okay.

 

Mark Prior, you dastardly fiend, how dare you get injured and have setbacks. Now get back in there and get better today, there is no room for gradual improvements. This is baseball, nobody ever takes time to improve, or get back to health, and nobody ever suffers setbacks.

[srbin84]

Seriously, you don't make any sense whatsoever. You want to give Prior the benefit of the doubt when does bad but praise him when he does good. That's b.s. Hold him accountable for his actions or blame it on Dusty, accept what Dusty did and get rid of him.

 

What are the actions I'm supposed to hold him accountable for? Not being great? Being injured? Having setbacks after being overused at a very young age?

 

Okay.

 

Mark Prior, you dastardly fiend, how dare you get injured and have setbacks. Now get back in there and get better today, there is no room for gradual improvements. This is baseball, nobody ever takes time to improve, or get back to health, and nobody ever suffers setbacks.

 

Like I said, just tell me how many years he gets to recover.

[badger1679666666]

Then just tell me how much time he gets to recover because it obviously is more than 3 years.

 

Wow are you this obtuse? He's had other non-dusty related setbacks during that team which have only magnified and excerbated the situation. Is it that hard to see or is your raging hard-on for getting rid of Prior that dominating?

[badger1679666666]

Seriously, you don't make any sense whatsoever. You want to give Prior the benefit of the doubt when does bad but praise him when he does good. That's b.s. Hold him accountable for his actions or blame it on Dusty, accept what Dusty did and get rid of him.

 

What are the actions I'm supposed to hold him accountable for? Not being great? Being injured? Having setbacks after being overused at a very young age?

 

Okay.

 

Mark Prior, you dastardly fiend, how dare you get injured and have setbacks. Now get back in there and get better today, there is no room for gradual improvements. This is baseball, nobody ever takes time to improve, or get back to health, and nobody ever suffers setbacks.

 

Like I said, just tell me how many years he gets to recover.

 

That's just it. You want clear cut black and white in a situation that is anything BUT black and white. Either you have patience (like the BJ's had with Roy Halladay) or you have no patience and get screwed in the pooch. The kid is 25 years old. You wait a hell of a lot longer than that before getting rid of what could be your co-franchise.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I'm still trying to figure out what the hell you're asking.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

If he can still be a very good pitcher, he himself should be criticized for his performance when it's bad and praised when it's good.

 

He should be blamed for getting injured?

 

You don't make any sense. The theory is that Dusty's use hurt Prior. It may not have completely ruined him. And he might be able to come back from those problems and get better. Just because he has a chance to recover from the abuse related setbacks earlier in his career doesn't mean he should be criticized for not being great right now.

 

Seriously, you don't make any sense whatsoever.

 

Seriously, you don't make any sense whatsoever. You want to give Prior the benefit of the doubt when does bad but praise him when he does good. That's b.s. Hold him accountable for his actions or blame it on Dusty, accept what Dusty did and get rid of him.

 

How do you know Prior won't rebound and improve? What's wrong in waiting to see if he rebounds from his injuries? His trade value is already pretty low.

[BigbadB]

Can you go three days without making a trade prior thread? Or just use one of the 124398745 trade prior threads you've made this year?

 

Well, learn how to read first because this isn't a trade Prior thread. Secondly, I've probably made 5 or 6, with the last one being a month or so ago.

 

What did Dusty do after Prior flipped over Marcus Giles and landed hard on his shoulder?

 

Dusty sent him back out there.

 

Just one of many examples of how Dusty has misused his pitchers.

 

Exactly what would you expect to get from Mark Prior in trade if you were to just give up on him and now and make him available in trade?

 

What will other teams give up for a guy no one knows will ever be right? Give a reasonable trade offer that someone would make at this time.

 

Considering how poor his trade value is right now, why bother trading him? Is the player that the Cubs could net in trade going to somehow bring the Cubs back into playoff contention?

 

He's either a sunk cost at this point as a low point, and becoming as dominant again as he was in 2003 as a high point. And then, there is also everything in between. If you aren't going to get anything significant in return for trading him, why not just gamble that he can at least get fully healthy with the potential to be an above average starter again someday?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Seriously, you don't make any sense whatsoever. You want to give Prior the benefit of the doubt when does bad but praise him when he does good. That's b.s. Hold him accountable for his actions or blame it on Dusty, accept what Dusty did and get rid of him.

 

What are the actions I'm supposed to hold him accountable for? Not being great? Being injured? Having setbacks after being overused at a very young age?

 

Okay.

 

Mark Prior, you dastardly fiend, how dare you get injured and have setbacks. Now get back in there and get better today, there is no room for gradual improvements. This is baseball, nobody ever takes time to improve, or get back to health, and nobody ever suffers setbacks.

 

Like I said, just tell me how many years he gets to recover.

 

None of us are doctors, how are we to know? We do know it's too soon to give up on him. He's only 25, his velocity is already back and he's shown lots signs of rebounding to his old form.

[srbin84]

Then just tell me how much time he gets to recover because it obviously is more than 3 years.

 

Wow are you this obtuse? He's had other non-dusty related setbacks during that team which have only magnified and excerbated the situation. Is it that hard to see or is your raging hard-on for getting rid of Prior that dominating?

 

This thread is about why I think it's wrong to both blame Dusty for ruining him and wanting to keep him. Wrong if you want the Cubs to win anyway. Now people are saying he's possibly ruined just the early part of his career. I can accept that possibility; I'm just wondering how many years that would constituted in your and likeminded people's opinions.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Then just tell me how much time he gets to recover because it obviously is more than 3 years.

 

Wow are you this obtuse? He's had other non-dusty related setbacks during that team which have only magnified and excerbated the situation. Is it that hard to see or is your raging hard-on for getting rid of Prior that dominating?

 

Come on badger, there's no need for that.

[badger1679666666]

Then just tell me how much time he gets to recover because it obviously is more than 3 years.

 

Wow are you this obtuse? He's had other non-dusty related setbacks during that team which have only magnified and excerbated the situation. Is it that hard to see or is your raging hard-on for getting rid of Prior that dominating?

 

This thread is about why I think it's wrong to both blame Dusty for ruining him and wanting to keep him. Wrong if you want the Cubs to win anyway. Now people are saying he's possibly ruined just the early part of his career. I can accept that possibility; I'm just wondering how many years that would constituted in your and likeminded people's opinions.

 

I understand what you're asking, but I think it's an unanswerable question. As someone else pointed out his velocity is rebounding (I saw him hit 93 serveral times in Minneapolis) and his stuff is coming back in only his second start...

 

No one knows how long to wait, but he's still too young, and his trade value is TOO low to give up on him.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

This thread is about why I think it's wrong to both blame Dusty for ruining him and wanting to keep him. Wrong if you want the Cubs to win anyway. Now people are saying he's possibly ruined just the early part of his career. I can accept that possibility; I'm just wondering how many years that would constituted in your and likeminded people's opinions.

 

Aren't you the expert in randomly assigning a length of time to an argument in order to make it appear stronger?

Edited June 28, 2006 by Ding Dong Johnson