Braves aquire Nate McClouth for prospects.

[SouthSideRyan]

Apparently Nate McLouth died, judging by how the players are mourning the loss: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4233488

 

On Wednesday, the Pirates dealt McLouth, one of their best players, to the Atlanta Braves for outfielder Gorkys Hernandez, one of their top prospects, along with pitchers Charlie Morton and Jeff Locke.

 

On Thursday, at the clubhouse table where McLouth used to play cards with relievers Sean Burnett and Jesse Chavez, a candle bearing McLouth's uniform No. 13 was lit, along with a photo of him in uniform, the Post-Gazette reported. "We'll miss him," Burnett said.

 

I change my opinion then. If McLouth is dead, this was an ok deal for the Pirates.

[SouthSideRyan]

Just to be clear, if someone wants to make the argument, "Huntington's an idiot: he should've held onto McLouth if that's all he could get for him", then I'll certainly listen to that.

 

What sounds foolish (IMO) is the argument, "Huntington's an idiot: he could've gotten more for McLouth."

 

How bout, Huntington's an idiot, he values tools goofs like Gorkys Hernandez and guys who throw hard and can't control it like the A-ball guy. What constitutes more depends on what the individual values.

 

When Dave Littlefield traded Rajai Davis for Matt Morris and his awful contract could he not gotten more for Rajai Davis.(Yes, he could've just released him)

 

When Jim Duquette(Or Jeff Wilpon or Rick Peterson or Al Leiter or whoever pushed that trade through) traded Scott Kazmir for Victor Zambrano, was that the best deal he could get for Kazmir, or did whoever pushed for the trade irrationally overvalue Victor Zambrano/irrationally hate Kazmir.

Look let's say Huntington sold McLouth for the baseball equivalent of $1.

 

It's been suggested in this thread that some other team would've gladly offered him more than $1, which strikes me as foolish and naive.

 

There's no need to argue whether the actual players involved are actually worth $2 or 2 cents. The Pirates rated them at $1, and more to the point, they didn't have another offer over $1 out there, or else they would've taken it.

 

So you're gonna ignore my 2 real world applicable question and make a bad analogy.

 

Baseball players aren't evaluated the same across the board. Neal Huntington may feel the 3 "prospects" he got in return are worth the hypothetical $1. Jim Hendry may feel those 3 are worth $.05, while thinking some offer the Pirates turned down was worth $4. Your definition of value says that every trade ever made was all a GM could get because the GM in question valued the return as equal to that which went out. It's absurd.

[jersey cubs fan]

From Olney's blog:

 

1. Some officials who really liked the deal for Atlanta say that as far as they knew, Pittsburgh was not aggressively marketing McLouth, casting a wide net and playing one offer against another in an effort to maximize the center fielder's trade value. "With so many teams looking for outfielders, I don't understand why they didn't play this out a little more," an NL talent evaluator said.

 

Seems to support the notion that Pittsburgh may not have gotten as much as they could have gotten for the guy.

[SouthSideRyan]

From Olney's blog:

 

1. Some officials who really liked the deal for Atlanta say that as far as they knew, Pittsburgh was not aggressively marketing McLouth, casting a wide net and playing one offer against another in an effort to maximize the center fielder's trade value. "With so many teams looking for outfielders, I don't understand why they didn't play this out a little more," an NL talent evaluator said.

 

Seems to support the notion that Pittsburgh may not have gotten as much as they could have gotten for the guy.

 

What does that idiot know, he's not an NL GM. Unless he is, then my brain just exploded.

[Tracer Bullet]

Nate McClouth CF

Freddy Sanchez 2B

Jason Bay RF

Aramis Ramirez 3B

Xavier Nady LF

Adam Laroche 1B

Ryan Doumit C

Jack Wilson SS

 

Dangerous.

 

Please stop bringing the Aram trade up> It's like picking at a 6 year old scab at this point. Let it heal, please.

 

Sucks about Roberto Clemente, Jake.

[17 Seconds]

they'd have lost ramirez to free agency by now even if they didn't trade him

[Jake]

Nate McClouth CF

Freddy Sanchez 2B

Jason Bay RF

Aramis Ramirez 3B

Xavier Nady LF

Adam Laroche 1B

Ryan Doumit C

Jack Wilson SS

 

Dangerous.

 

Please stop bringing the Aram trade up> It's like picking at a 6 year old scab at this point. Let it heal, please.

 

Sucks about Roberto Clemente, Jake.

 

Yeah.

 

But, he'd be retired by now anyway.

[DiamondMind]

Well there are three possible explanations here:

 

a) this deal accurately reflects the trade value McLouth has around baseball;

b) Huntington didn't perform the due diligence necessary to gauge the trade value McLouth has around baseball, and a better deal was out there that he didn't discover;

c) Huntington knowingly took less than the best offer for his player.

 

C) is laughable, and b) is highly unlikely IMO, especially when we're talking about the Pirates' marquee player. Huntington himself said it was a very difficult decision to trade McLouth, so I doubt he went about the process haphazardly.

 

I like how you leave out the most obvious choice, which is that the Pirates FO are poor at their jobs and don't know how to correctly evaluate talent

The fact that you're here posting on a messageboard rather than working in a MLB FO just boggles the mind, since obviously you're much better at evaluating talent, and would do a better job than the current Pirates GM.

 

That's a ridiculous comment. You are honestly going to debate that there aren't bonehead GM's in baseball?

 

And you know what, to take it a step further, you should just stop posting on this forum, since if you keep posting that would mean you know more about the Cubs than most people by your logic.

 

If you disagree with Dex, say why in a respectful and detailed manner. I mean that's what any poster worthy of respect should do right?

[Jake]

Yeah, I know this is old news right now. But, a new twist just popped up to better explain why the Pirates did this trade:

 

(Word of Doug McAlphabet)

"That being said, when Nate [initially balked at a] move to left or right field, I pretty much felt, as a baseball fan, that the handwriting was on the wall," he said. "Once Andrew [McCutchen] was ready, you got to play him."

 

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09258/998040-63.stm?cmpid=pirates.xml#ixzz0RHCJ4fMe