Text Size:
A|
A|
A
Email
PrintClick here to submit your question
A couple extra Qs today, because of the Cesar Izturis trade and because of your Pittsburgh Baseball Club's pending march toward 82 ...
Q: DK, what? Izturis? So, we're going to drop Jack Wilson to another team for a "prospect" and replace him with someone who won't sign with us after this year?
Pardon my frustration that Wilson, long my favorite player, is going to leave, that I watched a terrible PBC take the field Wednesday in person, and that the only memories of winning occurred when I was worshipping Andy Van Slyke and Bobby Bonilla as a 6-year-old.
Ryan Kasun of Export
KOVACEVIC: As you probably saw in the regular coverage, Ryan, Littlefield flatly denied that this has anything to do with Wilson.
Still, there are signs all over the place that a sale is in the offing, from Wilson to Salomon Torres to Damaso Marte. Shawn Chacon could join them, too, if his talks toward a contract extension do not go well quickly.
One thing is clear: Izturis is no upgrade on Wilson, if that is the way this ends up. He might be the preference of the manager and coaching staff, given their history with him in Los Angeles, but the statistics -- all of them -- are with Wilson.
Q: What are the Pirates telling us by acquiring Cesar Izturis from the Cubs? Another has-been making $3 million a year while batting .246. For a player to be named later? Who will that be? Steve Pearce, Andrew McCutchen, Brian Bixler? When will this vicious cycle end?
The Pirates are baseball's scrap yard!
Daniel Wascovich of Harrisburg
KOVACEVIC: The move was quite unpopular, according to the mail I got.
The player to be named is unclear, but it would be astonishing if the Pirates gave up anything more than one of their many minor-league relievers in return.
Q: I think PNC Park needs to invest in doormats to place outside the turnstiles that read: "Welcome Home, Pirates Fans: Last Place."
I have tickets for tonight's game and can't wait for the celebration after the Pirates lose to Houston and the out-of-town scoreboard shows a victory for the Reds lifting them out of last place.
Welcome home, Buccos. Welcome home ...
Eric Venezie of Ellwood City
KOVACEVIC: Other emotions abound ...
Q: So, it took most of 14 years for the Pirates to establish the goal that they should set a team goal of saying out loud that they should try to finish above .500?
I wonder how many more years it will take before they will establish the goal that they will decide they should create a team that gives consistent effort, works to improve and actually plays like an above-.500 team on the field.
Perhaps a few other guys somehow, somewhere, even in this little town of Pittsburgh, were able to figure out how to do that.
Patrick Weld of Malden, Pa.
KOVACEVIC: Another one on the 82 ...
Dejan, do you find it a bit incredible that the Pirates have FINALLY set a goal at this time? What is this goal based on? Good intentions? What happens when things don't turnaround, which is highly likely?
If this were a regular company, management would have been fired immediately for not setting a clear, understandable and tangible goal at the beginning of the fiscal year. Could you imagine Ford or GM saying their going to set their goal for sales and profit in January, halfway through the model year?
Kirk Davis of Brushton, Pittsburgh
KOVACEVIC: Well, first, Kirk, to Patrick's question above: No one was discussing this goal "out loud." That only came out after some of the players were asked about it. There was no announcement, no ribbon-cutting ceremony.
Now, to the 82 ...
As longtime readers know, this is a subject I have pounded almost as much as the Latin America shortfall, in this forum as well as the regular coverage. And, as you can see from clicking that link, the distaste among upper management for setting numeric goals very clearly originated with Kevin McClatchy feeling red-faced about the team finishing short of 90 victories one year. (Although he insists to this day he never predicted 90.)
The evidence is behind you, Kirk, that winning teams set goals. Some are short-term, some are long-term. But winning teams are not the type to gather everyone in the clubhouse in spring training and talk in vague terms about "general improvement" and "getting better." Nor do they laud, for example, year-over-year improvement at the All-Star break when the first half of the previous season was one of the worst in the history of a franchise that is a century-plus old.
All athletes, from professional team sports to the Olympics to the kids shooting hoops on your neighborhood courts, feed off goals. Real goals. Tangible goals.
Why did the Pirates do it now?
Some might describe it as Jim Tracy's attempt to unite his team the morning after it might have appeared to some it was falling apart, given the incident between the pitching coach and shortstop. Some might describe it as his way of trying to restore some of the focus and fire that clearly was there -- then lost -- with that 9-4 run up to the break.
Whatever it is, as mentioned in that article, I do not see it backfiring and, thus, see only pluses that can come from it.
Look at it two ways:
If they fail -- and the math overwhelmingly suggests they will, to be kind -- all that will have happened is the highly expected.
And if all they do is improve while focusing on that goal, they will have at least -- finally -- set their sights on the next step that the Pirates, as a franchise, need to achieve: 82.
I used the example, in that story, of the Brewers popping champagne in our city two years ago for a reason. When I was in Milwaukee earlier this year and spoke with some team officials, including Doug Melvin, they all talked about the importance of that day, about how necessary it was to shake the tag of perpetual losers before they could move on. Well, they had their setback year in 2006 because of massive injuries, but their next step is happening right now.
Anyone who thinks the Pirates, (ital) these (end ital) Pirates, after all this losing, can make some quantum leap from 67 wins to the playoffs is not dealing in reality.
It has to start somewhere and, for a bunch of reasons, 82 seems like a logical place. If not this year, then next.
Q: Hi, Dejan. First of all, I want to tell you how much I appreciate the unbiased coverage you give to the Pirates. You always try to see both sides of the picture without jumping to a rash judgment.
It appears that players just don't have the same commitment or passion they showed prior to the All-Star break. Do you feel like the players just don't want Jim Tracy as their manager anymore and this is their passive-aggressive way of showing this without actually having to verbalize their thoughts?
MaryAnn Zeroski of Adena, Ohio
KOVACEVIC: First, I appreciate the kind words, MaryAnn.
The Pirates appear passive and lethargic and all kinds of other negative adjectives when they do not hit, which is most of the time. This is a terrible offensive team, as is outlined again in the regular news coverage today. Some of that is due to players under-performing, but some of it surely is due to players simply not being very good at swinging baseball bats.
I see it as being no more complicated than that.
Until Monday, when we will have a chat, then the Q&A and regular coverage resumes Tuesday from New York ...
