Pirates don't want to win

Puh-leaze. Pat of Andy Van Slyke found The Onion commenting on the Pirates' recent acquisitions. Ha ha, very funny.

Pat also has a series of posts on the "evil genius" of David Littlefield here. This is a familiar argument; we've heard it before.

It doesn't mesh with my generous yet low opinion of human nature, however. I can't be persuaded that the GM and the owners don't want to win. I can be persuaded that they don't know how to win, but the argument that they are just milking the club for millions and laughing their asses off from some yacht in Florida, that doesn't jibe with my understanding of baseball people. Feel free to disagree; it's a free country.

And as for the argument that they are playing like the first half of 2006 is all that matters, to that I say Amen. Of course the first half of the season is all that matters. Any team that's out of contention at the All-Star break only plays mainly meaningless exhibition games the rest of the way. What fan wants to pay to see that?

I don't know how to do the math to support this, but this is why, for example, I don't put much stock in Freddy Sanchez's hot September. It was September, and the Pirates were cruising to 60-some wins. Nice homestand against Eric Milton, Luke Hudson, Matt Belisle, and the rest of the fifth-place Reds. He stunk at the plate the rest of the year. Sure, more recent performance should weigh heavier in projections of future performance. At the same time, however, there's no denying that there are varying levels of play. As much as the teams advertise that they play hard all year long, no matter what, common sense and personal experience prove that's bluster.

This is also why I was so pissed at Lloyd McClendon for not managing the 2004 opening series like it was a playoff series. And at Craig Wilson for his miserable April.

As the Pirates fall out of contention, I can not help thinking that it gets easier for most of them, as individuals, to produce good-looking statistics--if they have the will to do this in an atmosphere of loss and resignation. If it's easier for players on winning teams to stay motivated, they certainly do not face the same quality of opponent as teams renowned for incompetence. The Cardinals, who went 12-4 against the Pirates last year, will come to town and not play Jim Edmonds, saving him for their next series, against the Cubs or the Astros. When the Pirates go to New York and Boston, those teams don't juggle their rotations so that their aces pitch more often than their fifth starters. The statistics generated by all players do not have the same predictive value. Everything could be adjusted or translated for winning percentage. If Roy Oswalt mows down a Spring Training lineup in late September, that's not the same indicator of greatness as Roy Oswalt mowing down a 98-win lineup in October.

April is October for this club. So hell yeah, manage the team like the first half is all that counts. I'd go farther and manage the team like April is all that counts. Don't give us the "it's a long season" bullshit like McClendon did in response to our anger last April.

The only argument against playing to win now is that the Pirates might win more later if they deliberately lose now. And this, I've come to think, this "losing to win" strategy, is just bullshit. Nine out of ten "rebuilding" programs fail.

The team - all teams - should play to win every year. If the season devolves into several months of largely meaningless exhibitions, then we can talk about regarding the season as so many auditions and learning experiences - if anyone is around to listen.