Puzzling Tracy

Dejan Kovacevic reports some things that Tracy said to him. I am not sure how to make sense of these comments.

On the 2007 Pirates: "We're not starting over. That's the important thing. We finished with a winning second half for the first time since 1992, and we want to carry it over. And I'll tell you what: I feel really, really good about it."

Did the team tell us they were "starting over" when Tracy came on board? This explains the unspeakably horrible first half of 2006. I was under the impression that McClendon had them in position to achieve mediocrity, but the Pirates were retreating to zero and starting over.

On the goal: "I understand there are people who want to see us win 82 [games]. I appreciate that. It's been 14 years. But that's not the goal here. That's not what I signed up for. This group has a chance to be pretty good for the next several years. Let's get pretty good first, then go from there."

If 82 wins is not the goal, what is? 92? 72? This frightens me, since it appears possible that Tracy is defining "success" as something less than mediocrity. And what is "pretty good"? 82 wins is not "pretty good" in my book--unless this gets a team into the playoffs.

On the losing streak: "This group has been together 162 games, not 14 years. Let's remember that."

No problem, but if this is the mindset, let's be consistent and not brag about having "a winning second half for the first time since 1992."

On the team's reluctance to trade a starting pitcher for that coveted left-handed bat: "For us to fill a void and create a hole in the rotation ... you just can't do that. Also, you have to look around baseball at what people are paying -- maybe overpaying -- for pitching right now. And we're going to give that up? Can't do that.

Here's where I disagree with those guys. Trading one of our starting pitchers to acquire a slugging first baseman is not blowing a hole in the rotation to fix a hole in the lineup. Our starters are not that good, and they have not done enough to show that it is reasonable to expect them to be that good. I'd trade one of those starters for a player like LaRoche, and then I'd go sign a journeyman back-end starter - for whatever the market price might be - to replace the starter we lost.

There are so many reasons why this would be prudent. We could talk about injury rates for young pitchers vs. the same for young sluggers, we could talk about the scarcity of power hitters, we could talk about the wisdom of dealing from a strength to acquire the kind of player the organization has not been able to develop on its own. I'll make the long story short, though, and simply say that the coaches and the front office have an irrational attachment to these four young starters. It is good to be loved; I hope the young starters appreciate the undue respect they receive from their bosses.