Can't just be that though. That's as precipitous a two year drop as I've ever seen. He's gone from All Star to DFA...gotta be something physical as well.
Belli’s production drop was more dramatic. But by most accounts, he is a good dude, so teams stuck with him. Anderson is a cancer, so teams are not as apt to work with him to get him through it.
My gut agrees with this. But it won’t happen.
You are...most of the smaller market teams (and some big market ones) that build winners use a similar blueprint: tear it down, sell everything, stack prospects, wait 3 years until they start to emerge, add a couple key FAs, and win. Astros, Cubs, Nationals, Rangers, etc There are lots of examples. And there are others that do the same thing and get good but don't win a title, because titles are pretty random. This is for sure a tried and true method for building a contender if you aren't a powerhouse like the Dodgers who can buy whoever and also spend a lot on their farm system.
I am not factoring in the ”Tank Strategy”. The Giants will never do that (intentionally).
www.mlbtraderumors.com
www.mlbtraderumors.com
1993 the year the Giants won 103 and didn't make the payoffs.
Grrrr San Diego had a few more days to press the braves for a better prospect UGH. Doing so might well have had the Giants making the playoffs as the Braves batting order was good but needed one more Bat. Will never forgive the Pads for that deal on that day. Plus the guys they traded for ended up basically busts. So for nothing as it turned out ruined a great season for watching the Giants.
That is all supporting my hypothesis, though. I am proposing that trading MLB talent for prospects at the deadline RARELY works out on its own. The strategy works, of course, thanks to the associated losses that come with the trade, improving the draft position of the selling team. But the trades themselves, in a vacuum, SELDOM work out for the selling teams.1993 the year the Giants won 103 and didn't make the payoffs.
Well another example is the Braves in 1993 trading for Griff and giving up not quite top prospects.
P.S. history would have been different if Mike Jackson the the lefthanded set up man hadn't gotten injured covering first base. I think the over work for one of my Favorite Giants Rob Beck (who amazingly was just as good if not better against lefthanders) shortened his peak. top-gun relief and I could see the chance he would have been great longer and might have been Hall Worthy. After Beck left at least he got the chance to have one more big year. Loved the guy.
That can't be right, in the examples I mentioned many of the prospects they got emerged as good players, which is why the strategy worked. It wasn't just the draftees.
You didn’t give any PLAYER examples. You provided TEAM examples. And those teams won because of players they drafted (or signed internationally), not because they got a stud prospect who became a centerpiece.
I'm certain there were players that fire sale teams received that became studs, I just follow the Giants mostly so I'd have to go look LOL
Rizzo was not a deadline deal. I am looking at specifically deadline firesales.
OK that's even more specific then, I was thinking about the general strategy of a fire sale (offseason or not) to get prospects who help you be contenders. It does work, we see it happen. Just would need to research specific names to go with the teams LOL.
Rizzo was also a prospect 4 prospect trade. He was traded (primarily) for Andrew Cashner.
How about McCutchen for Reynolds, just off the top of my head.
I mentioned that one. That was an off-season trade, not a deadline trade.
