Everything always feels a lot worse that it really is the day after a crushing defeat.  After reading the throw-in-the-towel-and-start Newsome post, I thought it might be useful to look at some bowl scenarios to highight why all is not lost.  Everyone should remember is that this is college football and things never end up as they had previously seemed.  Teams always lose games that you had projected as wins.  Nobody should assume that the standings today will represent the standings two weekends from now.  The consensus seems to be that PSU's best shot is the Outback, but I believe they have a chance to improve and make the Capital One.  (I'm ruling out BCS bid btw because I just don't see it happening but in order to not violate my own rules, I guess it COULD happen under the "train wreck" scenario.)

Capital One: "Selects" the #2 B10 team vs #2 (really 3) SEC team.  The belief is that this will be the loser of the Iowa/OSU game next week.   Assuming that PSU wins out, a few not unrealistic scenarios could unfold for PSU to make the Capital One.  All of these also leave out Wisconsin who I believe will end up with 2 losses but is least attractive.  The "Select" portion here is very imporant because most scenarios require PSU to get chosen over a team that beat us - may or may not be realistic.  The likely opponent will not be the loser of the Alabama/Florida game who will get BCS bids - my guess would be LSU who I believe would be a great opponent.  This is the next best thing to a BCS bid.  A win would turn the season from mediocre to very good.

1. Very possible: Iowa loses to OSU but wins the final game against Minnesota.  PSU and Iowa tie for 2nd.  I would guess that the Capital One would PREFER PSU but may be pressured to take Iowa.  Either way, there's no guarantee Iowa gets the Cap One under this scenario.  They would have lost 2/3 last games and probably be ranked lower than PSU.
2. Reasonably possible: A Stanzi-less Iowa gets crushed by OSU and faces a Minnesota team that potentially needs a win to become bowl eligible.  All PSU fans know what happens when the team is thinking MNC and loses a devastating game late (see '99).  Iowa loses last 3 games, PSU wins out and makes the Cap One as the #2 team in the Big 10.
3. Less likely: OSU beats Stanzi-less Iowa and then loses to Michigan OR Iowa beats OSU and wins out.  Capital One selects from PSU/OSU who both have 2 losses.  Considering they haven't been to Orlando in while, the Capital One would love to get OSU here I believe.  I really don't see Iowa winning next week and I know UM has been playing very poorly but this game is at Ann Arbor and crazier thing have happened in rivalry games.  Keep in mind, OSU just lost to Purdue so while they appeared invincible yesterday, they're no juggernaut. 
4. Least likely: OSU and Iowa finish top 15 BCS, OSU gets BCS selection again and everyone in the B10 moves up one slot.

Outback: Selects #3 B10 team vs #3/4 SEC.  Nobody wants to play in the Outback but most would agree that at least it is a New Years Day bowl and against a quality opponent.  There are no guarantees that PSU gets the Outback but assuming they win out (which by no means do I think is a guarantee), this is the most likely destination.  Likely opponent would be Auburn/Georgia.

Champs/Alamo: #4/5 B10 teams play ACC #4 or B12 #4/5.  Since I believe this scenario requires another PSU loss, I don't want to discuss.  On the plus side, my wife went to VTech and I could possibly make a nice trip to Fla and settle a long standing family dispute.  Downside is that it's the Champs Bowl and nobody gives a rats ass about it (nor should they).  Other possible opponents include: UNC, Clemson, practically any ACC team since they're all about tied, Okla. State, Nebraska, Texas Tech.

The summary is that while it FEELS like all is lost today the reality is that if PSU wins out and finishes with 2 regular season losses, they have a decent chance at getting quality opponent to finish the season.  No matter how good the opponent, I like our team's chances with the reigns let loose and a senior QB in his last game.  So cheer up and let's hope the guys rebound to CRUSH Indiana and Mich State!

More great stuff recently in this article by Bill Madden (strong sarcasm)  Now I know that the Daily News only differentiates itself from Charmin in that Charmin is much softer and doesn't chap your ass, but is this really the best that a guy who writes about sports (and books about baseball for that matter) can do?  I also know that none of this matters until the Bucs actually start winning but its tough to read an article bashing your team that lacks any type of creative thought or journalistic work without commenting.  Please read at your own caution, the opinions expressed below are the work of a true idiot.   

Some tidbits:

"Privately, the Yankees were astounded at the seemingly underwhelming return Seattle GM Jack Zduriencik got for Jarrod Washburn  especially after he'd pulled off such a coup earlier in the week by fetching shortstop Jack Wilson and former 14-game winner Ian Snell out of the Pittsburgh Pirates' firesale for light-hitting shortstop Ronny Cedeno, defensively challenged catcher/first base prospect Jeff Clement and three low-level pitching prospects.

"What has happened in Pittsburgh - where the Pirates have assured themselves of many more losing seasons after this, their 17th straight, by gutting their roster of just about every player that made more than $2 million - is a disgrace. Selig's former salary police chief Frank Coonelly has traded Jason Bay, Xavier Nady, Adam LaRoche, Nyjer Morgan, Nate McLouth, Wilson, Freddy Sanchez, John Grabow and Tom Gorzelanny in one questionable deal after another.

"...only two, Double-A pitcher Tim Alderson (acquired from the Giants for '06 NL batting champion Sanchez) and righty Charlie Morton (who came over from the Braves in the McLouth deal) are regarded as potential frontline prospects - and neither of them was rated by their teams as top-tier."

Ok, so a lack of foresight for a team in PGH is understandable from a NY sportwriter, right?  Should we expect him to do enough homework to point out that the Bucs included cash in some of these deals in order to get the best group of prospects?  Is it unreasonable to point out that the powerhouse of a Pirates team that included Nady and Bay won 5 more games at this point in the year?  Fine, just please don't confuse Adam LaRoche for his younger brother. 

In case you are inclined to believe that Bill actually critically evaluates deals before he just spouts off about how poor Pirates' management is, let's examine a deal that he has actual evidence to use when evaluating:

Earlier this year

"Despite creditable starts by their 4-5 starters, ex-Yankees Ross Ohlendorf and Jeff Karstens, it would be a stretch to suggest the Pirates may actually have gotten the better of the deal with the Yankees last summer (that also netted them outfielder prospect Jose Tabata). For now they can at least be content at having gotten more out of it in April than the Yankees have gotten from Nady  and the $12 million man, Damaso Marte."

He's just an optimist holding out hope, right?  I mean, nobody in their right mind would argue in hindsight that this lopsided deal went the Yanks way.  Unfortunately, notice a trend here but his lack of ability to think critically demonstrates itself even at the time the deal occurs:

Last year when the trade occcured:

"Did the Yankees just get revenge for 1960?

As word of the Yankees' trade for Xavier Nady and Damaso Marte from the Pirates filtered through the annual party thrown by Hall of Fame chairman Jane Clark on Friday night, no one was more stunned than Pirates Hall of Fame second baseman Bill Mazeroski, whose homer against the Yankees won the 1960 World Series.

"I can't believe it!" Mazeroski said. "We just traded two of our best players for four guys I never heard of. How could we do this?"

In exchange for power-hitting outfielder Nady and lefty reliever Marte, the Yanks gave up outfielder Jose Tabata and pitchers Ross Ohlendorf, Dan McCutchen and Jeff Karstens.'

Just had to point out how little skill it takes to be a writer for one of the major newspapers in the world's largest cities.  Thankfully for Bill, his profession is so full of a lot of kindred idiotic minds - his job should be safe.

To me this series against the Nationals is one of the more interesting that the Pirates have had this year.  That may sound crazy at first, given that these two teams are the league's cellar dwellers, but I believe that no team should be more instructive for current Pirate fans than the Nationals.  I thought a brief history of the Nats was in order in order to put our heads around how they got this bad and how their organization compares to the Pirates' (sorry, this is from my memory and perspective so feel free to point out any inaccuracies or things I've missed).

When the Nationals moved to DC from Montreal in 2005, they were in and state of absolute dissaray.  Bud and his boys had attempted to contract and failed.  Jeffrey Loria, the former owner of the Expos, was given the rights to start a new club in Florida, sold the Expos to MLB and took the entire baseball operations staff with him on his way out the door.  Since MLB was the new owner, the focus was only on the bottom line so that no payroll could be added.  It was unfortunate, because the Expos had some superstar talent with guys like Pedro Martinez and Vladimir Guerrero and very good talent in guys like Javier Vazquez, Livan Hernandez, Jose Vidro and Orlando Cabrera.  A team that was in the running for the playoffs in 2003, couldn't even make standard baseball moves due to the constraints Bud had placed on the payroll.  Ironically, the division rival Marlins and Jeffrey Loria went on to win the World Series.

By the time the Expos had made their move to DC, baseball had sold off nearly all of it's talent with deals focused only on saving money.  There almost wasn't even a need to draft since no real payroll would be allocated.  To make matters worse, the new team was handicappped by a ridiculous bidding process in which Bud held out long enough to make DC believe there was actually a chance that MLB would choose another city (Norfolk anyone??).  Bud extracted every penny possible from the Expos, including getting the DC council to put themselves on the hook for much of the new stadium in order to make sure that the new owner's wouldn't have to lower their bid for team to include the necesary new stadium.  The real slap in the face came when a deal was made in order to appease the ONE owner who was kicking and screaming his way into this jackpot of deal, Peter Angelos in nearby Baltimore.  He was given television and radio rights over the Washington team and his own team.  DC locals couldn't even watch their own team on TV for the first year because Angelos refused to fairly negociate with the cable providers (note that I still can't find the Nats on FM radio and I live in DC).

Pretty freakin' sad, huh?  Well, most people here in DC quickly forgot about how hadicapped their new team was because 1) they had a team to root for 2) with a few short-term focused signing this new team did surprisingly well!  First round pick, Ryan Zimmerman, moved immediately up to the big league club and was an instant success.  Halfway through the year, this amazing team was in FIRST place and 20 games over 500!  The future was bright, right?  No, because the truth is that below this exterior of this outperforming team, there was no foundation.  The minor leagues had been depleted by Bud and the current roster was outperforming in many aspects.

This is where I believe things went terribly wrong for the Nationals.  They claimed to be focusing on rebuilding the organizational depth but they proceeded to trade for Alphonso Soriano, one year away from free agency.  Soriano did tremendously well and when given the opportunity to trade him the following year (the team had swooned), GM Jim Bowden either didn't have the guts to pull the trigger on the best offer or was dumb enough to believe that Soriano could be signed by the club and would be a part of the new future.  Bowden subsequently proceeded to make various deals, but either hestiated or never considered trading their best assets (Zimmerman, Jose Guillen, Nick Johnson, Guzman, Vidro) but when he did trade made moves for guys that were supposed to be immediate improvements to the major league club (Austin Kerns, Elijah Dukes, Felipe Lopez).

So why is this relevant?  The Pirates have had a concurrent streak of poor play to coincide with the Nats so what is the difference?  Well, this series represents the Pirates at their worst but with clear direction and the Nationals in the midst of a lack of anything resembling focus (it's only fair to include the fact that the Nat's staff is all young, but the Buccos are starting 3 rookies in the rotation too).  The Nationals failed to sign their first round pick last year but then proceeded to spend their offseason acquiring a slugger like Adam Dunn while Neal & Co kept focused on what appears to be the plan: 1) if overvalued, trade players at their peak value to build minor league depth 2) don't worry about how bad the team will be in the interim 3) if the right deal exists, make the trade, no matter how much you like the player 4) acquire multiple talented players instead of trying to hit the prospect jackpot 5) draft for talent. How can this be more clearly evident than in the Nyjer-Milledge deal?  Milledge is a prospect (not technically, I know - but in terms of age) while Morgan is a short to medium term solution.  The Nationals at best in the same spot as the Bucs development wise (debatable) and they made a move to improve their current roster! 

In conclusion (long winded I know, sorry), this weekend series represents the epitome of what should not be done while improving the team and ballclub.  Watch both teams and see the young players on the Pirates and compare them to the Nationals roster and think - this is what the alternative is - do we really want that?  It's an easy call for me.

It seems like many people have already solidified their opinion of the Freddy Sanchez / Jack Wilson situation and I'm not sure that I understand why.  As far as I'm concerned, coming to a conclusion on whether they should deal the duo hinges on a few very big factors, specifically what the return on such a deal would merit and what replacements will "cost."  Most of the "don't trade" anyone crowd seems a little extreme and unrealistic in general while the "rebuild" guys seem to want to deal at all costs.  While I agree with mostly and appreciate the enthusiam of the "rebuilders" to be a good team one day, I think that keeping both guys could still fit into the overall plan.

Despite some random speculation, I haven't heard anything REAL and I assume that means that nobody is knocking down the door for either of these guys.  Let's just say, I don't see the names Sanchez/Wilson on ESPN 1/100th of the time that I see Roy Halladay.  Could be wrong on that but all rumors seem like far-fetched speculation.  I totally understand that's fun to do, but reality is that we usually overestimate what our players will return and we end up being disappointed with the results.  Take Nate McClouth for example: when the word leaked that he was dealt, everyone immediately started mentioning Hanson or Heyward.  Maybe the Braves offered either of these guys in isolation but I'd be willing to bet they never entered the discussion.  Teams just aren't willing to give up their premier prospects any longer.  If you need evidence, look at how Philly is hesitant to trade Drabek for one of the top 3 pitchers in the game! 

Additionally, I'm not sure if other teams value Jack in accordance with what he means to the Bucs.  The overall cost to the team may be greater than what a trade will return.  A lot of the people that fall into the "rebuild" mode aren't taking into account what a Bixler led infield would look like.  A lot of current outs will turn into runs.  ERAs of an improving but young staff will go up.  Many say that we just need to trade for a major league ready SS - right... since lots of contending teams are willing to trade away major league ready talent at SS as they acquire a SS. 

Finally, if Neal can't deal either guy for prospects that have a real chance of being impact players in the future, why mess with a good thing?  If the only option is to follow the quantity over quality strategy and fill these spots internally (Neal's preferred method it seems), I'm not sure this one will be a good move.   The middle infield has been a positive for the pitching staff, as a combo they would be priced about league average, the trade market for guys with their talents doesn't seem to be overwhelming, and they're about average offensively when viewed as a combo.  While this team won't be good, it probably won't be horrific - for as much as it doesn't matter, it really does.  I'm all for dealing away players for prospects that have a good chance of being contributors but I'm not sure that dealing for the sake of dealing in this situation is the way to go.  Just my thoughts. 

I'm sold.  I had the feeling since last year's draft that this FO finally had the right idea but I've been cautiously optimistic, as any long-term Bucco fan should be with new management.  Dealing Nyjer for Lastings Milledge today really cemeted my optimism but not for the obvious reasons. 

This trade was one that the Pirates have been on the other end of for the last 15 years.  It should be clear as day to anyone paying attention to what has been happening.  The Nationals (I live in DC so I feel like I have a good perspective on the mood here) are DESPERATE.  Desperate teams do dumb things.  They're desperate to win, desperate to draw fans.  Teams that are in this position (read Pirates 1992-current) and can't fight the urge to get better immediately do stupid things.  So the Nats trade for Nyjer Morgan, immediate help at leadoff and give up on the guy that just recently graced their opening day program.  That's a buy high-sell low strategy if I've ever seen one.  It's a Dave Littlefield special.  Improve the leadoff spot and bullpen now... at the price of young talent.  Anyone who thinks the Nats won this deal isn't a Pirates fan or hasn't been paying attention.  It doesn't matter if Milledge flames out or Hanrahan's ERA continue to skyrocket.  The Buccos did the right thing today and that's all we should ask.

Lastly, it's nice to now know that there's a team above the Buccos on the get-ripped-in-every-deal list.  This smelled like a lemon for the Nats when I had read rumors that they had inquired about Nyjer and the Bucs had asked for Milledge and one of the Nat's young (talented) starters.  No reasonable team would make this request... but how many times have we read these types of rumors with the Bucs on the other end?  That means Neal & Co knew they could take Riz to the cleaners and started out with insane demands.  Look objectively at this deal and it's clear.  Nyjer, at 28, has none of the upside of Lastings and I'd make the argument Milledge's performance from last year was better than Nyjer's so far this year.  Burnett is at best as talented as Hanrahan.  Good work, Neal.