Trevor Richards Was a Truly Inexplicable Deadline Pickup for the Twins

[Riverbrian]

3 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Except we know that none of the teams that made deadline deals gave up highly rated prospects. I guess you could make the case Houston gave up a pitcher in a similar, but lower universe as Festa.

So I don't think "too expensive in prospects" makes much sense, particularly for relief help.

 

In some cases yes... In some cases no. And the answer to yes or no is going to be subjective and probably differ between You, Me and each individual front office.  

My opinion and my opinion only... not speaking for how others feel. 

I think Houston gave up waaaayyyyy to much for a rental. I think the Padres gave up too much for Tanner Scott and Scott was probably near the top of my wish list. 

However... on a good chunk of deals, I was surprised by what I considered to be a low return. I think the White Sox got completely hosed for Fedde, Kopech and Pham. I think they gave Eloy away. 

I think the Mariners got Arozarena waaaayyyy too easy. But I don't know what the Rays thought about these two prospects playing A ball for Seattle. 

And of course... even if the Twins could have beat the Mariners deal for Arozarena. It sure seems like they could have...  Would the Twins be willing/Able to pay the 12 million he'll get in ARB money next season. Of course... they could have just utilized Randy as a rental and traded him away in the off-season. 

Just examples of the complication... but... ultimately... no matter how we got here... we are both standing in the same room disappointed.  

 

[Brandon]

14 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

It's not even about money for me. 

Just bring someone who can help. Someone who can deepen the squad. We still have to get through August and September with health and I'll bet anyone that we won't. 

There were players who moved at the deadline that could have helped us that were not necessarily expensive in terms of payroll. Prospect cost of course but not major financial hits. At least not for this year. 

They were rumored to be in on Kikuchi. A Rental that would have added 4 million to the payroll. So if we believe the rumors... they were able to add 4 million more. We were rumored to be in on Fedde. That's about 3 Million this year and 7 million next year so they were willing to tack on 7 million for next year. 

We didn't even need to spend that much. 

Tanner Scott would have been a great addition. A Rental around 2 million. 

Gregory Soto has been really average for Philadelphia and he has been brutal with the Orioles since the trade deadline but I would have taken a shot on his huge left handed arm. Around 2 Million remaining this season and his final year of arb next year. 

Chafin was a 2 million dollar rental. 

On the right side of the bullpen Erceg is making the minimum with 5 years of control. 

I would have loved to have added Bryan De La Cruz. He's making the minimum with 3 years of control to come. 

Danny Jansen would have cost a couple of million as a rental. Paredes would have cost a couple million with 3 years of control in the following years. Jazz Chisolm would have been less than a million with 2 more arb years. Arozarena would have cost about 3 million this year with two arb years to come. 

I don't know what happened during the course of trade exploration phone calls but to come away basically blank for two years in a row is very strange. Something, Someone for some reason is holding them back. 

 

Kikuchi essentially cost Festa.   I prefer Festa in that sense.  
on Richards I get being mad at the trade but he has pitched well outside one bad appearance.  At least the results you want are there.  I think he will get some 6th inning opportunities in meaningful games soon.  He is showing he can get outs.  

[Major League Ready]

14 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

How has not trading for guys worked under this ownership? One series win in over two decades....

Their lack of success in the playoffs is not proof that trading for established players is the best strategy.  You would need to look at the league as a whole and more specifically teams with similar or less revenue.  Which teams with similar or less revenue that have been the most successful getting to the playoffs and playoff success.  Which teams have been the most successful?  Have they spent significant prospect capital to gain that success?

The answer is Cleveland and Oakland have been the most successful followed by Tampa.  These teams very rarely trade prospects of significance and they have been the most successful.  If you look at Cleveland's 7 best teams over the past couple of decades, they produced 44.5% of WAR from players acquired as prospects vs 10.1% from trading for established players or free agents.  The bar I am using for established player is they had one season where they produced 1.5 WAR.  I can appreciate your frustration with the lack of playoff success but if you are looking for proof of concept, looking at the actual history of success for teams with similar revenue is the way to do it.  The organizations producing the best teams are not following strategies that are often professed here.

[Mike Sixel]

22 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Their lack of success in the playoffs is not proof that trading for established players is the best strategy.  You would need to look at the league as a whole and more specifically teams with similar or less revenue.  Which teams with similar or less revenue that have been the most successful getting to the playoffs and playoff success.  Which teams have been the most successful?  Have they spent significant prospect capital to gain that success?

The answer is Cleveland and Oakland have been the most successful followed by Tampa.  These teams very rarely trade prospects of significance and they have been the most successful.  If you look at Cleveland's 7 best teams over the past couple of decades, they produced 44.5% of WAR from players acquired as prospects vs 10.1% from trading for established players or free agents.  The bar I am using for established player is they had one season where they produced 1.5 WAR.  I can appreciate your frustration with the lack of playoff success but if you are looking for proof of concept, looking at the actual history of success for teams with similar revenue is the way to do it.  The organizations producing the best teams are not following strategies that are often professed here.

Every other team trades for guys occasionally..... No one said trade a great prospect, none were dealt this year in the top 100. It can't be that every other team is wrong. 

[Mike Sixel]

And none of this excuses dealing for this guy. He's not good. He never has been. 

[USAFChief]

2 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Every other team trades for guys occasionally..... No one said trade a great prospect, none were dealt this year in the top 100. It can't be that every other team is wrong. 

Cleveland traded for Lane Thomas and Alex Cobb THIS deadline. 

[Mike Sixel]

6 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Cleveland traded for Lane Thomas and Alex Cobb THIS deadline. 

Facts. Stop it. 

[August J Gloop]

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

Zero top 100 prospects were dealt. And, that's one trade. What about all the other trades? Year after year we're told every other team making deals is wrong.... Every. Other. Team. Can't be wrong.

Most teams who make trades are in fact wrong. Trades more often than not don't benefit either side. The Lane Thomas and Alex Cobb deals have been immediately bad for CLE as Cobb has made 2 bad starts and is now on the IL. Thomas has played 18 games and been downright terrible. 

The Padres traded all that for these specific two months of Tanner Scott, since to keep him long term is no different than if they hadn't traded for him. So unless you're certain they would not have made the playoffs without him, what was the point? In the Pads case they make tons of trades so their farm is usually pretty bad so trading away from it in quantity like that makes some sense. 

The Twins have worked hard to develop a system that is producing good players on both sides of the ball. They do this by only making trades they feel they can win or break even on, and even then the outcome is not great half the time. 

 

[August J Gloop]

53 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

And none of this excuses dealing for this guy. He's not good. He never has been. 

None of the incessant whining and foot stomping changes it either, but yet here we are three weeks later.

[Mike Sixel]

9 minutes ago, August J Gloop said:

Most teams who make trades are in fact wrong. Trades more often than not don't benefit either side. The Lane Thomas and Alex Cobb deals have been immediately bad for CLE as Cobb has made 2 bad starts and is now on the IL. Thomas has played 18 games and been downright terrible. 

The Padres traded all that for these specific two months of Tanner Scott, since to keep him long term is no different than if they hadn't traded for him. So unless you're certain they would not have made the playoffs without him, what was the point? In the Pads case they make tons of trades so their farm is usually pretty bad so trading away from it in quantity like that makes some sense. 

The Twins have worked hard to develop a system that is producing good players on both sides of the ball. They do this by only making trades they feel they can win or break even on, and even then the outcome is not great half the time. 

 

Why do all those GMs still have jobs if what they do is wrong, year after year? Standing still isn't working in terms of the playoffs, does that make it wrong? 

[Major League Ready]

49 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Cleveland traded for Lane Thomas and Alex Cobb THIS deadline. 

Big deal!   Really?  That's your answer.  Lane Thomas and Alex Cobb?  Lane Thomas is playing at replacement level and Alex Cobb is 36 years old coming off an injury.  You want Alex Cobb starting a playoff game?  

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, Major League Ready said:

Big deal!   Really?  That's your answer.  Lane Thomas and Alex Cobb?  Lane Thomas is playing at replacement level and Alex Cobb is 36 years old coming off an injury.  You want Alex Cobb starting a playoff game?  

No. The point was, they made trades. To fill holes. 

[bean5302]

"No top 100 prospects were dealt"... but they absolutely were offered. Teams were making offers on guys like Tarik Skubal. The Twins offered a top 100 prospect in Luke Keaschall.

The Twins' ownership kneecapped the front office this deadline. That's very clear. Whether or not that should have been expected by Falvey would depend on the offseason plan (and I wasn't in those meetings.)

1. Falvey did not address ANY of the team's major needs this past offseason. Ace, CF backup for Buxton, RH power bat.
2. Falvey still hit the payroll max that ownership set.

At the deadline, the Twins needed an ace and they could have used a good reliever. Those problems were not addressed at least in part due to the expanded playoffs limiting the number of clear sellers, but also due to ownership. I don't know if ownership made it clear in the offseason plan that $130MM was the limit. Period. Or whether or not they told Falvey there would be flexibility at the deadline depending on the team's standing or attendance, etc.

A) Ownership tells Falvey $130MM is it. No deadline expansion in salary is available. This means Falvey failed even worse as a GM planning the season and roster.
B) Ownership tells Falvey $130MM is the opening year max. More money is available at the deadline depending on the team being in contention. This was my expectation based on the seemingly perplexing moves Falvey made this past offseason. In this case, ownership backtracked, sabotaged the plan, and severely hurt the team yet again this year.
C) Ownership tells Falvey $130MM is the opening year max, and more money may or may not be available at the deadline based on attendance and game day revenues, etc. This is mostly on Falvey making big gambles on how everything would need to work out perfect.

If a team has obvious areas of concern at the beginning of the year, but plan to address them at the trade deadline if necessary, it comes with several notable risk factors:
Will there be sellers with the talent type the Twins were seeking at the deadline?
Will there be budget to add to the payroll?
Will competition for the talent type the Twins are seeking be intense?
If the Twins don't address obvious areas of concern before the season, are they willing to risk a significant overpay to acquire talent at the deadline to make up for kicking the can down the line?
How likely is the team to make the playoffs?
How likely is the team to advance in the playoffs?
How strong is the competition level in the division projected to be in the future or more precisely, does the team really need to sell out to go for it?

Those questions needed to be asked and the appropriate plan needed to made in advance. It's seems the front office and ownership are not on the same page or one of those parties has severely failed in their planning or commitment.

[August J Gloop]

3 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

No. The point was, they made trades. To fill holes. 

They tried to fill holes and just made more holes. 

 

8 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Why do all those GMs still have jobs if what they do is wrong, year after year? Standing still isn't working in terms of the playoffs, does that make it wrong? 

It's not a binary and the reason people aren't engaging with your claim that the current FO doesn't do trades is because it's exhausting to argue with bad faith statements. Unless you're having memory issues, you're more than aware that they have made deadline trades to attempt to help the ML roster in recent seasons. 

Some of those trades have kinda worked, but by and large they have been bad moves, since deadline trades usually are bad moves in the big picture for teams that operate on the Twins budget. Which is where the real trouble lies. They simply can't take the same chances because ownership doesn't give them the same latitude. 

But since it seems your argument stems mostly from the perspective of Playoff wins, let's look at that. What move from the '23 deadline would you have made that would have changed their fortunes in the Houston series? I assume it would have been to get another starter they could trust to bump Maeda to the pen. The only two Starters of note that i saw in the trade recap were Michael Lorenzen and Jack Flaherty. 

Every 2023 MLB Trade Deadline deal

Lorenzen was awful for the Phils and Flaherty even worse for the Os. Fail to see how sitting still at the deadline last year hurt the team. What hurt the team was Joe Ryan Getting hurt. What cost the team in the playoffs was Sonny Grey having is worst start in his last one as a Twin.  

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, August J Gloop said:

They tried to fill holes and just made more holes. 

 

It's not a binary and the reason people aren't engaging with your claim that the current FO doesn't do trades is because it's exhausting to argue with bad faith statements. Unless you're having memory issues, you're more than aware that they have made deadline trades to attempt to help the ML roster in recent seasons. 

Some of those trades have kinda worked, but by and large they have been bad moves, since deadline trades usually are bad moves in the big picture for teams that operate on the Twins budget. Which is where the real trouble lies. They simply can't take the same chances because ownership doesn't give them the same latitude. 

But since it seems your argument stems mostly from the perspective of Playoff wins, let's look at that. What move from the '23 deadline would you have made that would have changed their fortunes in the Houston series? I assume it would have been to get another starter they could trust to bump Maeda to the pen. The only two Starters of note that i saw in the trade recap were Michael Lorenzen and Jack Flaherty. 

Every 2023 MLB Trade Deadline deal

Lorenzen was awful for the Phils and Flaherty even worse for the Os. Fail to see how sitting still at the deadline last year hurt the team. What hurt the team was Joe Ryan Getting hurt. What cost the team in the playoffs was Sonny Grey having is worst start in his last one as a Twin.  

I thought it was clear we were discussing the trade deadline and not deals at other times? They made deadline deals that mattered for prospects or money one time under this FO. 

The Cleveland example was in reply to a poster that said Cleveland doesn't make deadline deals....which they did this year. Nothing more or less than that. Not if they were good deals or not. Just in reply to the statement that they don't do it. 

I get it. Some people think standing still isn't risk taking, and it is better not to make deadline deals. Pretty much ever. Despite the fact nearly every team does it, even Cleveland this year. I don't agree. We aren't changing minds here, I guess I'm done. 

[August J Gloop]

24 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

"No top 100 prospects were dealt"... but they absolutely were offered. Teams were making offers on guys like Tarik Skubal. The Twins offered a top 100 prospect in Luke Keaschall.

The Twins' ownership kneecapped the front office this deadline. That's very clear. Whether or not that should have been expected by Falvey would depend on the offseason plan (and I wasn't in those meetings.)

1. Falvey did not address ANY of the team's major needs this past offseason. Ace, CF backup for Buxton, RH power bat.
2. Falvey still hit the payroll max that ownership set.

ACE? They have one. He's just not the same one we had last year, nor did many expect the coming of The Nightmare. They have the talent to have three aces right now. Pablo hasn't had his best season, but he can still be excellent going forward. Joe is down, but when his shoulder heals up, he has the makings as well. They were never going to sell out for an ACE. But as far as good starting pitching, who should they have signed and why is he wearing a Cubs uniform?  (Shota is the only FA the twins should have spent any energy on). 

CF - Just Cuz you don't like Manny Margot doesn't mean he's fictional. He's not a sexy backup but that's why he's here. 

RH power bat? Look who leads the team in HR. Almost all of them hit right handed at least some of the time. 

14 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

 

I get it. Some people think standing still isn't risk taking, and it is better not to make deadline deals. Pretty much ever. Despite the fact nearly every team does it, even Cleveland this year. I don't agree. We aren't changing minds here, I guess I'm done. 

You're also wrong about your statement that the Twins always stand pat at the deadline. They just have the last two years. Other years they've made moves that have mostly not worked out. I wouldn't be surprised if they just text each other Tyler Mahle's picture from time to time just to wind the other up. 

But even that's a great example. The Reds made off like Bandits at that deadline and now they have basically sweet FA to show for it. Spencer Steer is the only guy they got from trading Mahle and Castillo at that deadline who's still providing value to the big club. CES might if he recovers from his injury. They spent their trade chips and got an OK power hitting corner bat. If they really had wanted that they could have kept the starters and signed Jorge Soler. 

[Schmoeman5]

19 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

Heard on MLB radio today that after last night's loss the twins ARE 54-4 when leading after 7 innings.

What is their record after the starter is pulled with the lead? That's more telling than their record with the lead AFTER 7 innings.

[bean5302]

5 minutes ago, August J Gloop said:

ACE? They have one...

...CF - Just Cuz you don't like Manny Margot doesn't mean he's fictional. He's not a sexy backup but that's why he's here...

RH power bat? Look who leads the team in HR. Almost all of them hit right handed at least some of the time. 

You're also wrong about your statement that the Twins always stand pat at the deadline. They just have the last two years. Other years they've made moves that have mostly not worked out. I wouldn't be surprised if they just text each other Tyler Mahle's picture from time to time just to wind the other up. 

But even that's a great example. The Reds made off like Bandits at that deadline and now they have basically sweet FA to show for it. Spencer Steer is the only guy they got from trading Mahle and Castillo at that deadline who's still providing value to the big club. CES might if he recovers from his injury. They spent their trade chips and got an OK power hitting corner bat. If they really had wanted that they could have kept the starters and signed Jorge Soler. 

Lopez's career ERA 3.96. Just because you like Lopez or he's considered the best pitcher in the rotation doesn't mean he's earned such a lofty moniker. 

The Twins deploy Margot to CF out of desperation when Buxton, Castro and Martin are all unavailable. They didn't start Margot in CF for the first 26 games of the season. He's lost his speed and can't cover the position anymore. He was slowing down and his defensive metrics have been tanking for years.

The Twins needed a right handed power bat for 1B or DH. They got Carlos Santana who has really played out of his mind compared to expectations, and Jose Miranda has impressed as well. Notice how I didn't add that as a deadline need.

As for the rest of your strawman factory post, I have no idea what you're babbling about. Either you're trolling or you have me confused with somebody else. Given how seemingly wild your takes are... kinda leaning towards the former.

[Major League Ready]

3 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

And none of this excuses dealing for this guy. He's not good. He never has been. 

We definitely agree on this.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

5 hours ago, August J Gloop said:

Like, how does this even make sense to you as you type it? Do you think that MLB players just reach a point in their careers and just stop trying to get better? They're like nope. 7 Years in. I'm who I am. No changes here.

Let's compromise though and replace the word 'develop' with 'refine'. They're trying to refine his approach so that they can get 3-4 weeks of maximal output during key post season innings. Namely the 6th innings in SWR and ZebbyFest starts.  

Richards has averaged 9.8 K/9 for his MLB career. At St Paul this year there are Two guys who appear to be A) Healthy, B) Younger than Richards, C) Not already appeared on the big league roster and D) with more K/9 at AAA than Richards has had in MLB. 

Jordy Blaze and Ryan Jensen. We know why Blaze isn't up. Jensen is walking almost 9 per 9, so nope. 

If you still think it can't be explained, then you are just being willfully ignorant to keep redirecting your anger with the ownership at the front office who are trying to make it work.  

 

[August J Gloop]

29 minutes ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Which would totally apply if the Twins are just telling Richards to do exactly the same thing that he was always doing. All of these guys who make it to MLB are exceptional at baseball. All of them. Not a single one of the players who's gotten all the way to MLB has ever been bad at baseball, really. 

So keeping that in mind, it's never truly crazy to think that a team could expect an MLB player to be able to execute procedural tweaks, even at the ultra advanced age of 32. Obviously, they can't overhaul his entire motion and hope it will stick. Or even try to introduce a new pitch. There's no way they thought they could teach him a whole new skill, but they clearly saw something they thought they could reorganize and get some improved results out of.  

Just because we don't know what it is doesn't mean it's not there. We can only draw conclusions from experience. This team from the FO through the pitching dev team have prioritized unique pitches the whole time they've been doing things. They've had results go good, and others not. You are not being serious if you try to claim Richards throws a normal changeup. 

That's my main beef with this clickbait article. It's not real analytics, it's rage posting. I doubt that he's gonna work out, just as much as most of you do. There just isn't any reason to claim it's some total moron move with no basis. 

 

[CCHOF5yearstoolate]

On 8/21/2024 at 5:39 PM, USAFChief said:

This move is sort of the definition of doing something to soften the optics of doing nothing.

Unless you think our front office really thought this was a move that'd truly help the pen. 

Geez I hope not.

So why else?

Trading "Jay Harry" is not a desperation move. If they truly cared about optics of the deadline they'd have swung bigger than a guy who might not be playing baseball in a year or two.

They were done with the Staumont experiment and paid nothing to get a guy with a changeup after striking out on all the lefty relievers. We know it's a nothingburger trade, they do too. "Eh, why not" isn't desperation.

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, CCHOF5yearstoolate said:

Trading "Jay Harry" is not a desperation move. If they truly cared about optics of the deadline they'd have swung bigger than a guy who might not be playing baseball in a year or two.

They were done with the Staumont experiment and paid nothing to get a guy with a changeup after striking out on all the lefty relievers. We know it's a nothingburger trade, they do too. "Eh, why not" isn't desperation.

I'm not sure why you're arguing against "desperation." My post you quoted didn't mention desperation. 

I said it was a move made for optics. 

Hell I kind of wish they'd made a move out of desperation.  Maybe that'd have some chance of helping, even if at a steep cost.

 

[Otaknam]

The Richards trade smack of doing a trade for the sake of trade. When you walk five batters in one inning you should not be on the team. 

[Riverbrian]

19 hours ago, Brandon said:

I think he will get some 6th inning opportunities in meaningful games soon.

It's Martha and the Vandelas in the bullpen. 

Nowhere to run... Nowhere to hide. 

Trading for a player that has to be hidden is pointless. 

He will get 7th and 8th inning opportunities in meaningful games. 

[Major League Ready]

17 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

I thought it was clear we were discussing the trade deadline and not deals at other times? They made deadline deals that mattered for prospects or money one time under this FO. 

The Cleveland example was in reply to a poster that said Cleveland doesn't make deadline deals....which they did this year. Nothing more or less than that. Not if they were good deals or not. Just in reply to the statement that they don't do it. 

I get it. Some people think standing still isn't risk taking, and it is better not to make deadline deals. Pretty much ever. Despite the fact nearly every team does it, even Cleveland this year. I don't agree. We aren't changing minds here, I guess I'm done. 

Of course, they have made trades.  Do you really think I was not aware of the trades of Thomas and Cobb or other deadline trades in the past?  I qualified my statement by saying "significant trades".  The kind where you give up significant assets like the Padres did for Scott and Houston did for Kikuchi.   I don't give a crap about the inconsequential trades they didn't make.  If you want to bitch about those go ahead.  

Please quit ignoring the parts of my posts like "significant trades" when it gets in the way of your narrative.  There are some examples of significant moves in the history of the teams I mentioned but in general they have been very reluctant to part with good prospects.   Did you miss the fact they have produced 44% of their WAR from acquiring prospects.  That tells you a lot about their philosophies, practices, and what has been responsible for their success.  I don't worry about the Twins not going all in because I understand that the teams that have been successful understand that trading away assets that produce for 6 years for rentals is a good way to never have enough talent to contend in the first place.  

[tony&rodney]

Maybe the Twins could have swung a trade for A. J. Puk or Erceg from Oakland but we have no idea if either was an interest for Falvey or what those teams wanted from the Twins. Nothing of significance that was reasonable was exchanged. The Twins have the team that Falvey wanted all along and I would suggest that this team is in a good spot right now and better than the 2023 team. Five weeks will fly by and then comes the playoffs. I'm pretty pumped for this team.

[bean5302]

 

13 hours ago, USAFChief said:

I'm not sure why you're arguing against "desperation." My post you quoted didn't mention desperation. 

I said it was a move made for optics. 

Hell I kind of wish they'd made a move out of desperation.  Maybe that'd have some chance of helping, even if at a steep cost.

 

They definitely should have made a desperation move because desperation is the stage the Twins should have been in.

Their top arm in the rotation scuffling all year (Lopez), injuries (Desclafani, Paddack) and poor performance (Varland) forcing their 7th and 8th starters as rookies (SWR, Festa) into the rotation long term and no legitimate ace in the rotation at the deadline. SWR & Festa have both already blown through their career max innings with another 40 innings of work ahead of them...

However the year unfolded, the team risked needing to overpay at the deadline after Falvey failed to address the rotation weakness out of the gate. Now we're looking at our surprise 9th starter (Matthews) who started the season in A+ ball to replace one of the playoff rotation anchors (Ryan) who's been lost for the season.

If the team wasn't willing to pay the piper at the deadline if things didn't go perfectly (and they didn't), they shouldn't have gambled with the risk in the first place.

[Mike Sixel]

Sorry I made you so angry. Have a good day 

[CCHOF5yearstoolate]

14 hours ago, USAFChief said:

I'm not sure why you're arguing against "desperation." My post you quoted didn't mention desperation. 

I said it was a move made for optics. 

Hell I kind of wish they'd made a move out of desperation.  Maybe that'd have some chance of helping, even if at a steep cost.

Almost like my first post that you quoted was specifically talking about desperation and that was my point!