So long as we're making generalizations, I'm going to assume that you can't name more than four players the Pirates took in the last two drafts. No one would deny that Pedro Alvarez was the best player available to draft in 2008. Some may argue that Tony Sanchez wasn't the best available player to draft in 2009, but that's a tough stance to defend. There was no consensus pick when the Pirates were drafting, and so they invested big money in later rounds. Sanchez had a strong debut, and here's hoping he follows up on that.

But in all likelihood, you're talking about Dan Moskos. Dave Littlefield made that pick. Kevin McClatchy signed off on that pick. They're not Pirates any longer, and so I don't see how they're relevant here.

Ray Shero is a great GM. So is Neal Huntington. Pittsburghers are lucky.

Yes, the Pirates are recipients of revenue sharing. Yes, their major-league payroll was a higher figure last year (and will be this year, and next year, and every other year) than what they received in payouts from the Yankees. Yes, the Pirates do invest in their product. They've spent more on the draft in the last two years than any other team in baseball (the Yankees included), and they've built a flashy new Dominican operation. Just because you don't recognize the expense doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Should they have spent $5 million more on a free agent to go from awful to sort of bad in 2009? No, they shouldn't have. That's $5 million less to put towards keeping Andrew McCutchen long-term.

It's funny you cite three small market teams that don't spend much (the Brewers fall into “which of these teams is not like the others”) in the same post that you advocate the Pirates spending more. The Twins, A's and Marlins are competitive more often than they're not solely because they develop their own talent (and then trade it off when it gets too expensive to retain).