PDA

View Full Version : Blue Jays Acquiring J.Reyes, J.Johnson and M.Buerhle



Benihana
11-13-2012, 07:26 PM
Escobar, Hechevarria, and possibly even Jose Reyes (although doubtful) in the deal. More to come...

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 07:34 PM
Whaaaat? Is that really all it took?

mattfeet
11-13-2012, 07:35 PM
Holy crap that deal is unbelievable. Whoa.

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 07:36 PM
Johnson, Buehrle, Reyes, and John Buck and Bonaficio

Are they really dumping Reyes this soon? What a joke of a franchise. Contract them.

_Sir_Charles_
11-13-2012, 07:39 PM
Okay, that's got to be a mistake. I'm not buying that. Even the Marlins aren't THAT stupid. I like Escobar...but he's not that good. Not even close! I have no clue who that Hachevarria is though. That's just insane. No chance it's real.......right?

westofyou
11-13-2012, 07:39 PM
The Reds could learn a lot from the fish

RedsManRick
11-13-2012, 07:39 PM
It's just like 1997, without the World Series (or playoffs... or winning record). I'm guessing the Blue Jays are taking on a lot of salary...

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 07:40 PM
I really think Selig needs to step in and kill this one.

Or tell Loria he has to go.

MartyFan
11-13-2012, 07:42 PM
Johnson, Buehrle, Reyes, and John Buck and Bonaficio

Are they really dumping Reyes this soon? What a joke of a franchise. Contract them.

I think you are onto something...get rid of the fish entirely...what an absolute sham.:thumbdown:

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 07:42 PM
On that note, time to pick Stanton off of them for Chris Heisey or something equally ridiculous.

mattfeet
11-13-2012, 07:42 PM
On that note, time to pick Stanton off of them for Chris Heisey or something equally ridiculous.

or for ANYONE in our farm system...

Benihana
11-13-2012, 07:43 PM
On that note, time to pick Stanton off of them for Chris Heisey or something equally ridiculous.

In all seriousness, if there was a time there was an iota of possibility of prying Stanton away from them, this might be it.

I'd think it would have to be something like Hamilton, Cingrani, and Stephenson though. Who would be willing to do that?

Plus Plus
11-13-2012, 07:44 PM
According to Ken Rosenthal of FOXSports.com, the Blue Jays are close to acquiring Josh Johnson and Mark Buehrle from the Marlins in exchange for Yunel Escobar, Adeiny Hechavarria, Henderson Alvarez and Justin Nicolino.

http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/mlb/381878/jays-to-acquire-buehrle-johnson-from-marlins

Reyes may be included, but that hasn't been confirmed as of yet.

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 07:45 PM
In all seriousness, if there was a time there was an iota of possibility of prying Stanton away from them, this might be it.

I'd think it would have to be something like Hamilton, Cingrani, and Stephenson though. Who would be willing to do that?

Not me. I would do Corcino and Cingrani both though. No Hamilton, no Stephenson.

mattfeet
11-13-2012, 07:45 PM
In all seriousness, if there was a time there was an iota of possibility of prying Stanton away from them, this might be it.

I'd think it would have to be something like Hamilton, Cingrani, and Stephenson though. Who would be willing to do that?
Me without thinking twice. Stanton is the player the Reds need NOW. There's a 0% chance that all 3 of our prospects turn out to be as awesome as we all hope them to be. Do that deal now and dont think twice.

-Matt

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 07:45 PM
http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/mlb/381878/jays-to-acquire-buehrle-johnson-from-marlins

Reyes may be included, but that hasn't been confirmed as of yet.

Check out MLBTR. It's looking like Johnson, Buehrle, Reyes, Buck and Bonaficio.

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 07:48 PM
MLBTR says Toronto is sending back 5 players so far.

westofyou
11-13-2012, 07:51 PM
I really think Selig needs to step in and kill this one.

Or tell Loria he has to go.

later of the two.

The guy is bad for the game

Tom Servo
11-13-2012, 07:52 PM
Contract the Marlins.

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 07:56 PM
I honestly can't recall an owner swindling a city harder than he has Miami with this deal at this point. Promised to sign all these guys to get a free new stadium from the county (after pulling some shady stuff to get it approved in the first place), only to ditch them as soon as he could to cut costs.

This is worse than anything the Bengals ever did.

mattfeet
11-13-2012, 07:59 PM
Giancarlo Stanton ‏@Giancarlo818

Alright, I'm pissed off!!! Plain & Simple

marcshoe
11-13-2012, 08:00 PM
Contract the Marlins.

Looks like they just did.

I think the Blue Jays got Billy Marlin as well.

oneupper
11-13-2012, 08:15 PM
Looks like I'll get some great seats when the Reds come to Miami. :)

_Sir_Charles_
11-13-2012, 08:15 PM
Giancarlo Stanton ‏@Giancarlo818

Alright, I'm pissed off!!! Plain & Simple

Wow, he's not holding back is he.

Tom Servo
11-13-2012, 08:18 PM
I mean, the guy killed the Expos and baseball's market in Montreal for good. They are really going to let him do the same in Miami?


Also, the Reds should be asking about Bonifacio.

mattfeet
11-13-2012, 08:26 PM
I mean, the guy killed the Expos and baseball's market in Montreal for good. They are really going to let him do the same in Miami?


Also, the Reds should be asking about Bonifacio.

Asking who? Toronto? His bags are packed, too.

Tom Servo
11-13-2012, 08:31 PM
Asking who? Toronto? His bags are packed, too.
Yes, Toronto. I think they are likely open to wheeling and dealing as necessary.

camisadelgolf
11-13-2012, 08:33 PM
Hypothetically, let's say this trade ends up helping the Marlins become winners. Are people still going to hate on Loria?

Reds/Flyers Fan
11-13-2012, 08:34 PM
Looks like I'll get some great seats when the Reds come to Miami. :)

Has that ever been a problem?

Joseph
11-13-2012, 08:37 PM
Hypothetically, let's say this trade ends up helping the Marlins become winners. Are people still going to hate on Loria?

Even if they do win, I don't particularly see it as a residue of Loria's ways. Its more likely that someone in the front office had a clue, or luck, likely some of both.

Loria is a bad owner as this type thing gives baseball a black eye.

mattfeet
11-13-2012, 08:38 PM
Hypothetically, let's say this trade ends up helping the Marlins become winners. Are people still going to hate on Loria?

Absolutely. It's not the fact that he MADE the trade, but it's WHY he made the trade. No one scorned A's ownership last year when they traded away 3 All-Star pitchers but they also didn't sign them to $100MM+ 9 months prior. Loria tried to buy a World Series ring, failed miserably, and is now trying to get out of the contracts owed, effectively killing baseball in Miami.

Regardless of if Miami becomes a contender or not, this trade was made for one reason only.

PuffyPig
11-13-2012, 08:38 PM
Buerhle and Reyes, due to their production and contracts, have negative trade value.

I wouldn't take them off waivers for free.

Johnson is the cost of dumping those contracts.

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 08:42 PM
Buerhle and Reyes, due to their production and contracts, have negative trade value.

I wouldn't take them off waivers for free.

Johnson is the cost of dumping those contracts.

Buehrle, sure. Reyes? Ehhh...

Patrick Bateman
11-13-2012, 08:47 PM
Buerhle and Reyes, due to their production and contracts, have negative trade value.

I wouldn't take them off waivers for free.

Johnson is the cost of dumping those contracts.

Reyes does not have negative trade value.

Even Buerhle is being paid market rates.

At some point you need to add value to the major league team, which can often be hard for a non-preferred baseball destination like Toronto. The Blue Jays are massively better today than they were yesterday, by a very large margin, and if they have the payroll capacity that this does not limit their ability to keep young talent, then i really like it for the Jays.

Tom Servo
11-13-2012, 08:48 PM
Buerhle and Reyes, due to their production and contracts, have negative trade value.

I wouldn't take them off waivers for free.

Johnson is the cost of dumping those contracts.
I mean the back end of the numbers on Buehrle's contract aren't pretty, but the guy has been a model of consistency for years now even when the predictions persist that he's going to fall off a cliff. I think he's a fine addition to a decimated Toronto rotation and in a market where Anibal Sanchez may get $100 million, not cripplingly expensive.

Reyes' contract is worse, but it seems as though there were more than a few interested suitors at the trade deadline.

PuffyPig
11-13-2012, 08:49 PM
Buehrle, sure. Reyes? Ehhh...

2.8 WAR and a 6 year $106M contract. And he's likley to get worse as he ages.

Unless I have a Yankees type budget, I'd stay far away.

sonny
11-13-2012, 08:53 PM
Well, at least they have awesome uniforms, an attractive stadium and throngs of adoring fans. So there's that.

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 08:53 PM
2.8 WAR and a 6 year $106M contract. And he's likley to get worse as he ages.

Unless I have a Yankees type budget, I'd stay far away.

Is that number for Reyes? Because the last time I'm seeing his value that low is 2010, and it's been well over that for the rest of his career.

PuffyPig
11-13-2012, 08:54 PM
Reyes does not have negative trade value.

Even Buerhle is being paid market rates.

At some point you need to add value to the major league team, which can often be hard for a non-preferred baseball destination like Toronto. The Blue Jays are massively better today than they were yesterday, by a very large margin, and if they have the payroll capacity that this does not limit their ability to keep young talent, then i really like it for the Jays.

Oh I don't disagree that the Blue Jays are a better team today then yesterday.

But taking this much salary on can only be judged in a few years when it can be determined if the extra salaries have prevented the team from keeping cheaper and better talent.

I also thing both players are likely to regress pretty quickly.

PuffyPig
11-13-2012, 08:55 PM
Is that number for Reyes? Because the last time I'm seeing his value that low is 2010, and it's been well over that for the rest of his career.

According to Baseball Reference it is. I understand it can be different on other sites.

Patrick Bateman
11-13-2012, 08:56 PM
2.8 WAR and a 6 year $106M contract. And he's likley to get worse as he ages.

Unless I have a Yankees type budget, I'd stay far away.

1. Reyes had 4.5 WAR

2. The year before that he had 6

3. It looks like he's healthy. If he is he should keep being productive. He has real offensive ability, and his defense shouldn't completely fall off the cliff (I think he's more Jimmy Rollins type).

4. 17.5M doesn't get you that much on the open market. Jose Reyes would get just a good a contract right now. Look what Brandon Phillips got.

5. Anyways should be able to look beyond WAR. He's 29. He can play SS adequately. He's a strong offensive threat. There are what, 5 other guys in the majors who can do that?

Patrick Bateman
11-13-2012, 08:58 PM
Oh I don't disagree that the Blue Jays are a better team today then yesterday.

But taking this much salary on can only be judged in a few years when it can be determined if the extra salaries have prevented the team from keeping cheaper and better talent.

I also thing both players are likely to regress pretty quickly.

They only have Reyes until he is 34/35. You aren't really going to be able to lock up a star to more ideal age years.

I'd consider him as about as good a free agent get (dollars, age, and production) as you are going to get.

After seeing the contracts the Dodgers took on (and gave away prospects), the Jays got better players for a similar price.

_Sir_Charles_
11-13-2012, 08:58 PM
Interesting tidbit....


Guillen's replacement, Mike Redmond, most recently managed the Blue Jays' Class A Advanced team in Dunedin, Fla., last year and should be familiar with most of the prospects Toronto is sending to Miami.

PuffyPig
11-13-2012, 08:59 PM
no message

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 09:00 PM
So how many more times can these mega deals keep happening? There have been 2 unprecedented, enormous trades like this just in the past few months.

PuffyPig
11-13-2012, 09:01 PM
4. 17.5M doesn't get you that much on the open market. Jose Reyes would get just a good a contract right now.

Perhaps. But unless he would get sometohnmg quite a bit better, his trade value may be very limited over and above taking on his salary.

Patrick Bateman
11-13-2012, 09:03 PM
I should also note that there is a great deal of speculation about continued increasing revenue streams for baseball. On Baseball prospectus there is some thought inflation and such increasing salaries by 20% by 2014.

I think at this point if you can get a good player locked into a salary for multiple years he's going to have heavy value relative to the market. Presumably why the Dodgers would even consider doing what they are doing.

Sure the Jays aren't going to get a lot of value from the Buerhle and Buck contracts, but they did need major league pitchers. They had about 5 pitchers above replacement value last year. They needed a starter, and you can say what you want about Buerhle, but he is a major league starter and would probably get a deal sniffing his current one via free agency. Not the worst contract to buy considering his health record. Buck is an adequate major league catcher and can probably be dumped relatively easily if they wish.

westofyou
11-13-2012, 09:05 PM
I mean, the guy killed the Expos and baseball's market in Montreal for good. They are really going to let him do the same in Miami?


Also, the Reds should be asking about Bonifacio.
he also helped push up the price of the O's at sale and that carried over to the whole game before the game was ready

Patrick Bateman
11-13-2012, 09:06 PM
Perhaps. But unless he would get sometohnmg quite a bit better, his trade value may be very limited over and above taking on his salary.

It's not that easy to get a Jose Reyes.

If Reyes were making $0 per year, you would likely have to give up your top 4-5 prospects to get him.

At some point, there are only 5 guys on the planet who can do what Reyes can do, and there is essentially only one avenue to get a Jose Reyes (for the Jays - via trade, or you hope to get lucky with a prospect). It's not like if they keep their 17M they are going to get a different Jose Reyes, or sign 3 guys who add up to a Jose Reyes. They just added a guy who is likely their best player and should be fore multiple years. These guys dont grow on trees for Toronto.

_Sir_Charles_
11-13-2012, 09:11 PM
So, let's see....the Marlins have traded away in this past year....

Hanley Ramirez
Randy Choate
Edward Mujica
Gaby Sanchez
Kyle Kaminska
Heath Bell
Anibel Sanchez
Omar Infante
Jose Reyes
Josh Johnson
Mark Buehrle
John Buck
Emilio Bonifacio


Am I missing anyone? Good lord. Contract that team is right. Sheesh!

_Sir_Charles_
11-13-2012, 09:24 PM
7:14pm: As it stands now, the Marlins will send right-hander Josh Johnson, left-hander Mark Buehrle, shortstop Jose Reyes, outfielder Emilio Bonifacio, and catcher John Buck for shortstop Yunel Escobar, infielder Adeiny Hechavarria, right-hander Henderson Alvarez, left-hander Justin Nicolino, outfielder Jake Marisnick, catcher Jeff Mathis, and right-hander Anthony DeSclafani, tweets Morosi.
Read more at http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/#70ODKXxubBJUdftB.99


Plus the M's are sending 4 million to the Jays too.
Two words. In. Sane.

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 09:33 PM
One thing that hasn't been discussed here yet, is how likely it now looks that the Jays will compete in the AL east next year.

RedEye
11-13-2012, 09:46 PM
How will Chris Carpenter explain this to his son?

(For the record, this is the FIRST time I've ever used this internal RZ meme).

Wonderful Monds
11-13-2012, 09:47 PM
It's not even over yet either LOL
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/mlb-rumors/20971637/report-marlins-ricky-nolasco-will-be-next-to-go-says-execs

cincrazy
11-13-2012, 10:01 PM
What a joke of a franchise they are. The big, splashy free agent signings were all a sham from the get go. He got his stadium. Now what does he care? Say what you will about Boston or the Cubs or any other number of teams, but for my money the worst run organization in baseball resides in Miami, and it isn't even that particularly close.

Slyder
11-13-2012, 10:03 PM
I really think Selig needs to step in and kill this one.

Or tell Loria he has to go.

Loria needed to go when he killed baseball in Montreal. The fact baseball gave him the fish still burns me.

Buckeye33
11-13-2012, 10:37 PM
One thing that hasn't been discussed here yet, is how likely it now looks that the Jays will compete in the AL east next year.

J. Johnson
B. Morrow
Buerhle
Drabek
Romero

1. Reyes SS
2. Bonifacio 2B
3. Bautista RF
4. Encarnacion DH
5. Lawrie 3B
6. Rasmus CF
7. Lind 1B
8. d'Arnaud/Buck C
9. Davis LF

I would say that is a contending team.

RedsManRick
11-13-2012, 11:21 PM
All I have to say is that if I'm Buerhle or Reyes I am NOT a happy camper. Not to stereotype, but I'm imagine Miami had a certain appeal to Reyes in particular.

And if I'm Giancarlo Stanton, I'm telling my agent that I want to be next.

Can't wait for the inevitable, "Sure we had some bad luck, but we built you a stadium and got you good players and you fans still didn't come out. What can we say? We had no choice."

Tom Servo
11-13-2012, 11:30 PM
All I have to say is that if I'm Buerhle or Reyes I am NOT a happy camper. Not to stereotype, but I'm imagine Miami had a certain appeal to Reyes in particular.

I'm wondering if Buehrle may ask for a trade to St. Louis as has long been rumored throughout his career instead of playing in Toronto.

Roy Tucker
11-13-2012, 11:51 PM
This is reminiscent of the recent BoSox dumping of big names and contracts to the Dodgers.

If I were a Marlins fan (if there are any, I've never met one), I'd be pretty hacked off.

savafan
11-14-2012, 12:03 AM
I don't think anyone would argue that removing Loria from owning an MLB team would be in the best interest of the game.

Caveat Emperor
11-14-2012, 12:13 AM
This is reminiscent of the recent BoSox dumping of big names and contracts to the Dodgers.

If I were a Marlins fan (if there are any, I've never met one), I'd be pretty hacked off.

Marlins fans are used to firesales, but usually the ownership has the common decency to win a World Series before engaging in one.

savafan
11-14-2012, 12:15 AM
No way the Marlins ever sign another big name free agent now that they've traded off Bell, Buerhle, and Reyes a season after signing them all to long term contracts.

No way the fans ever fill that stadium to watch this team ever again. This is Expos pt. 2, from the same director.

Marlins team salary now is around $16 million

M2
11-14-2012, 12:27 AM
1) The people of Montreal made a good call when they refused to hand money to Jeff Loria.

2) Jose Reyes is just about as good as it gets at the SS position. He makes money because he's worth it.

3) Ben Cherington may have some 'splainin' to do for why the Jays made this trade and the Red Sox didn't.

4) Nicolino is the only particularly compelling talent headed to Miami. Alvarez kind of sucks. Escobar collapsed last season. Hechvarria looks like he's joining a long line of mirage players who only can hit while playing in Las Vegas. Marisnick is starting to look like a bit of a jeans model.

5) I'm with benihana, the Reds should make a move on Giancarlo immediately.

Tom Servo
11-14-2012, 12:33 AM
http://tophatal.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/sanmpson-buehrle-and-loria-e1323978879209.jpg?w=483
http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2011/1207/mlb_a_reyes_cr_576.jpg
http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/001/666/295/127514417_crop_650x440.jpg?1323627999

Blitz Dorsey
11-14-2012, 12:49 AM
The Marlins have no reason to trade Stanton as he's young, inexpensive and they can perhaps sell the BS angle that they're going to "build around him."

The Reds would have to throw a ton of prospects the Marlins' way for them to even think about parting ways with Stanton. He is the only thing the Marlins have left, he's extremely good and he comes extremely cheap. He hasn't come close to hitting his peak yet. It would take a package of Billy Hamilton, Tony Cingrani and then either Daniel Corcino or Robert Stephenson to get it done (as someone mentioned earlier in this thread). There might be some on here willing to do that deal, but I can't see Walt completely pillaging his farm system like that. Those are the Reds' top-four prospects right there. Giving up three of them would be really tough, but that's what it would take to get Stanton IMO. And who knows if the Marlins would even think that's enough. Just because we think it would be enough and perhaps too much doesn't mean they would agree. Remember how the Mariners preferred Justin Smoak over Yonder Alonso? While Alonso isn't all that good, he's definitely better than Smoak. Didn't matter. The M's thought Smoak was better.

So, I'll believe it when I see it, but yes, I hope the Reds at least kick the tires on a possible deal for Stanton. Just don't see the Marlins wanting anything to do with trading him though.

Captain Hook
11-14-2012, 12:51 AM
The Reds could learn a lot from the fish

:laugh:

That was my favorite thread last off-season.

Chip R
11-14-2012, 12:55 AM
Could we just merge these two threads. ;)

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98757

Wonderful Monds
11-14-2012, 01:09 AM
The Marlins have no reason to trade Stanton as he's young, inexpensive and they can perhaps sell the BS angle that they're going to "build around him."

The Reds would have to throw a ton of prospects the Marlins' way for them to even think about parting ways with Stanton. He is the only thing the Marlins have left, he's extremely good and he comes extremely cheap. He hasn't come close to hitting his peak yet. It would take a package of Billy Hamilton, Tony Cingrani and then either Daniel Corcino or Robert Stephenson to get it done (as someone mentioned earlier in this thread). There might be some on here willing to do that deal, but I can't see Walt completely pillaging his farm system like that. Those are the Reds' top-four prospects right there. Giving up three of them would be really tough, but that's what it would take to get Stanton IMO. And who knows if the Marlins would even think that's enough. Just because we think it would be enough and perhaps too much doesn't mean they would agree. Remember how the Mariners preferred Justin Smoak over Yonder Alonso? While Alonso isn't all that good, he's definitely better than Smoak. Didn't matter. The M's thought Smoak was better.

So, I'll believe it when I see it, but yes, I hope the Reds at least kick the tires on a possible deal for Stanton. Just don't see the Marlins wanting anything to do with trading him though.

And would you have seen this coming?

The Marlins are not an MLB team. Stanton may very well force their hand, anyway.

Tom Servo
11-14-2012, 01:17 AM
Stanton will only be inexpensive for another 2 seasons before he hits arbitration, at which point he will no longer be a Marlin just like Miguel Cabrera found out. Can't hurt to ask Miami now.

KronoRed
11-14-2012, 04:52 AM
Giancarlo Stanton ‏@Giancarlo818

Alright, I'm pissed off!!! Plain & Simple

Go get him, it's clearance time in Miami.

GAC
11-14-2012, 05:29 AM
When you have an ownership that has a strict policy against no-trade clauses, this is what you get.

This is the Marlins. Fire sales is what they do.

Superdude
11-14-2012, 06:47 AM
Go get him, it's clearance time in Miami.

Votto/Stanton/Bruce

Would absolutely mortgage the future for four years of that. Anyone's on the table. Back from dreamland, who's idea was this Miami debacle anyway? That's gonna be a joke next year.

membengal
11-14-2012, 06:48 AM
I would still do Chapman for Stanton, and I think the Marlins would too.

blumj
11-14-2012, 07:16 AM
1) The people of Montreal made a good call when they refused to hand money to Jeff Loria.

2) Jose Reyes is just about as good as it gets at the SS position. He makes money because he's worth it.

3) Ben Cherington may have some 'splainin' to do for why the Jays made this trade and the Red Sox didn't.

4) Nicolino is the only particularly compelling talent headed to Miami. Alvarez kind of sucks. Escobar collapsed last season. Hechvarria looks like he's joining a long line of mirage players who only can hit while playing in Las Vegas. Marisnick is starting to look like a bit of a jeans model.

5) I'm with benihana, the Reds should make a move on Giancarlo immediately.
WEEI on now, they're giving Cherington credit for having the discipline not to do it.

lollipopcurve
11-14-2012, 08:11 AM
I would still do Chapman for Stanton, and I think the Marlins would too.

That's the only proposition really worth considering. I'd say if you think Cingrani can come in and give the team a representative lefty out of the pen (or if you feel comfortable with the prospects for reconstituting the BP in some other way), this is a deal you make. Stanton in GABP would be Wilt Chamberlain on an 8 foot hoop.

I'd do it.

savafan
11-14-2012, 09:01 AM
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/11/13/its-time-for-bud-selig-to-force-jeffrey-loria-out-of-mlb/


Loria has now entered two markets and all but wrecked baseball for both of them. It’s in the best interests of the game that he exit for good. Commissioner Bud Selig should step in and apply as much pressure as he legally can in order to get Loria to sell. Otherwise, Loria and the deal that allowed him to trade the Montreal Expos for the Marlins will go down as black marks on Selig’s legacy.

_Sir_Charles_
11-14-2012, 09:29 AM
Votto/Stanton/Bruce

Would absolutely mortgage the future for four years of that. Anyone's on the table. Back from dreamland, who's idea was this Miami debacle anyway? That's gonna be a joke next year.

Hard to believe, but they might make the Astros look decent. LOL.

MikeS21
11-14-2012, 09:33 AM
Can you imagine what the bidding war for Stanton will become?

If you really think the Reds have the prospect talent to outbid all the other teams in baseball, then A) you are over valuing the Reds' talent in the farm system, or B) perhaps the Reds would be wiser to hang on to their farm system talent to plug the future holes on this roster.

Plus Plus
11-14-2012, 09:43 AM
I would still do Chapman for Stanton, and I think the Marlins would too.

In a world where Reyes, Buehrle, Bonifacio, Johnson, Buck, Bell, and Hanley are all had for slews of nothing, I don't think it would take Chapman to land Stanton.

Benihana
11-14-2012, 10:22 AM
That's the only proposition really worth considering. I'd say if you think Cingrani can come in and give the team a representative lefty out of the pen (or if you feel comfortable with the prospects for reconstituting the BP in some other way), this is a deal you make. Stanton in GABP would be Wilt Chamberlain on an 8 foot hoop.

I'd do it.

Me too. Sign Sizemore and one of the rehabbing closers. Championship.

traderumor
11-14-2012, 10:36 AM
There is a lot of offseason, but it looks like the Marlins are taking the Astros route, even while the body is still warm. Maybe they figured the NL needed to replace the sorry franchise that jumped leagues?

The funny part of it is that trades like these used to be proposed on message boards and gave rise to my RZ moniker. Now teams are really doing them while the internet has realized that this type of "rebuild" is not good for the game.

M2
11-14-2012, 10:59 AM
WEEI on now, they're giving Cherington credit for having the discipline not to do it.

I stay away from EEI as a rule, but it would be fascinating to hear the rationale for why the Sox don't need two starting pitchers, a top SS and a guy like Bonifacio, all for the cost of Henry Owens and perhaps Bryce Brentz.

I figure that John Farrell did an actual face-palm when he heard about this deal.

CarolinaRedleg
11-14-2012, 11:09 AM
Any truth to the rumors of another name change? Word is the team is going to be known as the MiAAAmi mAAArlins.

CySeymour
11-14-2012, 11:24 AM
I would still do Chapman for Stanton, and I think the Marlins would too.

I doubt they would considering the size of Chapman's contract.

Wonderful Monds
11-14-2012, 11:24 AM
Any truth to the rumors of another name change? Word is the team is going to be known as the MiAAAmi mAAArlins.

If they trade Nolasco, there could potentially be a AAA team with a higher payroll than the Marlins.

IslandRed
11-14-2012, 11:34 AM
In a world where Reyes, Buehrle, Bonifacio, Johnson, Buck, Bell, and Hanley are all had for slews of nothing, I don't think it would take Chapman to land Stanton.


I doubt they would considering the size of Chapman's contract.

^ The latter. The Marlins are dumping money; dumping talent is a byproduct. Stanton's cheap so there's no urgency to deal him. And it's safe to say that he won't be pried loose if it involves the Marlins taking on money, which would be the case in a Chapman swap.

Plus Plus
11-14-2012, 11:47 AM
^ The latter. The Marlins are dumping money; dumping talent is a byproduct. Stanton's cheap so there's no urgency to deal him. And it's safe to say that he won't be pried loose if it involves the Marlins taking on money, which would be the case in a Chapman swap.

I was addressing more the current philosophy of the Marlins than I was a realistic trade proposal. My comment was really tongue in cheek; Stanton will be traded before his contract ends IMHO- likely in his second or third arbitration year, when his salary becomes equal to the other 24 players on the roster combined.

That team is a mess, and ownership and management is all over the place. This isn't a rebuild, it's a white flag being raised over the stadium. They are getting nothing prospects and dumping nearly everything of value on the roster. So who knows what it would take for Stanton?

M2
11-14-2012, 11:59 AM
If they trade Nolasco, there could potentially be a AAA team with a higher payroll than the Marlins.

Prior to yesterday there was some talk that A-Rod could be Marlins bound. Apparently Loria thinks he'd sell tickets. I say that's a wrong and bad idea, but it's possible the Fish just moved a pile of big contracts in order to absorb A-Rod.

And if that is the case, I'd expect Nolasco to be the guy who heads over to the Yankees.

klw
11-14-2012, 11:59 AM
If the Reds can not land a return of Ludwick, I would not mind the Reds talking to the Jays about Adam Lind. Signed for next year for $5 mil with reasonable TEAM options after that. He would bring a potential lefty power bat. Maybe consider him even if Ludwick comes back. I doubt the price would be high at all (nonprospect minor leaguer) as I assume the Jays would be looking for an upgrade and he spent a chunk of time in AAA last season.

*BaseClogger*
11-14-2012, 12:02 PM
If the Reds can not land a return of Ludwick, I would not mind the Reds talking to the Jays about Adam Lind. Signed for next year for $5 mil with reasonable TEAM options after that. He would bring a potential lefty power bat. Maybe consider him even if Ludwick comes back. I doubt the price would be high at all (nonprospect minor leaguer) as I assume the Jays would be looking for an upgrade and he spent a chunk of time in AAA last season.

No thanks--he's a butcher in the field...

RedsManRick
11-14-2012, 12:07 PM
The more I think about this, the more I think there's actually significant upside for the Marlins. Set aside for the moment that I don't actually believe that the Marlins are thinking this way.

In a sim league I'm in, we have a $50MM salary cap and always have enough cash to meet it. Basically, every team spends $45-50MM every year. When you trade established players with big salaries for prospects, you don't just get the prospects. You get the salary cap space, which you can turn around and use the following year, adding just as much talent as you just gave up. But you get to keep the prospects.

There are always new FA available who you can spend money on. There isn't a comparable ability to add young talent. So, for example, let's say that the Marlins turnaround and spend their savings in FA (assuming they could lure FA, which seems unlikely...)



Escobar: $5
Mathis: $1.5
Cash: $4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Marlins: $10.5


Johnson: $13.75
Buehrle: $11
Reyes: $10
Bonifacio: $4 (arb)
Buck: $6
Cash: -$4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blue Jays: $40.75


Net: Blue Jays take on $30.25MM in salary from the Marlins in 2013

How could they spend $30MM? Well, I just read an analysis of Jim Bowden's FA predictions from last year and it turns out that he was quite accurate. So let's use his figures for this offseason to look at some packages of players the Marlins could theoretically get. Since we're just talking 2013, I'm going to take 10% off of Bowden's AAV since contracts are usually back-loaded.


Package 1
Josh Hamilton: $20MM
Dan Haren or Edwin Jackson: $10MM

Package 2
Zack Greinke: $18MM
Fransisco Liriano: $4MM
Joakim Soria: $4MM
Ryan Ludwick: $5MM

Package 3
Brandon McCarthy: $9MM
Shane Victorino: $8MM
Melky Cabrera: $7MM
Jonathan Broxton: $6MM

Now, take any one of those packages and add it to haul the Marlins got. Now who made out the best? I think we sometimes fail to account for just how valuable money is. Sure, teams could spend more if they wanted to, in theory. But we know that they functionally operate within a self-imposed cap. Getting both significant young talent AND significant "cap space" is a pretty nice haul. Unless the expensive players you're giving up are signed significantly below market rate (you can certainly argue that Reyes is), the money is basically worth just as much as the players. The prospects then are the price the other team has to pay for the guarantee of being able to spend that money on those specific players.

Considered differently, would the Blue Jays be a better team today if they had just signed Josh Hamilton and Dan Haren and kept all their young talent? Or Zack Greinke, Melky Cabrera and Ryan Madson?

bucksfan2
11-14-2012, 12:33 PM
The problem is Rick your not operating in a sim league. Your not operating based strictly on numbers. What I found interesting was the fact that Florida has no state income tax. So those guys, Reyes especially, played 81 games (more if they played Tampa) in a 0% income tax rate. He goes to Toronto Ontario where the top income bracket is close to 50%. So for half of their games they are losing 50% of their salary (granted in the US they would have to pay roughly 35% in fed income tax.) Still that is taking quite a pay cut.

Taxes aside, why would someone sign with Florida? They do not offer no trade clauses, they give the player no location security. One year after spending big they jettison off most of their established players. A player like Josh Hamilton may not want to play in KC, may not even entertain the idea of signing with them, but if he inks a big contract with Miami he has no power of when and where they will trade him.

mdccclxix
11-14-2012, 12:43 PM
The more I think about this, the more I think there's actually significant upside for the Marlins. Set aside for the moment that I don't actually believe that the Marlins are thinking this way.

In a sim league I'm in, we have a $50MM salary cap and always have enough cash to meet it. Basically, every team spends $45-50MM every year. When you trade established players with big salaries for prospects, you don't just get the prospects. You get the salary cap space, which you can turn around and use the following year, adding just as much talent as you just gave up. But you get to keep the prospects.

There are always new FA available who you can spend money on. There isn't a comparable ability to add young talent. So, for example, let's say that the Marlins turnaround and spend their savings in FA (assuming they could lure FA, which seems unlikely...)



Escobar: $5
Mathis: $1.5
Cash: $4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Marlins: $10.5


Johnson: $13.75
Buehrle: $11
Reyes: $10
Bonifacio: $4 (arb)
Buck: $6
Cash: -$4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blue Jays: $40.75


Net: Blue Jays take on $30.25MM in salary from the Marlins in 2013

How could they spend $30MM? Well, I just read an analysis of Jim Bowden's FA predictions from last year and it turns out that he was quite accurate. So let's use his figures for this offseason to look at some packages of players the Marlins could theoretically get. Since we're just talking 2013, I'm going to take 10% off of Bowden's AAV since contracts are usually front-loaded.


Package 1
Josh Hamilton: $20MM
Dan Haren or Edwin Jackson: $10MM

Package 2
Zack Greinke: $18MM
Fransisco Liriano: $4MM
Joakim Soria: $4MM
Ryan Ludwick: $5MM

Package 3
Brandon McCarthy: $9MM
Shane Victorino: $8MM
Melky Cabrera: $7MM
Jonathan Broxton: $6MM

Now, take any one of those packages and add it to haul the Marlins got. Now who made out the best? I think we sometimes fail to account for just how valuable money is. Sure, teams could spend more if they wanted to, in theory. But we know that they functionally operate within a self-imposed cap. Getting both significant young talent AND significant "cap space" is a pretty nice haul. Unless the expensive players you're giving up are signed significantly below market rate (you can certainly argue that Reyes is), the money is basically worth just as much as the players. The prospects then are the price the other team has to pay for the guarantee of being able to spend that money on those players.

Considered differently, would the Blue Jays be a better team today if they had just signed Josh Hamilton and Dan Haren and kept all their young talent? Or Zack Greinke, Melky Cabrera and Ryan Madson?

Bravo. I think that clearly outlines the quandary that teams can find themselves in when trying to improve. I think one x-factor is the fans response, which in a recent mlbtr article was stated by a gm to have some impact. I think the Votto case is a clear example. The psychology of retaining players is very benificial...for a while. Then they become KGjr 2008 or Arod 2012, etc. That aside, this move makes a ton of sense for the Blue Jays, as they're unloading 6 or 7 lotto tickets for 4 or 5 proven winners. And the Blue Jays fan base needs, wants, "deserves", a proven winner. I think the Baltimore effect, and the Boston effect, from the 2012 season is a major factor as well. The Blue Jays need to bust a move and they just did. And personally, I know little to nothing about the prospects going to Miami, but some of the peripherals seemed just okay. And from what I understand, the Jays have quite a few of their best prospects left. We could be seeing a Boston in 4th and 5th the next year or two...

blumj
11-14-2012, 12:49 PM
I stay away from EEI as a rule, but it would be fascinating to hear the rationale for why the Sox don't need two starting pitchers, a top SS and a guy like Bonifacio, all for the cost of Henry Owens and perhaps Bryce Brentz.

I figure that John Farrell did an actual face-palm when he heard about this deal.
Well, rationale number 1 was: Reyes isn't worth that contract, Buehrle would get destroyed in the AL East, and Johnson's only for the one year when the Red Sox have no chance to contend anyway.

Unspoken rationale number 2 is that they know nothing about prospects, so the Red Sox comparable for what the Jays traded would have had to be something like Middlebrooks, Doubront, Lavarnway, Iglesias, Bogaerts, Bradley, and Barnes. Although it's possible they've never heard of Bogaerts, Bradley, and Barnes, there is absolutely no chance they've ever heard of Owens or Brentz.

And Farrell should have known better than anyone who he was going to work for when he decided to switch teams.

Tom Servo
11-14-2012, 12:59 PM
While that is true Rick, it remains to be seen if the Marlins will actually spend any sort of significant money in free agency.

dougdirt
11-14-2012, 01:16 PM
While that is true Rick, it remains to be seen if the Marlins will actually spend any sort of significant money in free agency.

Even if they wanted to, who is going to sign with them, particularly if you have a family? Oh, so if we don't put 2 million people in the seats or win a World Series, you are going to trade me after the season?

westofyou
11-14-2012, 01:23 PM
While that is true Rick, it remains to be seen if the Marlins will actually spend any sort of significant money in free agency.

They aren't going to spend a dime.

This is a classic business move... for the owner.

He increases the worth and the stability of the franchise by securing a public financed venue, he strips the future cost of obligations to the most volatile aspect of owning a baseball team (talent) and he angers the fan base enough that they call for him to sell off the team.

Which he'll likely do and all the aforementioned items end up making his profit more delightful to his bank account.

Meanwhile the fans get kicked in the teeth by Loria for the second time in 10 years.

Baseball isn't really the national past time, making money at the expense of others is.

M2
11-14-2012, 01:41 PM
Well, rationale number 1 was: Reyes isn't worth that contract, Buehrle would get destroyed in the AL East, and Johnson's only for the one year when the Red Sox have no chance to contend anyway.

1) They're wrong about Reyes. Maybe he'll run into a wall at some point, but if you were to project who will be the best SS in baseball during the next three years, Reyes would be near the top of the list. That's worth a lot of money.

2) Buehrle's pitched plenty vs. AL East and gone undestroyed by the experience (3.88 career ERA vs. the division).

3) If the Sox had two quality starting pitchers and Reyes at SS, they'd be back in contention next year. The Jays literally just enacted what should have been the Red Sox's Plan A. A good year out of Johnson beats the heck out of John Lackey redux. If the Jays aren't in contention, they'll probably be able to move Johnson for better prospects than they gave up (BTW, I know you're just relaying what they were saying on the radio, so this is just me fuming at the walls).


Unspoken rationale number 2 is that they know nothing about prospects, so the Red Sox comparable for what the Jays traded would have had to be something like Middlebrooks, Doubront, Lavarnway, Iglesias, Bogaerts, Bradley, and Barnes. Although it's possible they've never heard of Bogaerts, Bradley, and Barnes, there is absolutely no chance they've ever heard of Owens or Brentz.

Good point. The ignorance of the average radio jock is depressingly high.


And Farrell should have known better than anyone who he was going to work for when he decided to switch teams.

I don't think he did. There's been a bit of a sea change with the Sox the past couple of years. They've become the most constipated guys in the room.

And I doubt he thought the Jays had a move like this in them. Surely he was thinking the Sox were the team more likely to pull the trigger on a blockbuster. You've got to figure a guy with Farrell's pitching coach background would be salivating over the prospect of Johnson and Buehrle in his rotation.

M2
11-14-2012, 01:51 PM
The more I think about this, the more I think there's actually significant upside for the Marlins. Set aside for the moment that I don't actually believe that the Marlins are thinking this way.

An actual email I got from a friend who assesses these things for a living:

You are missing a key point. If you have good players, they are taking up roster spots and money that can be allocated to...GOOD PLAYERS!

What would you rather have: Good players or the hope of new, different good players?! That's change I can believe in.

Now, signing Hamilton, Greinke, and trading for King Felix is on the table!

And then the follow up:

But watch this: If I win with Hamilton, Greinke, and Felix, I'm a genius. If they suck and I dump them, I'm a genius because WE'RE GETTING MIKE TROUT!

It's endless bait and switch. The best part is they don't even have to switch. They only have to create the perception that they could switch in order to get people-in-the-know bobbleheading about how smart they are.

And we should all pay a moment of respect to the SteelSD's classic Redszone PayFlex post, which pretty much skewered the insanity of what the Marlins just did.

westofyou
11-14-2012, 01:58 PM
An actual email I got from a friend who assesses these things for a living:

You are missing a key point. If you have good players, they are taking up roster spots and money that can be allocated to...GOOD PLAYERS!

What would you rather have: Good players or the hope of new, different good players?! That's change I can believe in.

Now, signing Hamilton, Greinke, and trading for King Felix is on the table!

And then the follow up:

But watch this: If I win with Hamilton, Greinke, and Felix, I'm a genius. If they suck and I dump them, I'm a genius because WE'RE GETTING MIKE TROUT!

It's endless bait and switch. The best part is they don't even have to switch. They only have to create the perception that they could switch in order to get people-in-the-know bobbleheading about how smart they are.

And we should all pay a moment of respect to the SteelSD's classic Redszone PayFlex post, which pretty much skewered the insanity of what the Marlins just did.
Mr Bracy

RedsManRick
11-14-2012, 02:24 PM
While that is true Rick, it remains to be seen if the Marlins will actually spend any sort of significant money in free agency.

Hence my caveat up front. I'd be shocked if they spent even half of their savings. Loria is basically saying, "Look, we gave it the old college try. We can't compete nor be profitable by signing big name players. This can only work if we're cheap."

M2
11-14-2012, 02:46 PM
Hence my caveat up front. I'd be shocked if they spent even half of their savings. Loria is basically saying, "Look, we gave it the old college try. We can't compete nor be profitable by signing big name players. This can only work if we're cheap."

Don't forget the kicker. "But thanks for building me that shiny new ballpark! :thumbup:"

Brutus
11-14-2012, 02:59 PM
The Marlins aren't trading Mike Stanton. He's the one player they can keep for relatively cheap for a few more years and still be used to draw some fans to the park.

westofyou
11-14-2012, 03:11 PM
The Marlins aren't trading Mike Stanton. He's the one player they can keep for relatively cheap for a few more years and still be used to draw some fans to the park.

Yep, he ain't hurting the owners bottom line

WildcatFan
11-14-2012, 03:22 PM
Apparently Miami is also looking to trade Logan Morrison. That's a deal I could get behind.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/mlb-rumors/20980464/report-marlins-shopping-logan-morrison-ricky-nolasco-also-expected-to-go

westofyou
11-14-2012, 03:32 PM
What's the allure?

His twitter account?

Wonderful Monds
11-14-2012, 03:34 PM
The Marlins aren't trading Mike Stanton. He's the one player they can keep for relatively cheap for a few more years and still be used to draw some fans to the park.

You are assuming Stanton won't tell them to trade him or he won't show up anyway. I think there's a fairly good chance he demands out of there.

Benihana
11-14-2012, 03:36 PM
Apparently Miami is also looking to trade Logan Morrison. That's a deal I could get behind.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/mlb-rumors/20980464/report-marlins-shopping-logan-morrison-ricky-nolasco-also-expected-to-go

I wonder what it would cost to take a flyer on LoMo? Maybe Lotzkar + LaMarre?

They certainly don't need middle infielders, but might need someone to man CF until Marisnick is ready.

LoMo could be a good buy low option for LF. He's 25, hits LH and sports a career .781 OPS despite a down year in 2012.

westofyou
11-14-2012, 03:40 PM
You are assuming Stanton won't tell them to trade him or he won't show up anyway. I think there's a fairly good chance he demands out of there.

So?

He can't go anywhere

Brutus
11-14-2012, 03:40 PM
You are assuming Stanton won't tell them to trade him or he won't show up anyway. I think there's a fairly good chance he demands out of there.

He has no grounds to demand a trade. He can demand all he wants. And the Marlins can tell him to pound sand and shut up and play.

Wonderful Monds
11-14-2012, 03:44 PM
He has no grounds to demand a trade. He can demand all he wants. And the Marlins can tell him to pound sand and shut up and play.

Intentionally tank it maybe? Operation Shutdown might have worked if Derek Bell was Giancarlo Stanton.

Brutus
11-14-2012, 03:45 PM
Intentionally tank it maybe? Operation Shutdown might have worked if Derek Bell was Giancarlo Stanton.

You think a player is going to hurt his own arbitration value to get traded? I'm assuming you're kidding, yes?

Wonderful Monds
11-14-2012, 03:47 PM
You think a player is going to hurt his own arbitration value to get traded? I'm assuming you're kidding, yes?

Maybe hurt his bottom line a bit or definitely play in Miami for 4 more years?

I know which sounds worse to me.

REDREAD
11-14-2012, 03:47 PM
Even if they wanted to, who is going to sign with them, particularly if you have a family? Oh, so if we don't put 2 million people in the seats or win a World Series, you are going to trade me after the season?

I imagine some players are just after the biggest payday in FA.

Hypothetically, if you are Josh Hamilton and you only want the biggest payday.. if Miami gives you an extra 20 million over 5 years, would you turn that down to play for another team (who may end up trading you eventually?)

Even when a player gets a no-trade clause, he's often pressured to waive it for relatively little compensation. If he doesn't wave it, it becomes public and the fans turn on him.. I think that's why we are seeing more creative means of enforcing a no trade contract, such as Arroyo's escalation of deferred money if traded.. BTW, Arroyo is a good example of a player that got burned for "Taking less to stay at a place that he really wanted to".

M2
11-14-2012, 03:49 PM
I wonder what it would cost to take a flyer on LoMo?

A blow to the head affecting their judgment centers. LoMo heads up my list of terrible ballplayers who have to be completely exposed. He is the worst defensive OF in captivity and pitchers have figured out how to handle him. He's a Ben Grieve wannabe. I'd stay far, far away.

M2
11-14-2012, 04:08 PM
He has no grounds to demand a trade. He can demand all he wants. And the Marlins can tell him to pound sand and shut up and play.

What he can do is give the team bad press. All he has to do is continue to state the obvious about how the ownership sold out the players and the fans. He can add that he'll always bust his hump for the fans and for his teammates, but he'll be leaving the first chance he gets because he wants no part of playing for Jeff Loria.

For a team that's going to get little to no press, having its star player calling out the ownership for being a fraud could be poison at the turnstiles.

And all it may take is the threat that he's going to tell reporters what he thinks about the sad state of the franchise in order to punch his ticket out of town. The Marlins' boat isn't seaworthy enough to survive anyone rocking it.

Plus, imagine how smart the Marlins would be cashing in Stanton at the height of his value?

Brutus
11-14-2012, 04:19 PM
What he can do is give the team bad press. All he has to do is continue to state the obvious about how the ownership sold out the players and the fans. He can add that he'll always bust his hump for the fans and for his teammates, but he'll be leaving the first chance he gets because he wants no part of playing for Jeff Loria.

For a team that's going to get little to no press, having its star player calling out the ownership for being a fraud could be poison at the turnstiles.

And all it may take is the threat that he's going to tell reporters what he thinks about the sad state of the franchise in order to punch his ticket out of town. The Marlins' boat isn't seaworthy enough to survive anyone rocking it.

Plus, imagine how smart the Marlins would be cashing in Stanton at the height of his value?

You really think Stanton's comments make that trade look any worse? That trade was going to get bad press with or without Stanton's tweet. Yet those same fans will continue to come watch Stanton play regardless of what he says.

mdccclxix
11-14-2012, 04:37 PM
I think his comments added another thud/splat when we thought there wasn't another bounce after the splat. This is the fish dying, you see.

M2
11-14-2012, 04:39 PM
You really think Stanton's comments make that trade look any worse? That trade was going to get bad press with or without Stanton's tweet. Yet those same fans will continue to come watch Stanton play regardless of what he says.

No, I think Stanton can make things uncomfortable for the Marlins moving forward. I doubt he will because it's Michael Jordan 101 to be docile, compliant and agreeable in order to maximize your earnings (malcontents don't sell Hanes t-shirts).

Yet he could make the ongoing news story with the Marlins that their star player doesn't want to participate in their sham. What Loria doesn't want, and many not want to risk, is ongoing bad publicity.

WildcatFan
11-14-2012, 05:08 PM
A blow to the head affecting their judgment centers. LoMo heads up my list of terrible ballplayers who have to be completely exposed. He is the worst defensive OF in captivity and pitchers have figured out how to handle him. He's a Ben Grieve wannabe. I'd stay far, far away.

That's an awfully quick assessment of a guy with 1100 PAs under his belt. He's a lefty with some power who has shown he can get on base up until last year when he battled a knee injury.

M2
11-14-2012, 05:34 PM
That's an awfully quick assessment of a guy with 1100 PAs under his belt. He's a lefty with some power who has shown he can get on base up until last year when he battled a knee injury.

I despise his game. For me, he's the spiritual heir of guys like Kevin Maas, Phil Plantier and Sam Horn.

westofyou
11-14-2012, 05:52 PM
I despise his game. For me, he's the spiritual heir of guys like Kevin Maas, Phil Plantier and Sam Horn.

He's not a sausage like Billy Butler though... yet

_Sir_Charles_
11-14-2012, 05:57 PM
Any truth to the rumors of another name change? Word is the team is going to be known as the MiAAAmi mAAArlins.

Too many A's. This is almost looking like a AA club.

Patrick Bateman
11-14-2012, 06:45 PM
The more I think about this, the more I think there's actually significant upside for the Marlins. Set aside for the moment that I don't actually believe that the Marlins are thinking this way.

In a sim league I'm in, we have a $50MM salary cap and always have enough cash to meet it. Basically, every team spends $45-50MM every year. When you trade established players with big salaries for prospects, you don't just get the prospects. You get the salary cap space, which you can turn around and use the following year, adding just as much talent as you just gave up. But you get to keep the prospects.

There are always new FA available who you can spend money on. There isn't a comparable ability to add young talent. So, for example, let's say that the Marlins turnaround and spend their savings in FA (assuming they could lure FA, which seems unlikely...)



Escobar: $5
Mathis: $1.5
Cash: $4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Marlins: $10.5


Johnson: $13.75
Buehrle: $11
Reyes: $10
Bonifacio: $4 (arb)
Buck: $6
Cash: -$4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blue Jays: $40.75


Net: Blue Jays take on $30.25MM in salary from the Marlins in 2013

How could they spend $30MM? Well, I just read an analysis of Jim Bowden's FA predictions from last year and it turns out that he was quite accurate. So let's use his figures for this offseason to look at some packages of players the Marlins could theoretically get. Since we're just talking 2013, I'm going to take 10% off of Bowden's AAV since contracts are usually back-loaded.


Package 1
Josh Hamilton: $20MM
Dan Haren or Edwin Jackson: $10MM

Package 2
Zack Greinke: $18MM
Fransisco Liriano: $4MM
Joakim Soria: $4MM
Ryan Ludwick: $5MM

Package 3
Brandon McCarthy: $9MM
Shane Victorino: $8MM
Melky Cabrera: $7MM
Jonathan Broxton: $6MM

Now, take any one of those packages and add it to haul the Marlins got. Now who made out the best? I think we sometimes fail to account for just how valuable money is. Sure, teams could spend more if they wanted to, in theory. But we know that they functionally operate within a self-imposed cap. Getting both significant young talent AND significant "cap space" is a pretty nice haul. Unless the expensive players you're giving up are signed significantly below market rate (you can certainly argue that Reyes is), the money is basically worth just as much as the players. The prospects then are the price the other team has to pay for the guarantee of being able to spend that money on those specific players.

Considered differently, would the Blue Jays be a better team today if they had just signed Josh Hamilton and Dan Haren and kept all their young talent? Or Zack Greinke, Melky Cabrera and Ryan Madson?

Rick, I think the problem with this line of thinking is that baseball is not played in a vaccum.

The Blue Jays can go around and offer FMV contracts, but so will other teams. In the end, the players choose the team to some extent. Who says that Greinke or anyone is going to choose the Jays over another team prices being equal? Look at the list of free agents the Jays sign. It has not been a substantial list of talent. Presumably they are making more offers than they are getting talent back.

Likewise, with the Marlins, this trade does not make them a desination. Free agents are going to look at Miami and be afraid they could be traded to any other team in baseball in a year's time. That risk has now been proven after yesterday's events.

The only way the Marlins get an established talent through free agency is by offering contracts firmly above market rates, and even then, if Greinke has offers for 19M somewhere else, is Miami really the destination he is going to pick for an extra 2M a year?

The Marlins may have just significantly closed their ability to acquire talent through 1 of the 3 main streams of acquiring talent. They may have also significantly hindered their ability to lock up their own young talent like Stanton, knowing that they could be part of the next purge, or could be faced playing on a 16M payroll team at a minutes notice.

Needless to say, none of those are good things. The Jays on the other hand might have just moved up their rebuilding effort 3+ years. Considering how long it took the Reds/Nationals/Athletics to rebuild, or watching teams like the Pirates, Royals, Mariners, Houston, Cubs, etc. continuously struggle to field competitive teams, at some point, there needs to be a large amount of value placed on getting good players under contract, even if it costs prospects, and removes payroll flexibility. There are only so many good players to go around that payroll flexibility is not always something that needs to be kept sacred. Getting quality baseball players is the end all objective, and IMO, the Jays just acquired a ton to compliment a team that had the existing talent required to fit with.

PuffyPig
11-14-2012, 06:53 PM
The more I think about this, the more I think there's actually significant upside for the Marlins. Set aside for the moment that I don't actually believe that the Marlins are thinking this way.

In a sim league I'm in, we have a $50MM salary cap and always have enough cash to meet it. Basically, every team spends $45-50MM every year. When you trade established players with big salaries for prospects, you don't just get the prospects. You get the salary cap space, which you can turn around and use the following year, adding just as much talent as you just gave up. But you get to keep the prospects.

There are always new FA available who you can spend money on. There isn't a comparable ability to add young talent. So, for example, let's say that the Marlins turnaround and spend their savings in FA (assuming they could lure FA, which seems unlikely...)



Escobar: $5
Mathis: $1.5
Cash: $4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Marlins: $10.5


Johnson: $13.75
Buehrle: $11
Reyes: $10
Bonifacio: $4 (arb)
Buck: $6
Cash: -$4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blue Jays: $40.75


Net: Blue Jays take on $30.25MM in salary from the Marlins in 2013

How could they spend $30MM? Well, I just read an analysis of Jim Bowden's FA predictions from last year and it turns out that he was quite accurate. So let's use his figures for this offseason to look at some packages of players the Marlins could theoretically get. Since we're just talking 2013, I'm going to take 10% off of Bowden's AAV since contracts are usually back-loaded.


Package 1
Josh Hamilton: $20MM
Dan Haren or Edwin Jackson: $10MM

Package 2
Zack Greinke: $18MM
Fransisco Liriano: $4MM
Joakim Soria: $4MM
Ryan Ludwick: $5MM

Package 3
Brandon McCarthy: $9MM
Shane Victorino: $8MM
Melky Cabrera: $7MM
Jonathan Broxton: $6MM

Now, take any one of those packages and add it to haul the Marlins got. Now who made out the best? I think we sometimes fail to account for just how valuable money is. Sure, teams could spend more if they wanted to, in theory. But we know that they functionally operate within a self-imposed cap. Getting both significant young talent AND significant "cap space" is a pretty nice haul. Unless the expensive players you're giving up are signed significantly below market rate (you can certainly argue that Reyes is), the money is basically worth just as much as the players. The prospects then are the price the other team has to pay for the guarantee of being able to spend that money on those specific players.

Considered differently, would the Blue Jays be a better team today if they had just signed Josh Hamilton and Dan Haren and kept all their young talent? Or Zack Greinke, Melky Cabrera and Ryan Madson?

Rick, I've made a similar point previously, but the fact of the matter is, there is no salary cap in baseball, like in hockey, where most teams spend to the cap and even the less desirable desinations can get UFA's to sign with them.

Toronto has to ask themselves how confident they were that they were going to be able to attract some of the premium free agents.

I think they answered that question by making this trade.

RedsManRick
11-14-2012, 07:14 PM
Rick, I've made a similar point previously, but the fact of the matter is, there is no salary cap in baseball, like in hockey, where most teams spend to the cap and even the less desirable desinations can get UFA's to sign with them.

Toronto has to ask themselves how confident they were that they were going to be able to attract some of the premium free agents.

I think they answered that question by making this trade.

I don't disagree with you. I'm just saying that they paid a significant price to turn that uncertainty into certainty.

westofyou
11-14-2012, 07:44 PM
http://joefrisaro.mlblogs.com/2012/11/14/marlins-not-intending-to-trade-stanton/



MIAMI — Major turnover is taking place with the Marlins, but a player not being shopped is Giancarlo Stanton.

The Marlins have no intention to trade their All-Star right fielder. According to a source, the slugger pretty much remains untouchable, at least for 2013.

Miami has Stanton under club control for one more season before he is eligible for arbitration. And he won’t have the necessary service time to become a free agent until after the 2016 season.

Currently, the Marlins are not in discussions with Stanton’s representatives regarding a long-term contract.

PuffyPig
11-14-2012, 08:50 PM
I don't disagree with you. I'm just saying that they paid a significant price to turn that uncertainty into certainty.

I think the point being made is that (1) if they had the money to spend (and that question has presumably been answered); and (2) they were quite confident they couldn't get a premium SS and two decent starters in FA for $30M, the lost "cap" space in the deal isn't that much of a price to pay.

lollipopcurve
11-14-2012, 08:50 PM
Currently, the Marlins are not in discussions with Stanton’s representatives regarding a long-term contract.

Currently, Stanton's representatives are not taking the Marlins' calls.

membengal
11-14-2012, 09:45 PM
I doubt they would considering the size of Chapman's contract.

the cuban aspect to Chapman and miami would mitigate, I would think

Wonderful Monds
11-14-2012, 10:16 PM
the cuban aspect to Chapman and miami would mitigate, I would think

Personally, I think the "Marlins need every Cuban" meme is the most played out in baseball. I honestly don't see why they would care *that* much.

Tom Servo
11-14-2012, 10:31 PM
Personally, I think the "Marlins need every Cuban" meme is the most played out in baseball. I honestly don't see why they would care *that* much.I would suggest Ozzie wouldn't have been fired after just one losing season had it not been for some comments relating to the whole Cuba thing, so it is kind of important. Obviously they are not going to trade for all hispanic players though, but Chapman is affordable, dominate, and the Cuban thing would be a nice bonus for Miami. It's all likely a moot point however.

blumj
11-15-2012, 10:58 AM
This is awful, Mark Buehrle has a pitbull and they're banned in Ontario.

http://nesn.com/2012/11/mark-buehrle-cant-bring-dog-to-toronto-due-to-pit-bull-ban-in-ontario/

westofyou
11-15-2012, 11:12 AM
This is awful, Mark Buehrle has a pitbull and they're banned in Ontario.

http://nesn.com/2012/11/mark-buehrle-cant-bring-dog-to-toronto-due-to-pit-bull-ban-in-ontario/

Punish the deed not the breed

savafan
11-15-2012, 10:22 PM
Marlins 2014 contractual obligations as of right now: $0

klw
11-16-2012, 03:11 PM
Marlins 2014 contractual obligations as of right now: $0

Hey that is about equal to the revenue their season ticket sales should bring in.

savafan
11-17-2012, 12:27 AM
Time to reinvent the team yet again

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y299/iceroo7/marlinsfiresails.jpg

Tom Servo
11-17-2012, 03:33 AM
Giancarlo Stanton was home in Westwood, Calif., on Tuesday when he heard the news that five of his teammates were being traded to the Toronto Blue Jays. His first thought hadn't changed by Thursday night.

"I do not like this at all," Stanton said. "This is the 'winning philosophy?' Then to say it's not about money? What is the motivation? There comes a breaking point. I know how I feel. I can't imagine how the city and the fans feel. They talked about that, a winning philosophy, and how they were building a winner to play in the new ballpark," Stanton said. "They talked about me and Jose. They talked about how they'd have Jose and [Emilio Bonifacio] and Hanley [Ramirez] in front of me and how they would go get a bat to protect me.

"Jose, Bonifacio, Hanley ... all three are gone now. I had people warn me that something like this could happen, but it runs against the competitive nature every athlete has, that nature that everything is about winning. This kind of thing is what gets talked about all the time around this team. Former Marlins come back and they warn us. It gets talked about during the stretch, in the clubhouse, after games, on the road. Again, I do not like this at all."

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20121116&content_id=40327450&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb



The Marlins do not award no-trade clauses, but club officials, while recruiting Reyes and Buerhle as free agents last offseason, assured both players that they would not be moved, sources said.

Buehrle knew the Marlins’ history of dumping high-priced players, and it concerned him, according to a friend. Team president David Samson, however, told both Buehrle and his wife, Jamie, that the team was committed to a long-term vision, sources said.

A source close to Reyes, asked if the shortstop also received verbal assurances from the Marlins that he would not be traded, responded, “The answer is yes. A vehement yes.”


http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/miami-marlins-told-jose-reyes-mark-buehrle-they-would-not-be-traded-broke-promises-111612

Benihana
11-17-2012, 06:15 PM
In his latest column, Buster Olney says "It would be a shock if the Marlins dont trade Stanton in the next 20 months."

Definitely the strongest terms we've heard since this whole thing started. So the question is, what is the BEST package you offer for Stanton?

I'll start: One each of
Chapman/Stephenson/Frazier
Cingrani/Corcino/Travieso (Once he can be moved)
Any hitting prospect in the minors other than Hamilton

(my guess is the Fish need pitching and not up-the-middle players after the blockbuster trade)

If the Fish choose Frazier, sign Youkilis to play 3B

Wonderful Monds
11-17-2012, 07:18 PM
In his latest column, Buster Olney says "It would be a shock if the Marlins dont trade Stanton in the next 20 months."

Definitely the strongest terms we've heard since this whole thing started. So the question is, what is the BEST package you offer for Stanton?

I'll start: One each of
Chapman/Stephenson/Frazier
Cingrani/Corcino/Travieso (Once he can be moved)
Any hitting prospect in the minors other than Hamilton

(my guess is the Fish need pitching and not up-the-middle players after the blockbuster trade)

If the Fish choose Frazier, sign Youkilis to play 3B

No no no to trading Chapman. Don't really want to trade Frazier either. Trading a major league player is a lateral move at this point. We need to add, not exchange.

I'm not down for trading Hamilton because he's basically a MLB player at this point. I would also prefer to not trade Stephenson, because he looks like he could be ridiculously good.

Aside from that, if we have the pieces, give them whatever they want. Corcino/Cingrani/Travieso/Leake, it's a lot of pitchers but that is the game's currency. Maybe that could do it. Maybe add a SS too? Maybe Didi since he would make less for longer?

Scrap Irony
11-17-2012, 07:29 PM
For Stanton?

I'd do Hamilton, Cingrani/ Corcino, and Frazier.

And that's a bunch to pay, but, if you're going to spend a bunch on someone, it'd be Stanton.

Benihana
11-17-2012, 07:30 PM
No no no to trading Chapman. Don't really want to trade Frazier either. Trading a major league player is a lateral move at this point. We need to add, not exchange.

I'm not down for trading Hamilton because he's basically a MLB player at this point. I would also prefer to not trade Stephenson, because he looks like he could be ridiculously good.

Aside from that, if we have the pieces, give them whatever they want. Corcino/Cingrani/Travieso/Leake, it's a lot of pitchers but that is the game's currency. Maybe that could do it. Maybe add a SS too? Maybe Didi since he would make less for longer?

No Chapman, no Frazier, no Hamilton, no Stephenson = No Stanton.

Plain and simple.

Why would a team trade their biggest asset if we're not willing to trade a top 10 asset?

Wonderful Monds
11-17-2012, 07:34 PM
No Chapman, no Frazier, no Hamilton, no Stephenson = No Stanton.

Plain and simple.

Why would a team trade their biggest asset if we're not willing to trade a top 10 asset?

So we should trade 4 of our top assets in exchange for 1? No way. That's a good way to tear apart a team that just won 97 games. It doesn't need a drastic makeover.

Moreover, Cingrani and Corcino are two of our top 5 prospects. Leake is a first round pedigree with upside and control years, and Travieso is a first rounder too. Didi is a potential starting SS to round it out.

We should do it but only if it makes sense. The prospects make sense. A contending team trading away multiple major contributors does not.

Benihana
11-17-2012, 07:38 PM
So we should trade 4 of our top assets in exchange for 1? No way. That's a good way to tear apart a team that just won 97 games. It doesn't need a drastic makeover.

Moreover, Cingrani and Corcino are two of our top 5 prospects. Leake is a first round pedigree with upside and control years, and Travieso is a first rounder too. Didi is a potential starting SS to round it out.

We should do it but only if it makes sense. The prospects make sense. A contending team trading away multiple major contributors does not.

Who said trade 4 of our top assets?

I said I'd trade ONE of Chapman/Stephenson/Frazier + 2 other pieces (Corcino + a minor league hitter other than Hamilton).

The Marlins just acquired three middle infielders from Toronto. I don't think they're looking for another SS, unless his name is Jurickson Profar (which the Rangers ESPN writer said the Rangers should be willing to do- just to put things into perspective as far as Stanton's value).

Wonderful Monds
11-17-2012, 07:47 PM
Who said trade 4 of our top assets?

I said I'd trade ONE of Chapman/Stephenson/Frazier + 2 other pieces (Corcino + a minor league hitter other than Hamilton).

The Marlins just acquired three middle infielders from Toronto. I don't think they're looking for another SS, unless his name is Jurickson Profar (which the Rangers ESPN writer said the Rangers should be willing to do- just to put things into perspective as far as Stanton's value).

I missed the one each part of that post, my bad. Still, trading Chapman is the worst idea along with trading Bailey that has hooked on with some degree of curious popularity with a fair amount of RZers. Chapman was arguably our MVP. Do not trade him.

Anyway, maybe they don't want Didi. OK, that's fine. But a package of 3 legitimate top prospect SP, 1 of whom is a first round pick, and a fellow former first round pick MLB SP with upside and years left is not a slouch of an offer.

Dom Heffner
11-18-2012, 05:58 AM
I would trade Chapman for Stanton in a heartbeat.

thatcoolguy_22
11-18-2012, 06:21 AM
I would trade Chapman for Stanton in a heartbeat.

I would throw in Hamilton as well plus some pitching lottery prospect types.

23 year old that already has 1500 PA under his belt and last year put up a line of .290/.361/.608 with 37 HR. Add in 4 years left of control and he is exactly the type of player you trade your best trade chips for.

Sabo Fan
11-18-2012, 11:36 AM
Hamilton, Leake, & Cingrani should get the conversation going. I'd do that plus a couple lottery-ticket guys and not look back. You don't pass up the opportunity to get a talent like Stanton when all it costs you are prospects and 4/5 starters. I like Hamilton, but one leg injury and his value tanks. Cash him in. Now.

Degenerate39
11-18-2012, 11:42 AM
Hamilton, Stephenson, Leake, and Corcino if necessary

lollipopcurve
11-18-2012, 11:42 AM
The competition for Stanton would be outrageous. The only thing that would separate a Reds offer from any other team's would be Chapman -- the most celebrated Cuban player and hardest thrower on the planet. In Miami, that plays. That's the deal, and the only deal, the Reds could make, IMO.

Benihana
11-18-2012, 01:23 PM
The competition for Stanton would be outrageous. The only thing that would separate a Reds offer from any other team's would be Chapman -- the most celebrated Cuban player and hardest thrower on the planet. In Miami, that plays. That's the deal, and the only deal, the Reds could make, IMO.

Yep, agreed.

REDREAD
11-19-2012, 11:13 AM
I'm not sure the Marlins want Chapman's contract though.

I'd be willing to back up the truck for Stanton, but I would really prefer to keep Frasier though. If Frasier is traded, we're going to likely end up with a Cairo type guy playing 3b every day. Probably still a net gain, but there'd be a big dropoff at 3b.. Decent 3b are hard to find.

Benihana
11-19-2012, 12:19 PM
I'm not sure the Marlins want Chapman's contract though.

Then let them choose Stephenson or Frazier.


I'd be willing to back up the truck for Stanton, but I would really prefer to keep Frasier though. If Frasier is traded, we're going to likely end up with a Cairo type guy playing 3b every day. Probably still a net gain, but there'd be a big dropoff at 3b.. Decent 3b are hard to find.

Reds would still conceivably have room to sign one short-term FA. Kevin Youkilis would be my choice.

2B Phillips
3B Youkilis
1B Votto
LF Stanton
RF Bruce
C Mesigan
SS Cozart
CF Stubbs/LHH (Sizemore?)

World Series.

Tom Servo
11-19-2012, 03:04 PM
Apparently Mike Hargrove is a candidate for the Toronto managerial job, a much better choice than any of the other names floated.

REDREAD
11-19-2012, 03:08 PM
Reds would still conceivably have room to sign one short-term FA. Kevin Youkilis would be my choice.
.

True.. If push came to shove, I would certainly give up Frasier for Stanton.

I would actually give them Stephenson or any minor league pitcher before Chapman if possible.

PuffyPig
11-19-2012, 03:21 PM
Then let them choose Stephenson or Frazier.



Reds would still conceivably have room to sign one short-term FA. Kevin Youkilis would be my choice.

2B Phillips
3B Youkilis
1B Votto
LF Stanton
RF Bruce
C Mesigan
SS Cozart
CF Stubbs/LHH (Sizemore?)

World Series.

A very good team certainly increases your chances of making the playoffs, but nothing guarantees making the world series.

Tom Servo
11-20-2012, 04:56 AM
So the Jays are rehiring John Gibbons, he of "this is a sinking ship" incident with Shea Hillenbrand and fighting Ted Lilly in the clubhouse hallway fame.

Dan
11-20-2012, 07:50 AM
The competition for Stanton would be outrageous. The only thing that would separate a Reds offer from any other team's would be Chapman -- the most celebrated Cuban player and hardest thrower on the planet. In Miami, that plays. That's the deal, and the only deal, the Reds could make, IMO.

Although I'd prefer not to deal Chapman at this point, Stanton is probably one of the few players that if the other team said Chapman I wouldn't balk.

Mario-Rijo
11-21-2012, 05:17 AM
Wonder if the Jays would have any interest in dealing Bonafacio? Bonafacio to me is the perfect fit for alot of what ails the Reds.

Sent from my MB865 using Tapatalk 2

Scrap Irony
11-21-2012, 09:52 AM
Bonifacio looks to be their starting 2B, so he's not likely to be dealt.

However, both Anthony Gose and Moises Sierra are, right now, on the outside looking in. I'm guessing both are going to be in Toronto quite quickly, so a deal for Colby Rasmus makes sense.

He's right now a step down from Bonifacio, but could really provide some great numbers if he can rekindle the magic he had in 2010. I could see a Logan Ondrusek/ Drew Stubbs for Rasmus swap.

And I'd do that, for sure.

camisadelgolf
11-21-2012, 10:37 AM
Bonifacio looks to be their starting 2B, so he's not likely to be dealt.

However, both Anthony Gose and Moises Sierra are, right now, on the outside looking in. I'm guessing both are going to be in Toronto quite quickly, so a deal for Colby Rasmus makes sense.
Yeah, Bonifacio isn't going anywhere. It's not like he was an all-out salary dump as he had one of the most manageable contracts of all the players the Marlins traded. But I have more faith in Denis Phipps than Moises Sierra. Although it should be interesting to see what happens with Gose though.

mth123
11-21-2012, 09:36 PM
Bonifacio looks to be their starting 2B, so he's not likely to be dealt.

However, both Anthony Gose and Moises Sierra are, right now, on the outside looking in. I'm guessing both are going to be in Toronto quite quickly, so a deal for Colby Rasmus makes sense.

He's right now a step down from Bonifacio, but could really provide some great numbers if he can rekindle the magic he had in 2010. I could see a Logan Ondrusek/ Drew Stubbs for Rasmus swap.

And I'd do that, for sure.

Why in the world would the Jays deal Rasmus for Ondrusek and Stubbs? I'd just as soon cut a guy than get those two back. I get the logic for the Jays dealing Rasmus, but I'm sure they could get a better deal than that from just about any of the 28 other teams.

Mario-Rijo
11-22-2012, 01:11 AM
Why in the world would the Jays deal Rasmus for Ondrusek and Stubbs? I'd just as soon cut a guy than get those two back. I get the logic for the Jays dealing Rasmus, but I'm sure they could get a better deal than that from just about any of the 28 other teams.

Perhaps and i'm just throwing this out there but perhaps the Jays may see some worth in Ondrusek like Philly did at midseason. And as far as Stubbs goes they might think he could be a their next Bautista or EE project. I don't doubt for a second that Victorino for Ondrusek was the deal the Reds passed on considering the deal that was eventually made for Victorino.

All that said Bonafacio is the right target for the Reds and the Jays have Kelly johnson still, perhaps they can be persuaded to roll the dice in that area for an improvement elsewhere.

Sent from my MB865 using Tapatalk 2

mth123
11-22-2012, 04:13 AM
Perhaps and i'm just throwing this out there but perhaps the Jays may see some worth in Ondrusek like Philly did at midseason. And as far as Stubbs goes they might think he could be a their next Bautista or EE project. I don't doubt for a second that Victorino for Ondrusek was the deal the Reds passed on considering the deal that was eventually made for Victorino.

All that said Bonafacio is the right target for the Reds and the Jays have Kelly johnson still, perhaps they can be persuaded to roll the dice in that area for an improvement elsewhere.

Sent from my MB865 using Tapatalk 2

Even if it was Ondrusek for Victorino, that was about dumping money for Philly. It wouldn't be the same with Rasmus.

Johnson is a Free Agent. I doubt that that the Jays have any intention of dealing Bonafacio.

Plus Plus
11-22-2012, 09:36 AM
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/mike-berardino-blog/sfl-agent-for-mark-buehrle-issues-a-statement-directed-at-miami-marlins-20121121,0,2511400.story


“I’m upset with how things turned out in Miami,” Buehrle said. “Just like the fans in South Florida, I was lied to on multiple occasions. But I’m putting it behind me and looking forward to moving on with my career.”


“Throughout the recruiting process, the Marlins made repeated assurances about their long-term commitment to Mark and his family and their long-term commitment to building a winning tradition of Marlins baseball in the new stadium. This was demonstrated by their already completed signings of Ozzie, Heath Bell and Jose Reyes.

“At the same time, given the Marlins’ history, we were all certainly aware of and voiced concern about the lack of no-trade protection. This is unquestionably a business, and signing with the Marlins was a calculated risk. Mark held up his end of the bargain; unfortunately, the same can't be said of the Marlins.”

PuffyPig
11-22-2012, 03:25 PM
There is a reason why the Marlins refused to give a no trade clause. No one forced Reyes et al to sign.

CySeymour
11-22-2012, 05:51 PM
There is a reason why the Marlins refused to give a no trade clause. No one forced Reyes et al to sign.

Exactly. Sure, the Marlins may have said they had no intention to trade them, in the end there was nothing stopping them from changing there mind. Buerhle has been around the game long enough to know that unless there is a no trade contract, you could very well be traded.

Patrick Bateman
11-22-2012, 06:13 PM
At the same time, it's awful business to tell the player that there is absolutely no intent to trade the player, and then do so 1 year into the deal. That is not honest. Does not sound like there was situation that they explained if they had an awful year they would look to deal these players. Obviously they would not want to say that because it would make the lack of a no trade deal less attractive.

The Marlins set the tone for the future, and I except that there shenanigans will be a pretty big roadblock in attracting marquee playersa (whether developed in house) or not to long term deals.

Brutus
11-22-2012, 06:53 PM
At the same time, it's awful business to tell the player that there is absolutely no intent to trade the player, and then do so 1 year into the deal. That is not honest. Does not sound like there was situation that they explained if they had an awful year they would look to deal these players. Obviously they would not want to say that because it would make the lack of a no trade deal less attractive.

The Marlins set the tone for the future, and I except that there shenanigans will be a pretty big roadblock in attracting marquee playersa (whether developed in house) or not to long term deals.

That's why you get it in writing. If these guys didn't want to be traded, they should have insisted on a no-trade clause. Players should know enough in this day and age not to take clubs at their word. Even if someone is honest, all it takes is a change of ownership or change of management with a different opinion and they could still be moved without anyone having lied.

Patrick Bateman
11-22-2012, 07:33 PM
That's why you get it in writing. If these guys didn't want to be traded, they should have insisted on a no-trade clause. Players should know enough in this day and age not to take clubs at their word. Even if someone is honest, all it takes is a change of ownership or change of management with a different opinion and they could still be moved without anyone having lied.

I'm not saying that the players should not have been ready for this situation.

I'm just saying that the Marlins, from a business perspective are not going to get very far by misleading players. If they want to be a reasonable destination for talent, and I would assume any team would want to be, this behavior is not going to win anyone over. I bet most players see them as untrustworthy, and a joke.

Nonetheless, you are right, the players only have so much to complain about. If being traded meant so much, presumably they would have been willing to take less dollars to sign with a different team willing to give the NTC. The dollars won out, so hard to feel too sorry.

CySeymour
11-22-2012, 09:01 PM
I agree with you, Patrick. I'm just saying its happened enough in pro sports that players shouldn't be too surprised when it happens. Didn't Jimbo promise Shaw he wouldn't trade him then traded him to the Dodgers?

Joseph
11-22-2012, 10:46 PM
I agree with you, Patrick. I'm just saying its happened enough in pro sports that players shouldn't be too surprised when it happens. Didn't Jimbo promise Shaw he wouldn't trade him then traded him to the Dodgers?

Yup, about 15 minutes later.

kaldaniels
11-22-2012, 11:05 PM
Marlins did a crummy thing here. Good luck landing free agents without paying a hefty premium in the future. Both on account of their lying and on their "blow-it-up" mentality.

But players need to be on top of things. If Mark didn't want to play in Toronto, the onus is on him to sign with a team offering a no-trade, not just take some snake-oil salesman word for it.

Vottomatic
11-23-2012, 11:17 AM
These shenanigans by the Marlins have pretty much doomed their franchise to eternal mediocrity or worse, IMHO. Good luck getting any quality free agent to sign there from here on out. Good luck extending Stanton to a contract now, like the Reds did Bruce/Cueto.

If I'm Stanton, I demand a trade now.

*BaseClogger*
11-23-2012, 03:16 PM
These shenanigans by the Marlins have pretty much doomed their franchise to eternal mediocrity or worse, IMHO. Good luck getting any quality free agent to sign there from here on out. Good luck extending Stanton to a contract now, like the Reds did Bruce/Cueto.

If I'm Stanton, I demand a trade now.

Kinda like how it doomed then after the firesale in 1997?

Vottomatic
11-23-2012, 03:36 PM
Kinda like how it doomed then after the firesale in 1997?

They aren't coming off a World Series title this time.

savafan
11-23-2012, 06:55 PM
They aren't coming off a World Series title this time.

And they didn't just con the taxpayers into paying for a brand new stadium with the promise of the team being competitive.

cincrazy
11-28-2012, 07:55 PM
Kinda like how it doomed then after the firesale in 1997?

Totally different circumstances. This is the THIRD time this has happened. They're trying to draw fans to that team that in the past have shunned them. Yes, they've lucked their way into a few world titles. Doesn't change the fact that they've alienated and killed most of their fanbase. They can't build a bond with any of their players. We've got Votto, Bruce, Cueto, Latos, Chapman, Phillips, etc. The Reds can plaster those faces all over the city and say Come watch them play! And you know what? They'll be around a long, long time. Can the Marlins do that with ANYONE? Even Stanton? Really hurts them in marketing and in staying credible.