SI: Beinfest Game's 4th Best GM....Errr...President of BBO

[Swifty]

The criticism is the clock was running for guys that looked like crap. LA's guys had their clocks running and looked like they were capable (Loney) with all-star upside (Kemp, Billingsley). That's the kind of trade you make for a guy that falls out of bed and hits .320, you don't go risk/reward upside because a player that good MUST bring back a certainty. That isn't to suggest all the players need to be guarantees but if given the choice you need to be risk averse.

[Bobbob1313]

I don't see how Maybin and Miller didn't look like they had all star potential at the time. I mean, you don't get ranked in the top 10 of all prospects in baseball without having all star potential. And seeing as how Maybin's not going to be arbitration eligible until 2012 (Lou or Nny correct me if I'm wrong), his clock was hardly running.

I realize you are basing this "potential" on the 74 innings Miller had thrown at the major league level and Cameron Maybin's 53 PA callup, of course, but that's silly, so I'm going to pretend you didn't do that.

Again, we still don't know that the Dodgers offered that in the offseason. What if they came back in the offseason and said "You know what, we've got two potential all stars and a solid everyday 1B, we don't think we want to give that all up. We'll do Billingsley and Kemp, but not Loney." At the time, that's no better than the Miller/Maybin package, unless you really put that much stock into a couple of hundred PAs.

We simply don't know what else they could have gotten. You will always have an advantage because you can say "We could have gotten the entire world instead of what the Tigers gave us", but you continue to ignore that Cameron Maybin and Andrew Miller were, at the time, far more highly thought of than anyone the Dodgers were rumored to offer, and we don't know what combination of guys they ultimately did offer.

I maintain that in the offseason, very few teams had the combination of talent and willingness to spend that the Tigers did. Maybe the Dodgers, maybe the Angels, and that's about it. And since we don't know what they actually offered, this conversation is kind of tough. You're always going to maintain that the Marlins should have gotten more, but they got a shitload of value.

It was the equivalent of getting Evan Longoria and David Price, basically. They had that kind of value.

[lou]

2013. He's not going to make Super2 after 2011. He'll be at 2.129 and miss it by 10-20 days.

[Bobbob1313]

So we have 3 full seasons of him from right now. I'd wager that's far more valuable than 2 seasons of minimum salary for Kemp that end right now. The possibility of having Maybin making the minimum for the first big season in the ballpark when payroll expands cannot be overstated. That is huge, though obviously not what they were probably looking at when making the trade, so I'm not sure it matters in this discussion.

The point is, his clock was not really running.

[Swifty]

I maintain at the point we could have/should have done a lot better. Hell, this happened when we all hung out at idiotville, you can pull up how god damn opposed to it I was, how I thought Maybin was shit then and the only chance of a perennial all-star player rested in Andrew Miller. Two years later, I'm not going to say I'm really all that incorrect. You can say you were beating off to the return we got, I wasn't then, I'm not now. If this is judged purely on the past, I'm not switching boat midstream like you guys and hedging your bets now saying "well, it's the best we could have done" far off your tune of "we fucking fleeced 'em, Cam's awesome!"

[lou]

I maintain at the point we could have/should have done a lot better. Hell, this happened when we all hung out at idiotville, you can pull up how god damn opposed to it I was, how I thought Maybin was shit then and the only chance of a perennial all-star player rested in Andrew Miller. Two years later, I'm not going to say I'm really all that incorrect. You can say you were beating off to the return we got, I wasn't then, I'm not now. If this is judged purely on the past, I'm not switching boat midstream like you guys and hedging your bets now saying "well, it's the best we could have done" far off your tune of "we fucking fleeced 'em, Cam's awesome!"

Why are you so militant about this. Yes, we know you hated the trade day 1. Yes, we all know compared to "Miguel Cabrera," this trade has not produced results that can remotely compensate his performance (we'll just ignore the $152 million he got for arguments sake).

But who is changing on the past? I liked this trade and thought it was fine value wise when it happened. If we got a # 2 SP and a top CF out of this, we did well and that's what all the projections said. If it was Billings/Kemp, or Kendrick/Adenhart. Whatever. You're getting the package back in any way of up the middle starter/SP, and clearly in any scenario, one package will ultimately be better than another 5 years down the road. You're harping on something that's irrelevant. Who cares, the value was there even if it didn't pan out and that's what's important in viewing the PROCESS of the trade.

You know what's fucking up, not getting ANYONE projectionable, like Carlos Gomez, Phil Humber, Kevin Mulvey and Deolis Guerra. And then, unlike the Marlins where there are rumors of other packages, this is easily findable: In early December, the Yankees had offered a package built around pitcher Phil Hughes and center fielder Melky Cabrera, and the Red Sox talked about two separate deals, one built around left-hander Jon Lester and the other around center fielder Jacoby Ellsbury, with pitcher Justin Masterson and infielder Jed Lowrie prominently involved.

I mean WOW what a fuck up. THAT's where I draw the line. That wasn't Olsen with a horrible flyball rate, lowering K/9, and attitude problems, or Hammer with a shitty back and no guarantees either would be good where you could only dump them for only Bonifacio and a nice A prospect in Smolinski. That was Johan Fucking Santana and they took that crap we wouldn't take for fucking Cantu. Beinfest has never been that bad and will never be that bad. I think we can all agree to that.

Be upset with the package, Be pissed, whatever. The Marlins still got two immensely talented prospects so the value was there at the time of the trade. Are we not counting the Willis implosion at all? He was horrible in 2007 and it's great we got out before rock bottom hit. It's just going to suck for us if it doesn't work out, but I really just don't see how you can slam them no matter how great Cabrera is. Maybe we lose even if Miller/Maybin hit their 80% projections each (which would be awesome) because Cabrera is that good, but we got value back to keep harping on it.

[Swifty]

Maybe I'm really slow, but it doesn't matter one iota what the Twins did with Santana to evaluate the Cabrera trade. Are you just doing this to say we could have done worse. I mean WOW you think? Maybe we could have just asked Dombrowski to punch us in the stomach and leave the money on the dresser. Would that have sufficed lou? Maybe take a shit in a bag and leave it on our doorstep. NO FUCKING KIDDING WE COULD HAVE DONE WORSE.

But, unlike your fantasy where everyone farts rainbows, 3 years from now looks like fucking heaven and you sleep on a bed of flower petals and dew drops, being not bad does not mean you are good, it just means you are not bad, just like could have done worse does not mean you did well. Yes, we could have done worse, and, unequivocally, we should have done a lot fucking better.

To bring this conversation full circle, since we've long beaten the horse to death on Maybin, Beinfest being not bad, could have done worse, does not make him an irreplaceable genius or good, it just means he's not bad. Except for you, where I'm pretty sure 3 years from whenever now is always looks like Avatar, I think most people would likely agree.

[Todd]

Yes, I believe he does more good than bad.

Boner is on him, to be sure. He sucks, and he should have replaced him way earlier. We could have made it to the playoffs if he traded for NJ in May.

But is it Larry Beinfest's fault that Jorge Julio had 9.1 crap innings with us sandwiched between 44 innings of 3.83 ERA in Zona beforehand and 52.2 innings of 3.93 ERA in Colorado afterward?

Jorge Julio sucked for us, but I'm not sure that can be put on Beinfest. He was solid in the time surrounding his time with us and just shit all over himself for the equivalent of one full game with us. How much can you put of that on Beinfest? He stuck with him for all of two weeks as the closer, that's not really a "he's our guy" situation on the Bonifacio level.


You can't put Julio on him completely and then not give credit for Uggla, Cody, Cantu, Kiko, Dan Meyer, etc. He's done more good than bad for us, absolutely.

Julio's track record before going to Arizona was fairly poor, just to point out.

[Bobbob1313]

I don't think I thought we fleeced them, but I thought we got as fair value as possible for the deal.

I thought, and still think, that Cameron Maybin is going to be a very good player. I see absolutely no reason to have thought he was shit two years ago, and you haven't been proven right.

I looked back and while I can't find my specific reaction to the deal, I would imagine it was something along the lines of "We got some really cool prospects. Sucks Cabrera has to leave, but it's probably best for everyone. A couple more years in south Florida and he likely would have turned into an Arepa."

I was just as high on Maybin the day we got him as I am today. I think he will easily become one of the top CFers in the game before long. No, he isn't cabrera and yes, the deal looks bad in hindsight. But it was a buttload of talent at the time and that talent isn't yet done developing. It's neither the worst nor the best haul for a major talent in recent memory. But at the time, I'm not sure there was anything that was definitely better.
--------------------
I'm trying to think back on rumored deals for Willis and/or Cabrera at the time.

I remember:

Willis for Melky and some mediocre relief prospect
Cabrera for Kemp, Loney, and Billingsley, but frankly my "memory" of this is just that nny's mentioned it a bunch of times, so it's as accurate as that.

Ramp, what was the Angel's offer that "for sure" was better?

I just think we keep saying he "should have done better" (with more "fucks" thrown in when Swift says it), but if we're taking what we know now about people's development out, what were the better deals? There might have been some comparable deals, but at the time, I don't think Maybin and Miller (top 10 prospects in baseball, comparable to getting Evan Longoria and David Price, in terms of how highly regarded they were) plus four guys who could pan out can be viewed from
that time as a terrible deal.

Maybe I'm wrong. Do we know what the Dodgers or Angels offered in the offseason? I really don't remember anyone else being serious players for Cabrera at the time. Was te rumored Dodgers deal only for the deadline?
--------------------
Also, Swift, to hear you talk about him, he's far worse than "not bad". You make it sound like he's a bumbling fool who blindly stumbles into the only pieces of value he's ever had. Maybe that's your shtick and you intentionally overexagerate your criticisms for humor or something, but to "bring it full circle" and settle on "Hes not bad" is severely misrepresenting the argument you've laid out in this thread.

[lou]

Maybe I'm really slow, but it doesn't matter one iota what the Twins did with Santana to evaluate the Cabrera trade. Are you just doing this to say we could have done worse. I mean WOW you think? Maybe we could have just asked Dombrowski to punch us in the stomach and leave the money on the dresser. Would that have sufficed lou? Maybe take a shit in a bag and leave it on our doorstep. NO FUCKING KIDDING WE COULD HAVE DONE WORSE.

But, unlike your fantasy where everyone farts rainbows, 3 years from now looks like fucking heaven and you sleep on a bed of flower petals and dew drops, being not bad does not mean you are good, it just means you are not bad, just like could have done worse does not mean you did well. Yes, we could have done worse, and, unequivocally, we should have done a lot fucking better.

To bring this conversation full circle, since we've long beaten the horse to death on Maybin, Beinfest being not bad, could have done worse, does not make him an irreplaceable genius or good, it just means he's not bad. Except for you, where I'm pretty sure 3 years from whenever now is always looks like Avatar, I think most people would likely agree.

It's a comparable analogy to a superstar. You are so deadset against this I'm trying to reason with you, but if you don't want to listen and huff and puff with your sluttiest dress on, so be it. When I click this http://www.baseballamerica.com/today...007/26983.html, I see this

1. Daisuke Matsuzaka, rhp, Red Sox
2. Alex Gordon, 3b, Royals
3. Delmon Young, of, Devil
4. Philip Hughes, rhp, Yankees
5. Homer Bailey, rhp, Reds
6. Cameron Maybin, of, Tigers
7. Evan Longoria, 3b, Devil Rays
8. Brandon Wood, ss, Angels
9. Justin Upton, of, Diamondbacks
10. Andrew Miller, lhp, Tigers

Value. You can cry all you want about it. The best people in the industry all saw value. People smarter than all of us, and I'm intelligent enough to defer to their expertise. This trade may not have/will work out for us (since I mean, Maybin turns 23 in a few weeks and Miller isn't that much older), but it is what it is.

2003

1. Mark Teixeira, 3b, Rangers
2. Rocco Baldelli, of, Devil Rays
3. Jose Reyes, ss, Mets
4. Joe Mauer, c, Twins
5. Jesse Foppert, rhp, Giants
6. Jose Contreras, rhp, Yankees
7. Brandon Phillips, 2b/ss, Indians
8. Hideki Matsui, of, Yankees
9. Gavin Floyd, rhp, Phillies
10. Francisco Rodriguez, rhp, Angels
11. Scott Kazmir, lhp, Mets
12. Miguel Cabrera, 3b, Marlins

You're talking the same level of prospect Cabrera once was. Ripping this is pretty stupid. Yea, Cabrera is fucking amazing and turned out better than everyone. But every player has their price and two top 10s while dumping a declining Willis? That's solid with the reasonable level of prospects they got behind them. I mean it's been said, but Cruz and Trahern were in there top 10. The Marlins did not embarrass themselves in that trade.

Also, where's the fucking fantasy? We have the best building block in baseball at SS signed for years. We have a top 10-15 SP in baseball (if not better) signed for 4 years. We have the rookie of the year. We have an incredibly high number of projectable pre-prime above average players in Nolasco, Volstad, Stanton, Morrison, West, Dominguez, etc. We have a ton of in house roll players. We have assets to trade. We have clear books. What's not to like about all of that?

I mean, have you watched this team the last few years? We had total meltdown performances, and they won 87. How are you NOT optimistic? They routinely exceed all expectations and baseball is not completely outcome determinative to a world series or bust. Teams can have good years and not take the main prize. They play 162 games. I know I thought we were going to contend seriously "now," but how the hell am I (or Beinfest) to account for having to deal Cabrera because ownership won't pay because of constant stadium delays, and I don't know, having all of your starters blow out their arms under Girardi. The Marlins have a PLAN even if you don't see it. I wouldn't say this if I was an Astros fan. Or a Royals fan. I'd be pissed and frustrated the club is controlled by idiots. But the Marlins are one of the few teams in baseball that consistently have a plan and course of action that isn't idiotic, and I'm sorry if I'm a fan of the team and I generally agree with what's going on. Maybe they have to take a step back with Cabrera, to eventually take two steps forward but that's fucking life. We're not a large market team. Need I remind you, you perennially pick this team to not just be under .500, but to lose 100 games, and they go over .500. Why are you even here?

Concerning "full circle," I think you need to follow baseball a little bit more and see what other GM's are doing with their player acquisitions before throwing Beinfest under the bus and declaring him simply and nonchalantly "not bad." He is far from neutral. Far far far. He does so much more good than bad it's not even funny and you haven't been able to defeat that this entire thread. By your level of criticism, I don't think you'd give passing marks to any GM in baseball over a 7 year stretch of years.

Seriously. Get over yourself. I'm happy you hate the Cabrera trade, but you don't need to go on a rampage vendetta because Beinfest isn't flawless. That trade is not as bad as you characterize it even if it is now a negative, and your other complaints are nominal at best and can be deflected away with simple salary and other concerns. But as I've said before, MAYBE you'll be right and Beinfest just signed that extension to 2015 to keep nickel and dimeing and wanting to trade all Josh Johnson level players after their 5th year of service time because that's how he thinks you win. That makes perfect sense.

Go be a Mets fan. Misery loves company.

[Swifty]

lou, what's troubling is that you'll tell sports writers they should have been aborted, yet when you cannot do anything to defend your sycophantic and absurdly optimistic ways you defer to the same profession who now feature a preponderance of "people smarter than you." It's even more troubling that most intelligent people (whether they are "smarter than you" or not) realize what they have in a sportswriter: opinion. Additionally, what intelligent people realize, is that opinions are just that, opinions. However, this is of course something you struggle with. It is your opinion that we're winning the 2012 pennant, just like it was your opinion we won the 2009 and 2010 World Series (I'll see you on opening day for the banner ceremony!). Again, given your track record, it's not surprising that opinions about a hypothetical future (so long as there are lollipops and rainbows in that future) really aren't opinions at all, they're absolutely indisputable presentations of fact.

The other thing that's problematic is that you are making a huge and fallacious assumption: namely, that baseball front offices put as much weight into baseball america as you as a fan do.

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but you really are actively demonstrating these guys are smarter than you. Do NFL teams run their big board based on Mel Kiper? Do MLB teams not employ scouts? Wait, they do...and what do they pay those scouts for? To scout players! Really? What does that entail? Evaluating a player's future? You don't say! Doesn't baseball-america provide the same service all for the low low price of $29.99? I just can't imagine that a baseball team that has a scouting budget would even bother with advance scouts and regional scouts when baseball america does it all for them for under $30. Hell, they even do the draft too. Maybe you should tell the Marlins they're doing it all wrong and can save assloads of cash, too.

So, lou, to say that because BA valued them this highly does not mean two things: (1) They were right and (2) That was the prevailing opinion among MLB front offices. That is too tremendous of a conclusion to make, but one I'm sure you're happy to have believed given that it was a future full of farting out rainbows.

[Party]

Top 10 lists are groupthink.

[Bobbob1313]

The point of pointing out that they are ranked highly is that they are generally thought of highly.

Would you rather I pull out quotes from scouts that say that the two of them had all star potential? There's tons of those too.

The point is that everyone but you thought it was good value at the time. That miller has busted (way too early to say on Maybin) doesn't mean you were right and everyone else was wrong.


As an aside, I like that swift continually points out that Lou is an eternal optimist while ignoring that he is the mirror image of Lou. You can't honestly believe that you aren't just as far to an extreme as he is.

[Swifty]

Bobby, I thought we were getting back pennies on the dollar (time has shown, we did) I thought we'd be lucky to salvage one above average ML player (evidently, we will, and we're still a long ways away from that)...and I'm wrong?

That's fun.
--------------------
And as for me being the mirror image of lou, that would involve not believing there is a tomorrow, that 3 years from "now" is filled with hellfire and brimstone and that my farts don't smell like roses (ok, well, 1/3).

I think I'm far more measured than any of the former Maybin fan-club. I realize I'm negative, but that isn't to say that I am being unreasonable. I've maintained consistently that I think we're the best team in that second tier of NL teams for this year, and that all we need is a legitimate #3 to come in or emerge for us to have 90ish win potential. I mean, maybe lou thinks we're good for 162-0 so then I can kind of sort of be a mirror image to him, but the real big difference between lou and me isn't the absence of sunshine and rainbows, it's that I realize how damn hard it is for a player to "make it." I realize that teams don't luck into 90 wins and I certainly realize that a best case scenario for a player (which is what most, if not all, scouting reports are) is far from an inevitability.

[Bobbob1313]

You are playing the result on this while simultaneously not allowing anyone to play the result for Hanley, Uggla, Cody, Cantu, etc. Can't have it both ways.

It was good value at the time. Great, you thought it wasn't. That doesn't really matter. You are one person. If everyone else in the world thought it was good value (or as good value as you can possibly get for him), it probably was. The fact that it hasn't panned out doesn't change the reality of the deal at the time. The general consensus was that it was a great package.

I've said it like three times, but we can either judge moves on how they work out (hanley is a huge win, cabrera a huge loss) or we can judge them by the context of when they were made (the Cabrera trade was better value than the Beckett one.) You can't judge some by the outcome and others by the context of the time, and yet that is what is happening in this thread.