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

[Party]

No one is disputing you.

I don't dispute that.

[Fritz]

Fip eats chicken fingers.

[Ramp]

no one is disputing that

[Party]

No one is disputing you.

[Ramp]

im indisputable

[Party]

No one is disputing that.

[lou]

My question regarding it though is if he's so good at the minor moves, why isn't he so good at the major moves? Since he has been rather bad at major moves, and an organization will make so many minor moves that some are bound to work out, that it is instead an indication he's been "lucky" with the minor moves?

You could certainly make the other argument instead that he hasn't made many major moves, so that instead that is the small sample size and luck factored one. My only issue with that is that his "minor" moves, the guys who work out are way down on the list and in most cases take years to actually get starting gigs while his "first choices" get infinite chances to suck ass. More or less the "Beinfest guys" issues.

First, and this is the smaller point, I'd say your/swift characterization of "guys down the list" is a bit off. Yes, I can agree Pokey/Castillo/Julio/etc were considered "Option A" at a position, and ultimately "Option B" with Uggla/Cantu/Constant stream of relievers proved to be the better option. But why does that matter at all? The bottomline is, talent was brought into the organization and the better play ultimately won the playing time. All of these guys are retreads, so does it matter one is expected to "suck less" than another, and Beinfest is ultimately wrong about which guy is more likely to succeed? I don't think it matters where on the "list" the guy is, because performance really dictates what happens with this franchise. The bottomline is we are getting serious production here.

To the main point here, in general Beinfest's major moves. I wouldn't say he hasn't made any, but here is what I see as major:

1. Preston Wilson/Charles Johnson/Mike Hampton/Juan Pierre Insanity - Fucking Brilliant. We can bag on JP all day, but he was awesome 2003-04.
2. Dontrelle/Clement - Awesome
3. Pudge Free Agency - Awesome
4. Jack McKeon Hiring - Awesome
5. Urbina - Awesome. I don't care that Gonzalez is amazing. The fact is this is exactly what the team needed and even if it overpaid, it worked. I hate being outcome determinative about things, but when you beat the Yankees for a world series, that cures all wrongs.
6. D. Lee/Choi - Not awesome
6a. Lowell 4 years, $32 million (forgot this is in initial list why the number is different) - I'm on the fence. Lowell was a very productive, and popular, guy on the team so I can understand them keeping him. I'm going to say neutral. This didn't "hurt" the franchise. And I'm not going to play the hypothetical game where we could have used the money elsewhere. This was a fine longterm contract. Who knew he was going to be like that in 2005.
7. LoDuca/Penny/Mota/Encarnacion/Choi - I hated this move when it happened, and still today
8. Delgado signing - Awesome.
9. Beckett/Hanley/Anibal/Lowell - Awesome
10. Pierre/Nolasco/Pinto/Mitre - Awesome
11. Delgado/Jacobs/Petit - Neutral. If it's true we passed Milledge, I hate this so freaking much, but we did clear salary and Jacobs was useful for a few years. This didn't hurt us like D. Lee/Penny trades
12. Cabrera/Willis/Maybin/Miller - Not awesome, and that goes to "not buying out Cabrera's arbitration," versus what we got back. I can understand this trade even if it has not yet worked out, but it should just have never come down to this.
13. 6 year Contract for Hanley - Awesome
14. 4 year Contract for Johnson - Awesome

I think that's a fair assessment of all the BIG things the franchise has done under him. Maybe McKeon is a cheap one I'm throwing in there to skew the stats, but he did turn around a what 11-31 club into the best team in baseball. I see the MAJOR moves as rather dominating. Yea, there are some bum trades here, but this is clearly "more good than bad." I think he takes care of business in the large transactions, versus just the 1 year flyer ones.

And we shall see what happens in the next 3 years, as we have a whole bunch of players who are buyout quality coming around, and he should have free agency money to grab someone legit.

This is not an issue with Beinfest but rather an issue with articles like the one above that talked about how good our club has been because of our farm. But we're currently looking at 2 starting position players (1 of which being a rookie), 1 bench bat, 2-3 SP, and probably no BP arm.

Again not an issue with Beinfest, doesn't matter how you make a winning team, I just hate media people who say that.

I mean, he's had 7 drafts. Let's ignore what we actually have, let's just see what the hell is here.

C - Skipworth, Hayes
1B - G. Sanchez, Morrison
2B - Coghlan
SS - Andino
3B - Dominguez
OF - Hermida, Stanton, Cousins, Petersen
SP - Johnson, Olsen, Volstad, West, Thompson, James, Hand, Berglund
RP - Tank, Tucker, and like 15-20 arms in the minors that's really deep

I mean, there is a star here (Johnson), a rookie of the year (Coghlan), two prospects in the top 25 overall (Stanton, Morrison), another highly thought after young player (Volstad), some other cool potential above average quality parts (Skipworth, Dominguez, Hermida, West, James, Hand, Berglund, Tucker), and then some sort of allotment of role/bench players.

I know your comment was based on the media saying he better than he is, which I don't mind, but this really isn't a "bad" spread. They got really unlucky with Allison. Sinkbiel was a bust and a half. Hermida did not turn into what everyone thought. But if Stanton, Morrison, Volstad, West, and Dominguez turn into true legit starters, this is going to start looking really nice really quick. Not just for "what's on the team," but just in general for Beinfest, developing 1-2 above average MLB players per draft. Which I mean, is a phenomenal percentage if you think about it and that sets the team up for a decade if you don't just start wildly trading guys away like we have. Maybe I'm thinking to much about our prospects growth, but I'm real confident at the top end of what's going on, and he's good enough to provide fodder (The Gaby Sanchez, the Leroux/Wood RP, etc) to fill out a few spots on the team. And I mean, if Stanton/Morrison/everyone else fail, then I think a legitimate criticism can be had that he is not good at identifying 18-21 year old talent. But right now, looks good to me.

Even putting Hanley at that point is extremely gracious. And for Cabrera, I just can't stand getting Miller.

When we got Miller, we always knew he'd be a work in progress. People constantly say now "Yeah he's sucked, but look at Randy Johnson!"

Here's the thing. Let's say he turns into Randy Johnson when he's 26. What organization is he going to be with then? Not us.

We need players who can produce during their cost and club controlled years. Not projects. I'm obviously not saying every player we trade for needs to be Hanely and Cabs out the gates. And if we even started Miller in the minors, I'm likely not complaining about him. So this might have less to do with "trading for Miller" and more with how we treated Miller.

Miller's really the only player I can think of like that though. It'd be easy to put Hermida here, but it's also easy to forget just how good he was in '07.

But if the Dodgers really proposed Billingsley, Kemp, and Loney at the deadline and we didn't take it, I think that's a major ball dropping by Beinfest. He had to have known then that Cabs would be traded that offseason. Billingsley and Kemp were already proven ML commodities and essentially Maybin and Miller become them.

Also, I don't think he's bad. I just question whether things he gets credit for (and all GMs) is something that is actually worth getting credit for.

I mean, it's the hypothetical game with Kemps/Billz, but that would have been a ball drop for sure.

But I agree completely we need guys that can play sooner rather than later and are less of projects. But, Miller was supposed to be ready though. And everybody thought Maybin might do a Hanleyesque jump to the bigs quick. It obviously hasn't worked out that way, but I can't fault them for those guys. I like to think they took the "best deal available" and there's no question that Tigers deal at the time, was dead sexy in prospects with those two.

I mean, we can just chalk up Cabrera to (1) no buyout and (2) Miller didn't work out (let's just assume Maybin does). That's a loss, but I reiterate, overall the "major" moves and longterm contracts that really effect the team, i.e. not giving Helms $1.8 million, have been mostly not just wins, but big wins.

----

Just saying in general to everyone, I'm with Bob when he says it could be MUCH, MUCH, worse. Beinfest is not perfect, and I bet he would agree with that, but he's still damn good and I think we will see a different style soon with that ballpark from things like, going for a more sure thing (Beckham, Smoak) versus a signability reach (Skipworth), more buyouts (Hanley, Johnson), more keeping a guy an extra year in arbitration as a luxury (Cantu, Uggla, Ross), and I don't have examples yet, but more free agent signings that impact the team more than 200 PA off the bench, no more Abercrombie/Bonifacio/Cantu/Uggla hail marys, etc. I think ownership has handcuffed him drastically and that will change quickly. And really, I KNOW this is going to change because he signed an extension through 2015. Beinfest knows he could get 25 other jobs in MLB instantly if he became a free agent. He stayed here for a reason. I'm excited to see what he does with some cash and is finally allowed to keep his team together. We don't have any Dombrowski holdovers anymore which is the argument about 2003. This is HIS team. I'm very optimistic about the future.

[PitchingWinsGames]

Lou, exactly why do you think the Lee/Choi deal was bad? (Genuinely curious)

Lee made it clear he didn't want to be here, didn't he? It's not unfair to reason that we had zero leverage in dealing him anywhere, really. So, I mean, Choi, pre LA was a cool player while he was here .270/.388/.495 and arguably (if he had stayed the full season) been better with us that season than Lee with the Cubs.

The followup move sending him to LA and obscurity sucked balls, though.

[Ramp]

I don't recall Lee ever saying he didn't want to play in Miami

but perhaps I have misremembered

[Swifty]

He did after we traded Floyd.

By 2003, he wanted to be here, but he wanted an extension so I guess you could make a large assumption that's his way of asking out.

Also, regarding the lou worship:

I would disagree that reupping Lowell was a good move if for no other reason than we controlled his 2004, he was coming off a broken hand and we had Miggy here. He could have had his 2005 season in 2004 and I don't think it would have been horribly shocking. The rate we gave him was probably a fair going rate for 3B (if I remember, it was slightly less annually than Aramis with the Cubs, but they were the only free agent mega spender with a huge need at 3B at the time, so you could argue with the Chicago hot corner off the market, Lowell's market was quickly drying up).

Nor would I call the Beckett trade "awesome." We didn't make a push for an elite 2nd prospect behind Hanley (Pedroia was off limits, but neither Papelbon nor Lester were) and we actually made a hard push for Anibal. And this is with Anibal already coming off a riddled injury past including severe nerve damage. When you trade a player like Josh Beckett, you sure as fucking hell better get back Hanley Ramirez, anything less and you should not only be fired, you should probably never work in a major league front office again.

And lastly, you can't call the 4 year JJ contract as an "awesome" move for Beinfest since Beinfest didn't want to do it, Loria did. If Beinfest had his way, JJ's gone before 2012.

[Fish and Chips]

And lastly, you can't call the 4 year JJ contract as an "awesome" move for Beinfest since Beinfest didn't want to do it, Loria did. If Beinfest had his way, JJ's gone before 2012.

Beinfest probably didnt want to trade cabrera, or any other salary dump player, Loria did, so by your logic, you can't call those trades failures for beinfest

[Swifty]

Beinfest probably didnt want to trade cabrera, or any other salary dump trade, Loria did, so by your logic, you can't call those trades failures

The trade itself is not a failure, the failures that involve Cabrera were not buying out his arby schedule. Once the trade became more or less "inevitable" we owed it to ourselves to get a fucking haul of major league ready certainties. Getting a bunch of fucking projects back for a top-3 offensive talent is the failure.

My "logic" is very sound since you cannot praise a GM for a move he was capable of making but did not want to do. Beinfest had the ability to make the JJ extension, that is plainly obvious (since it happened after Loria stepped in). Unless you are suggesting that Loria and Illitch negotiated the Cabrera - Maybin swap themselves (which I assume you are not doing since I'm not even entirely sure you know who Mike Illitch is) I'll ask you to keep your "logic" to yourself.

[Party]

FTR, I do not fault Beinfest and Co. for the Lee and Willingham/Olsens trade. Those hauls were so bad there can be little doubt it was A) A salary dump and B) There was no real market.

Perhaps the same can be said for some of the 2005 firesale trades.

[lou]

I would disagree that reupping Lowell was a good move if for no other reason than we controlled his 2004, he was coming off a broken hand and we had Miggy here. He could have had his 2005 season in 2004 and I don't think it would have been horribly shocking. The rate we gave him was probably a fair going rate for 3B (if I remember, it was slightly less annually than Aramis with the Cubs, but they were the only free agent mega spender with a huge need at 3B at the time, so you could argue with the Chicago hot corner off the market, Lowell's market was quickly drying up).

Nor would I call the Beckett trade "awesome." We didn't make a push for an elite 2nd prospect behind Hanley (Pedroia was off limits, but neither Papelbon nor Lester were) and we actually made a hard push for Anibal. And this is with Anibal already coming off a riddled injury past including severe nerve damage. When you trade a player like Josh Beckett, you sure as fucking hell better get back Hanley Ramirez, anything less and you should not only be fired, you should probably never work in a major league front office again.

And lastly, you can't call the 4 year JJ contract as an "awesome" move for Beinfest since Beinfest didn't want to do it, Loria did. If Beinfest had his way, JJ's gone before 2012.

A broken hand is a very "weak" injury to be worried about a guy longterm. That's highly recoverable. I don't think you can play that card. Second, Lowell was coming off 4 really solid years and he was 29 so it's likely he would have survived those years for production. You can't fault them for wanting to keep Lowell to build around. Personally, I would have picked Lee, traded Lowell, bought out Cabrera. And I say that without hindsight bias, but I mean Lowell was still really good post 2003 and it's reasonable to build around him. Also if you remember, Lowell had that "can opt out without a stadium clause." That was really innovative in getting him to stay in the first place. There may have been a more perfect direction to go in, but this wasn't tendering Juan Encarnacion, Juan Pierre, or Sea Bass.

The Hanley trade is awesome. I mean, you can cry about Pedoria, Papelbon, or Lester if you want, but Anibal was still a good second piece. They absorbed a bunch of cash with Lowell, and Beckett was coming off years of blisters for 142, 156, and 178 IP. Beckett was easily coveted and projectionable, but he had not put it all together yet despite his incredible stretches. And that was proved right really quick with his 5 era year in Boston. I can understand Boston holding back a second "A" prospect and giving a "B" instead for those reasons. And also adding in hindsight bias, we fucking smoked them with Hanley no matter how good Beckett is. There's no way this was a loss at the time or now. Cabrera? You hated it from day 1 which is cool and you're going to be right about it unless Miller turns awesome, but you really just can't blast the Boston deal.

And you don't know that at all about JJ and him leaving before 2012. Beinfest is still running a budget in two "poor" years pre-stadium, so I think "keeping guaranteeds" off the books is still the modus operendi for another year. Especially with pitchers coming off injury. I bet Beinfest would wait to see 2010, and then offer a 5-6 year deal after seeing 2 1/2 years of performance. Does that save money? No, but it also allows a longer evaluation period to make sure the arm holds up. Maybe I am obtuse in thinking this, but I can't imagine they REALLY think they can contend with pitchers of 1-5 years of service time continually. Secondly, what's to say all of this is a ruse by the front office to have gotten JJ for $39, and not $44. I know you have "inside information SFX buddy," but there is a lot to this story not reported by the media or Sosnick mouthing off. I can't knock them for a potential art of the negotiation issue.

The great thing is, we'll know in 3 years when all this stadium excuse is gone, so we'll find out if your criticisms are warranted, or if they/Beinfest keep doing some of these stupid things. But I am cautiously optimistic we start seeing Coghlan, Maybin, Volstad, Stanton, Morrison break out buyouts after 2-3 good years (which is fine, we don't need to Sizemore/Longoria anyone), better drafting and not going slot, and getting a $3 million veteran to stopgap versus Abercrombie. But time will tell.
--------------------

Lou, exactly why do you think the Lee/Choi deal was bad? (Genuinely curious)

Lee made it clear he didn't want to be here, didn't he? It's not unfair to reason that we had zero leverage in dealing him anywhere, really. So, I mean, Choi, pre LA was a cool player while he was here .270/.388/.495 and arguably (if he had stayed the full season) been better with us that season than Lee with the Cubs.

The followup move sending him to LA and obscurity sucked balls, though.

You're probably right and I am just bitter on hindsight bias. But I mean, Lee was really good and really under appreciated by Marlins fans. As I said, I'd have preferred him over Lowell if we had 1 contract to give.

Choi was BA # 22, 2003. That's a lot higher than I thought.

[Bobbob1313]

Yeah, Choi was not a bad pick up for Lee, all things considered. Top 40 prospects three years in a row, top 25 2/3 years, and killed it in 3/4 years in the minors, including his 2003 in AAA as a 23 year old when he .287/.406/.513 with 53 XBHs and 95 walks to 119 Ks.

And then gave us an awesome .270/.388/.495 line in half a season here even with the massive handicap of being a LHer here.

The perception has never matched up with the reality when it comes to Hee Seop Choi's time in the Marlins. I've been arguing this for a while.