Sell! Sell! Sell! Discussion

[Ralph]

Well Locking Nolasco up with cost considerably less than Uggla I believe. And I'm sure the philosophy with Beinfest and Co. is hitting is easier to find than pitchng.

[wanks1212]

It undoubtedly would cost less to lock up Nolasco, but the cost/production ratio is probably more favorable in locking up Uggla.

And generally speaking, hitting is easier to find than pitching. But guys who can hit like Uggla and play second base (albeit, not play second base well) are more difficult to find that middle of the road starters like Ricky.

[nny]

We're also talking about uggla aged 31-33/34, and Nolasco age 28-30/31

[wanks1212]

With the way Uggla's raised his walk rate and had roughly the same power output over the past few years, I don't think his bat is as likely to sharply drop off as some of us once thought it was.

Whether he can still play 2B at that age is a different story though.

[nny]

Also back to Cody, it isn't the first time it's been said in the media we have a high asking price. I know I've referenced it before, but back when Braves traded for McClouth, it came out afterward that they talked to us about Cody but didn't happen cuzz they felt we were asking too much.

[lou]

Well, since Nolasco has 2 arbitration years, they could lock in a 3 year deal really easily as it will guarantee Nolasco money in year 6, and give him 80% of what his FA value would be in year 7, and still making him a free agent in his prime around 30. That's worth something to Nolasco, unlike Uggla, who has 1 arbitration year left, and KNOWS the payday is coming. And it's coming sooner than Nolasco. Basically, Ricky still has "risk" involved in getting paid, Uggla is "pay me or see ya." Uggla's already made around $15 million in baseball, Nolasco around $8. Big difference in accumulated wealth there for these guys too. I think Nolasco is a MUCH easier sign on a 3 year contract, than Uggla on a 4 right now. And if that is what the thinking is with the comments, that just makes logistical sense.

You can probably sign, seal, and delivery Nolasco for like 3/$21 (5-7-9) right now (give or take $2 million, probably take). Even if he never turns into that consistent # 2, I think we all agree those average prices are more than fair for a # 3 or # 4 starter who can eat 180-200 innings, thus Nolasco is in "bargain town." Let alone his upside if he figures out how to be Curt Schilling. It's a slight discount, Ricky leaves a few bucks off the table, but that contract sets him up for life. It would have to be signed if offered.

Uggla, has to be looking at a $10-12-13-14 progression, lop off a million here or there. If the Marlins try to lowball this and shave $1-2 million off per year like the Nolasco year above, it's not in Dan's best interest to take a $9-10-11-12 ($42) type of deal, when he will easily get 20% more money (in a better baseball town and owner) elsewhere.

If you are confident that Ricky can throw say a 4.25 era, 190 innings, a year for 2011-2013, I think you sign him as a no brainer. If you are worried with his HR rates, general inconsistency, or arm holding up after the abuse coming off the surgery 2 years ago, you play the arbitration game and don't worry about it. It's that easy with him. Personally, I'm pretty scared with him and would take him to arbitration, but I can understand a moderate 3 year deal here, and think it would be easy to accomplish.

Another question would be Anibal, who you could sign OUTRAGEOUSLY cheap for 3 years right now (Anibal has made about $2.5 million in baseball). It would be a high risk buyout, but you can probably land him for something stupid like 3/$10 ($2, 3.5, 4.5), or be clever and frontload it with $6 million now to appease MLB payroll limits, and keep it really low for 2012-2013 to make him an easy dump if he doesn't hold up. If he can handle starting 25 games a year, would be an absolute steal and save a ton on 6th year arbitration and especially the FA year. Just saying. Lot's of creative ways to shave millions off the team with the pitchers if they want to

[wanks1212]

Letting Uggla walk in the 2011 offseason, a few months before the stadium opens, would be a massive PR boner, even if he signs some obscene contract with a big market club. Yes, most of us here may be like "those 2 first round picks are nice and he signed a stupid contract," but to the more casual fan that the Marlins are trying to reel in and get to buy tickets for their new stadium, it's going to look pretty bad to let Uggla walk when Uggla will have been here 5+ years, put up outstanding numbers for 5+ years, and have made at least a few All Star appearances. Those guys are going to be all "same shit, different day, this team is still cheap and doesn't keep anyone, why should I invest my money and effort into following them?".

After Hanley and JJ, Uggla's the next most recognizable face on this team. He's been a mainstay for years, and he's a damn good hitter. The FO can't let a guy like that walk away right before the opening of a new stadium that's supposed to bring in big revenue that they'd supposedly spend to make this team a contender. It's terrible from a PR perspective even if it may be semi-defensible from a baseball perspective.

If they want to get rid of Uggla, they need to trade him this offseason or at the deadline so they at least have something to show for him (ignoring the possibility that the something to show for him ends up being a shitty package). Two first round picks isn't going to impress the casual fans and local media (and the local media influences the casual fan more than, say, us).

[Swifty]

From Will Carroll on twitter:

Odd one - just got told that Marlins have to *take on* payroll in any deal they make. Wonder if that could help them ...

/via @injuryexpert

[Ralph]

ehe... Might as well lock up both Nolasco and Uggla.

[wanks1212]

Is he implying that MLB told them that, or that the ownership group decided that. Well, that's actually a fairly easy answer and I'm guessing he's implying MLB told them that.

If so, wow.

[Swifty]

Carroll and I believe Olney have said there is some form of agreement between the Marlins and the MLBPA.

Of course, if true, it's going to bite us in the ass with a Cantu long-term deal with Uggla shipped out, but I can't imagine them forcing the issue in season; it's bad business to force us to keep Cantu and Cody, it means big league jobs for prospects.

Now, consistently up ticked spending I can see, but forcing payroll adding moves in season seems unreasonably harsh.

[LocoMarlinFan]

That doesn't make sense. I think he meant the Marlins will have to send cash or pick up a portion of a players salary in order to get a better return.

[Swifty]

That's absolutely not what he said.

[LocoMarlinFan]

Were fuked then, no point in trading Cantu and company if we have to take on payroll in any deal.

[Big Z]

Wow, that's shocking to hear, as well as exciting. Seems like now it will be harder to move Cantu and Ross.