Selling Time: Marlins Trade Deadline Discussion

[tjfla]

Buehrle isn't going anywhere. They like what he brings to the table-especially for the future. Leadership and innings is gonna be big for us in the future

Nolasco they would get rid of in a second,the problem with him tho is his contract. NO ONE is gonna pay him that next year

The issue with JJ is the contract that he is gonna want. They are gonna shop him around again to whoever misses out on Greinke/Anibal or whoever else is on the market. If they get an offer of guys they like(ML Ready 2B/3B/CF and arms) he is gone. Now if they get the offers like they got at the trade deadline I could see them trying to extend him for less money and hope they can get innings and leadership for the young guys
--------------------

Speaking of this, I really wonder what the team should do with Heath Bell, at this point.

Would we be better off keeping him?

It's one bad year and, like JJ, you could make a case (based on #'s) that he's been a victim of bad luck.

Like, he's definitely not a ~6 ERA pitcher. If you keep him around until next year's trade deadline, for instance, you'd get more value in return than the nothing you'd get now.

He has a 3.71 FIP. .350 .BABIP/64 LOB % is unlikely to repeat.

His terrible 4.62 BB/9 also seems like an anomaly. His 51.5 zone % (50.2 career) and 59.5 F-strike% (59.7 career) indicate that his BB #'s should not be looking this terrible.

They want to get rid of his contract it is that simple,he could not give up a run the rest of the year and if someone offered a low level prospect we would take it. Cishek already took over his Closer role so

[Erick]

Buehrle isn't going anywhere. They like what he brings to the table-especially for the future. Leadership and innings is gonna be big for us in the future

Nolasco they would get rid of in a second,the problem with him tho is his contract. NO ONE is gonna pay him that next year

The issue with JJ is the contract that he is gonna want. They are gonna shop him around again to whoever misses out on Greinke/Anibal or whoever else is on the market. If they get an offer of guys they like(ML Ready 2B/3B/CF and arms) he is gone. Now if they get the offers like they got at the trade deadline I could see them trying to extend him for less money and hope they can get innings and leadership for the young guys
--------------------


They want to get rid of his contract it is that simple,he could not give up a run the rest of the year and if someone offered a low level prospect we would take it. Cishek already took over his Closer role so

Well, that's dumb.

Then again, the Marlins front office isn't exactly brilliant so no surprise there.

[tjfla]

Well, that's dumb.

Then again, the Marlins front office isn't exactly brilliant so no surprise there.

How many RP do u know that get paid that much and dont close(Well beside K Rod)? Cishek is the closer now and unless something goes wrong,Bell is just a big contract.

In there eyes it's like why pay Heath Bell however many million to pitch an inning or so when u can call up Evan Reed/Sandy Rosario/or sign some vet to a minor league deal instead

Its all about CASH!!! Even more about it when u prolly won't compete next year

[lou]

What I don't get is Erick blasted them for signing "a reliever" to a $27 million contract, now that the organization is seemingly looking to dump that on someone for nothing, now "that's dumb." What?

[Mainge]

I have zero problem with them dumping Bell for nothing.

[Anonymous]

Call the Dodgers.

[Erick]

Although I'm well aware of the bad investment that is signing relievers long-term, I did not really have a problem with the Bell signing. Obviously, it turned out to be even worse than a poor use of money as Bell's unexpectedly absolutely terrible performance has made it a catastrophe.

I was for the signing at the time so I'm not going to sit here and hate the front office for making the deal in hindsight. People like Mainge and just about everyone else can do that because you all said it from the very beginning, not me.

My problem now is that the front office gives the guy a long-term contract and is quickly ready to give up on him for nothing because of a couple of bad months.

I feel like a smarter front office would wait another half season, at least.

Bell could easily have value that could make our future better by the trade deadline next year.

If the front office would just look beyond the ERA and blown saves over the course of ~51 innings (small sample...and for what it's worth, he's pitching better recently), they'd see that some of his issues do, indeed, deal with bad luck.

It's his first bad year since 2006, which is rare for relievers. There's no way that we have 7 relievers in the system who are clearly better than him.

I get that it's a waste of time to spend money on him, but the money is already spent.

If Bell puts up a good half year next year, any contender would want him and we'd get some prospects in return.
Even if he's not closing, I think he'd still have value (if he comes back and pitches well) to any contender in need of backend bullpen help/closer help. His velocity is still there and he has the experience that certain GM's love in closers.

Also, tjfla, the idea that he's no longer as valuable because he's no longer closing is rather false. That just makes him less valuable to other teams, in which case I'd have no problem with the Marlins letting him close again to put up save totals.
Fact of the matter is, the closer comes in with a 2/3 run lead a lot of times when the game is statistically won a good ~95% of the time, regardless. The middle reliever is often more important; considering that Cishek is our best reliever and cost-controlled, I'd have no problem with him going back to the setup role/pitching in most of the high leverage situations regardless of the inning.

Brett Myers was basically Ricky Nolasco before the year began until Jeff Luhnow named him closer, knowing it would probably net him better value if Myers got saves. He got 3 players in return, a lot better than the nothing he was worth before the year began.

I'd like to see the Marlins not sell low on any player, especially when the player has just had an inconsistent 51 innings. 51 innings is not a good sample size to just give a player up for nothing.

It's not as if the money being spent on Heath Bell is preventing us from doing something better. The Hanley/Anibal deals saved money, and we've basically all agreed that the 2013 class of FA's kinda sucks/the team is playing for 2014.

If the team is playing for 2014, the best case scenario is letting Heath Bell close for another half season in 2013, hope he puts up big save totals again, and get something for him.

What, exactly, is accomplished just letting him go for nothing?

[tjfla]

Although I'm well aware of the bad investment that is signing relievers long-term, I did not really have a problem with the Bell signing. Obviously, it turned out to be even worse than a poor use of money as Bell's unexpectedly absolutely terrible performance has made it a catastrophe.

I was for the signing at the time so I'm not going to sit here and hate the front office for making the deal in hindsight. People like Mainge and just about everyone else can do that because you all said it from the very beginning, not me.

My problem now is that the front office gives the guy a long-term contract and is quickly ready to give up on him for nothing because of a couple of bad months.

I feel like a smarter front office would wait another half season, at least.

Bell could easily have value that could make our future better by the trade deadline next year.

If the front office would just look beyond the ERA and blown saves over the course of ~51 innings (small sample...and for what it's worth, he's pitching better recently), they'd see that some of his issues do, indeed, deal with bad luck.

It's his first bad year since 2006, which is rare for relievers. There's no way that we have 7 relievers in the system who are clearly better than him.

I get that it's a waste of time to spend money on him, but the money is already spent.

If Bell puts up a good half year next year, any contender would want him and we'd get some prospects in return.
Even if he's not closing, I think he'd still have value (if he comes back and pitches well) to any contender in need of backend bullpen help/closer help. His velocity is still there and he has the experience that certain GM's love in closers.

Also, tjfla, the idea that he's no longer as valuable because he's no longer closing is rather false. That just makes him less valuable to other teams, in which case I'd have no problem with the Marlins letting him close again to put up save totals. Fact of the matter is, the closer comes in with a 2/3 run lead a lot of times when the game is statistically won a good ~95% of the time, regardless. The middle reliever is often more important; considering that Cishek is our best reliever and cost-controlled, I'd have no problem with him going back to the setup role/pitching in most of the high leverage situations regardless of the inning.

Brett Myers was basically Ricky Nolasco before the year began until Jeff Luhnow named him closer, knowing it would probably net him better value if Myers got saves. He got 3 players in return, a lot better than the nothing he was worth before the year began.

I'd like to see the Marlins not sell low on any player, especially when the player has just had an inconsistent 51 innings. 51 innings is not a good sample size to just give a player up for nothing.

It's not as if the money being spent on Heath Bell is preventing us from doing something better. The Hanley/Anibal deals saved money, and we've basically all agreed that the 2013 class of FA's kinda sucks/the team is playing for 2014.

If the team is playing for 2014, the best case scenario is letting Heath Bell close for another half season in 2013, hope he puts up big save totals again, and get something for him.

What, exactly, is accomplished just letting him go for nothing?

His value to US is less because he can't close since Cishek is the closer. We can pay a FA a minor league deal(like we do ever year) who can do the same job and cost millions less

What makes him less valuable to teams is his CONTRACT. No one wants to pay him that deal. Other teams see him as this-maybe he turns it around and maybe he doesn't but long as we don't have to give up anything we will take the risk.

If he had 2 yr/10 mil left on his contract teams would prolly be more willing to trade prospects for him.

It is like the Hanley trade,Oakland was offer 3 prospects for us paying half of his contract and LA offer Eovaldi for us pay 0. If we are willing to pay his contract,we could prolly get 5 or 6 teams making an offer for him on the fact that they are paying him nothing and any save he gets is a bonus. However since he want to pay close to nothing for him,the market goes down to SF and maybe LA.

[Mainge]

I get that it's a waste of time to spend money on him, but the money is already spent.

This is my biggest issue. After this season, he's only been paid $6m of the potential $36m left on his deal. There's significant savings to be had by jettisoning him now.

Plus I doubt anyone is going to give up anything of significant value for a reliever in his mid-30s that's making $10m+ for the next two (and probably three) years, regardless of how well he's pitching.

[lou]

Brett Myers was basically Ricky Nolasco before the year began until Jeff Luhnow named him closer, knowing it would probably net him better value if Myers got saves. He got 3 players in return, a lot better than the nothing he was worth before the year began.

I have said this in other threads and think its a great idea. Throw Eovaldi in their too. JJ, Buerhle, Turner, LeBlanc, and go sign a # 3/200 IP horse and let it rip with Hand in AAA and in disaster scenarios stretch out Nolasco or Eovaldi.

[tjfla]

Deadline is 2 days!!

Carlos Lee is getting ALOT of interest-Giants,Rays,Orioles,Yankees

Heath Bell COULD still be dealt-SF and LA have both stayed in contact and with LA losing Jensen they might need a closer

Zambrano has no real market and will either stay in LR or might even be released

John Buck-We called the Cards to see if any interest with the Molina injury but nothing

We want cash for Lee/Z and Buck/Bell can be had for taking there contracts(Other words PTBNL who would be a non prospect)

[Miamarlin21]

It would be fucking amazing if we could trade Bell by tomorrow. I hope San Francisco or Los Angeles is desperate enough. Probably not though.

[tjfla]

It would be fucking amazing if we could trade Bell by tomorrow. I hope San Francisco or Los Angeles is desperate enough. Probably not though.

If we paid some of his contract we prolly could. Both of them are desperate for a setup/closer however that contract is terrible. Really we missed the boat with LA,we should have sent him with Hanley instead of Choate

What we need is to have 1 of them blow a game in the 9th in the next 2 days and then call to see.

[Erick]

If we paid some of his contract we prolly could. Both of them are desperate for a setup/closer however that contract is terrible. Really we missed the boat with LA,we should have sent him with Hanley instead of Choate

What we need is to have 1 of them blow a game in the 9th in the next 2 days and then call to see.

I'm sure the reason they wanted Choate instead is because he had more value than Heath Bell. I'm not sure how that qualifies as "missing the boat."

As for the last part, I doubt something changes that much over one blown save.