Giancarlo: "I Do Not Like This at All”

[lou]

And I'm not sure what Swift thing I am adopting. I gave these guys the benefit of a doubt since 05 that they were always handcuffed by Joe Robbie and would change when they got the stadium, and they didn't. They showed their true colors, and I won't support them. It's that simple.
--------------------

I would very much prefer the perfect players and worry about positions when the time comes.

I don't think they have to get a 3B in a deal for Stanton.

Better yet, I don't think they have to trade Stanton. All of the proposed deals I've seen are nowhere near good enough including this one.

Right. They don't have to trade him. But they will, because they are terrible.

[Bobbob1313]

The "Beinfestball" thing. It's stupid.

[Namaste]

And I'm not sure what Swift thing I am adopting. I gave these guys the benefit of a doubt since 05 that they were always handcuffed by Joe Robbie and would change when they got the stadium, and they didn't. They showed their true colors, and I won't support them. It's that simple.

You may have to make this more clear for Erick.

[Erick]

Yeah Lou, I don't understand. I'm too busy loving Loria.

[Cambridge]

I read a recent article about Mike Trout peaking in production (given his 11.5 WAR/600) and was thinking about Giancarlo and what we can expect were he to stay with the Marlins.

His WAR/600 this year was 7.0, up from 4.5 the previous year. Was this a career year? His BABIP was .344 (cf of his previous MLB and MiLB numbers being around .330 other than the one season in Greensboro). We know he hits the ball harder than nearly anyone in baseball, but his LD % rocketed from 16.5/16.3 (2010/2012) to 22.1 last year. His K% went up rapidly in the second half of the season to 28.5 % (up from 27.6% 2011) and his BB/K rate dropped from 0.42 to 0.32.

I am not the most stat savy fan, however is there reason to concern ourselves that Stanton may have peaked? Even if this were the case a drop from 7 WAR/600 to 5/6 WAR/600 moves him only from superstar to exceptional. Are the injuries a genuine concern given his defensive value (which is higher than most would give him credit for)? Does it matter that a move to either LF or 1B would diminish a little of his positional value - I think not at all.

I think it is safe to say that his trade value will never be higher. He isn't going to get a ball to hit all year and given the way he began chasing pitches at the end of the year, this has to be a concern.

This post is meant to perhaps produce a little debate, I would welcome those with a better understanding of the stat values stated to provide their input.

[lou]

I think he's also 22 and going to get better. The Ks will always be a concern, but his raw power is crazy, and defense pretty above average, so there is not much downside (as to an arbitration buy out) and his upside if he has one of those extra 8 HR/+.30 BABIP years is going to be enormous and the type of performance that gets teams far in playoffs. I don't think 2012 is a 'peak.' Just will end up being a good year for him. I don't think normal line drive 'theory' matters with how hard he hits the ball. He's going to get his whether its 16-22%. He's that special generational player.

His BB rate is going to double in 2013 if he stays, which isn't going to necessarily be related to his ability, more of teams are going to let Morrison/Ruggiano/Brantly beat them. I agree, pre-arbitration, no downturn in production, and no injury, he is more valuable now than he will likely be in a trade. He'll have to hit 50 next year to increase in value. However, he's also a player you absolutely hold onto for 7 years no matter what return

I say you offer him 7/$85-90, which is above Cargo (highest comp besides Pujols, who was better), and dare him to decline it. He may not be happy about Miami, but playing for $500,000 and even with a good year say $8,000,000 in 2014, is a far cry from $85 guaranteed. If he adamantly refuses, take 3 of Texas top 4 prospects, and 2 of the next 10.

[Namaste]

If they trade Mike Stanton (which I think is unlikely)

I AM DONE

I giggled a little too when I typed that but I actually mean it.

It tells me once and for all that the Marlins business plan is "We have an amazing player right in front of our face who is loved by many of our fans (all 378 of them) yet we want to spend less money, not more."

I'm obviously going to take my kids to 5 or 6 games a year but if they ask me who I'm rooting for I'll say, "I'm rooting for all of the players on the field to try their best to win" or something real neutral like that.

Last paragraph belongs in NOGAF chat thread.

[Ramp]

I think if they're actually starting from scratch, they should trade him and get a bundle from the Rangers

(once Stanton turns down their longterm offer)

[Namaste]

Fair enough. You're entitled to your opinion.

However, the Marlins should not do this.

They've already gotten a bundle back for the AL MVP. A bundle of Andrew Miller and Cameron Maybin.

This organization can't take that risk again if they don't want to end up with 17 fans.

[Ramp]

They don't give a shit about the fans.

And yea, Maybin and Miller were flops but if you had to move Cabrera, those were the 2 guys to get. It doesn't always work out.

[Swifty]

They don't give a shit about the fans.

And yea, Maybin and Miller were flops but if you had to move Cabrera, those were the 2 guys to get. It doesn't always work out.

I cannot disagree with this more.

This isn't going to be a rehashing of the Cabrera debate, but how absolutely awful Beinfest et al's "first instincts" are when it comes to prospects/the future.

Let's just take a look at the "big" ones where there was a known "either/or"

2003 - Rangers said Stokes or AGon. That went well.

2005 - Marlins went to Rangers as Plan A around Beckett/Lowell for Blalock and Diamond. Rangers refused to take Lowell's $$ in its entirety (I guess this was the worst thing that happened to Miami since this team would be in San Antonio or some shit now).

2007 - Marlins turn down Dodgers Matt Kemp centered package and overtures from the Angels for Maybin/Miller (both with already started clocks).

And that's ignoring the draft missteps. Or just the flat out "bad" trades (Willingham, Castillo, Delgado, Penny, etc). Or if the Marlins ate some of Lowell's money they could have gotten Baker from the Twins and, in theory, gotten even more for Josh Beckett. When it comes to figuring out "the future" these guys are (forgive me lou) clowns. You can't keep defending it in the "those were the guys to get" since it always seems the option OTHER than the guys they wanted to get worked out significantly better.

[Beef]

Everyone wanted maybin/miller. You prob knew better, from seeing them so often.

Wasn't the Kemp centered thing not a real thing?

[Ramp]

Really not defending Beinfest in the least, but Miller and Maybin were two of the top 5 prospects in all of baseball. That was the move to make (if they had to move Cabrera).

And yea, what Beef said about Kemp.

[Mainge]

I also remember the Kemp thing being fake.

[Beef]

Maybe it was his first instinct to go after Kemp, so it was reported that the Dodgers were involved...?