Marlins Sign Placido Polanco

[Erick]

I think the Polanco signing was necessary based on the infield depth in the organization. Paying him 3 million is not going to have any effect on other deals. I'm all for giving other players the majority of the starts at third but the organization needs to field a team. I just looked at the depth chart on the official site, it lists Solano and Hechavarria as each others back ups. Want to know the only other middle infielder listed on the roster? Coghlan. Just because we signed Polanco doesn't mean he is even going to start a game a third base. We needed depth and he fits.

This is going to fuck up a potential Stanton extension.

[Jay]

This is going to fuck up a potential Stanton extension.

A potential Stanton extension is already fucked up or won't be an issue. I assume this was sarcasm though.

[emkayseven]

Ok "erick"

[dim]

Did you have a problem with the Hanley/Dominguez trades last July? For what it's worth, I did have a problem with the lack of vision in the Dominguez trade but I was told I was making a big deal about nothing much like I'm saying now about Polanco.

At the end of the day, I don't see a point in dwelling in the past now. I, personally, didn't like the Dominguez deal, but it happened so you have to try to get better now.

This is because at the time nobody was expecting a full force fire sale and the team to go back to it's old ways. We thought we can...I don't know, maybe afford to get one of the better 3B options available. Instead we put ourselves in a situation where we're either too cheap to sign a 3B option or the 3B options out there don't want to play for a team on their third career fire sale (just saying that is the perception).

I mean we went from three legitimate third base options in early July (Ramirez, Bonifacio, and Dominguez) to none by December. Don't you think there's something wrong with THAT?

[Erick]

This is because at the time nobody was expecting a full force fire sale and the team to go back to it's old ways. We thought we can...I don't know, maybe afford to get one of the better 3B options available. Instead we put ourselves in a situation where we're either too cheap to sign a 3B option or the 3B options out there don't want to play for a team on their third career fire sale (just saying that is the perception).

I mean we went from three legitimate third base options in early July (Ramirez, Bonifacio, and Dominguez) to none by December. Don't you think there's something wrong with THAT?

But you should have already known that the market for 3B this offseason was going to suck.

By the way, lol at Bonifacio being a legitimate third base option.

[dim]

A potential Stanton extension is already fucked up or won't be an issue. I assume this was sarcasm though.

Stanton would've been willing to sign an extension from 2010-2012, without a doubt. The Marlins had every chance to get something signed with a kid who was clearly, CLEARLY going to breakout. Even with the injury concerns it was well worth taking the chance giving him a Carlos Gonzalez type of extension and having Stanton under contract for two or three free agent seasons. Instead, Beinfest and Co. decided to sit on their asses and "wait the situation out". Stanton became one of baseball's best power hitters, the Marlins made a fire sale, and Stanton probably has zero incentive to sign and extension unless he's very clearly overpaid and given a full no trade clause, which this front office has rarely done in their entire tenure.

[lou]

Stanton would take 7/$85, they just have to offer it.

He is making $500,000 in 2012, and assuming health and awesome, maybe $7.5 million in 2013.

Just because you are pissed off you play for a shitty organization, doesn't mean you leave $70+ million on the table and hope you stay healthy and productive for 2 seasons in hopes of more significant arb 2/free agency potential 3-5 years away.

They just have to offer it.
--------------------
But yea, they are clowns because they haven't offered it yet when every other franchise in baseball would have

[dim]

But you should have already known that the market for 3B this offseason was going to suck.

By the way, lol at Bonifacio being a legitimate third base option.

Bonifacio last season was a better player than Polanco last season.

Although for the most part mentioning Bonifacio was simply to show that we've had options over the last year and decided it was better to trade them all away, leaving us in our current situation.

I'll start by saying I'm perfectly fine with the Polanco signing and have said it before. It fit a need, gives Cox time to develop, and basically puts a warm body at 3B for this shitty 2013 season. But the problem with the signing is that we put ourselves into this situation.

With ALL the trades we made, we didn't use any of them to get a player who had a legitimate chance of starting in 2013 (and I don't see Cox as a viable option until mid 2014).

Again, I'm fine with the Polanco signing, but if I was a GM and all that was left of the pickings was Placido Polanco and no team was willing to trade a real decent 3B for me, then I would rather just go with Chris Coghlan and see if there's still something left in there.

[Erick]

Bonifacio last season was a better player than Polanco last season.

Although for the most part mentioning Bonifacio was simply to show that we've had options over the last year and decided it was better to trade them all away, leaving us in our current situation.

I'll start by saying I'm perfectly fine with the Polanco signing and have said it before. It fit a need, gives Cox time to develop, and basically puts a warm body at 3B for this shitty 2013 season. But the problem with the signing is that we put ourselves into this situation.

With ALL the trades we made, we didn't use any of them to get a player who had a legitimate chance of starting in 2013 (and I don't see Cox as a viable option until mid 2014).

Again, I'm fine with the Polanco signing, but if I was a GM and all that was left of the pickings was Placido Polanco and no team was willing to trade a real decent 3B for me, then I would rather just go with Chris Coghlan and see if there's still something left in there.

This is why I asked about the Hanley/Dominguez thing though.

A lot of the people who have a problem that we're in this position now were content with letting Hanley/Dominguez go, despite knowing the market for 3B was going to suck. Acquiring 3B is not easy right now. The best one available was Youkilis who is declining and overpaid.

I just think it's odd that many are criticizing the front office for things they had no problem doing in July.

Trading Dominguez for Carlos Lee, which many were fine with, is something that shows a clear lack of vision. Yet, many of the same people complaining about the situation didn't really care at the time. After Hanley was traded, I'm not sure why or how people expected the organization to acquire a 3B that was way better than what they had.

Seriously, once you trade all those options, who did you want this offseason? This is why I keep asking if you had a problem with the Hanley and Dominguez deals because it was unrealistic to expect anything much better after that.

[dim]

Hanley deal? Yes, because the deal sucked and clearly was only done to get rid of his salary.

Dominguez deal? Nah, because Dominguez never showed that he would be able to hit effectively at the major league level. But at the time of THAT deal he was essentially blocked off by Hanley, meaning he served basically zero value to us. So trading him for Carlos Lee at a time when we needed a bat and maybe were still in the playoff hunt didn't look like it would hurt the team badly long term. That's why many people, including me, were ok with the Dominguez trade.

[fauowls44]

This is why I asked about the Hanley/Dominguez thing though.

A lot of the people who have a problem that we're in this position now were content with letting Hanley/Dominguez go, despite knowing the market for 3B was going to suck. Acquiring 3B is not easy right now. The best one available was Youkilis who is declining and overpaid.

I just think it's odd that many are criticizing the front office for things they had no problem doing in July.

Trading Dominguez for Carlos Lee, which many were fine with, is something that shows a clear lack of vision. Yet, many of the same people complaining about the situation didn't really care at the time. After Hanley was traded, I'm not sure why or how people expected the organization to acquire a 3B that was way better than what they had.

Seriously, once you trade all those options, who did you want this offseason? This is why I keep asking if you had a problem with the Hanley and Dominguez deals because it was unrealistic to expect anything much better after that.

Well to be fair, when Dominguez was dealt, I don't think thought that trading Hanley was going to be necessary. They thought that adding Lee to the middle of the order would jump-start the offense and they'd play well...and Hanley would be the 3B this year. Once the team tanked and Hanley was dealt and Cox was acquired, the "vision" was obviously to go with a stopgap until Cox was ready. I don't necessarily blame them for this series of moves...I blame the front office for being bad at drafting players and having no depth. But then again, as we've all seen this offseason, 3B is a pretty tough position to fill right now.

[Erick]

Hanley deal? Yes, because the deal sucked and clearly was only done to get rid of his salary.

Dominguez deal? Nah, because Dominguez never showed that he would be able to hit effectively at the major league level. But at the time of THAT deal he was essentially blocked off by Hanley, meaning he served basically zero value to us. So trading him for Carlos Lee at a time when we needed a bat and maybe were still in the playoff hunt didn't look like it would hurt the team badly long term. That's why many people, including me, were ok with the Dominguez trade.

Ok so basically you would've kept Hanley.

Dating back to last July, what were your plans for the 2013 season? Would you have kept the same team?

I ask because it seems like you're a bit different in a sense. At the time of the Hanley trade, most people were okay with that too for many reasons.

[dim]

It's hard to say what I would've done. I would've tried to keep a good deal of the core that I felt could still produce in 2013. I know I would've made sure Eric Chavez was a Marlin from the get go (if Hanley Ramirez was going to be traded regardless). 1 year, $3 million. I'm sure we could've offered that and some, and that move would've made me happy at 3B.

Hell, since you posted that the Rangers were willing to give up Olt in a JJ deal, I would've made that deal (again, if Hanley was traded and we weren't forced with an Eric Chavez option), and we'd still have Buehrle/Reyes/Bonifacio/Buck with Buck then being traded in some kind of salary dump.

So I guess I would've liked to see the team look something like...

1B: Morrison
2B: Reyes
SS: Ramirez
3B: Olt
LF: Ruggiano
CF: Bonifacio (with Yelich taking over soon after)
RF: Stanton
C: Brantly

or the cheaper alternative

1B: Morrison
2B: Solano
SS: Reyes
3B: Chavez
LF: Ruggiano
CF: Bonifacio
RF: Stanton
C: Brantly

with a starting rotation of Buehrle/Turner/Eovaldi/Nolasco/free agent pitcher

Obviously Eovaldi isn't a part of this if the Hanley trade never happened.

If we were still spending money I'd probably have signed Brandon McCarthy and signed a free agent fifth starter like Pavano or gone internal until Fernandez dominates AA and gets called up (and trade Nolasco for cap space, although I'm gonna keep him on there because it seems unlikely he's tradeable).

Obviously this is a rough idea of the team I'd want, as if I looked closer I'd probably change a couple of things, but for the most part this seems like a better alternative (more expensive obviously) than what we currently have.

More importantly I'm just saying there were a few options we had at 3B if we wanted to. Hanley, Dominguez, Olt, Chavez, etc... all could've been options for the Marlins before we ended up settling for Polanco.

EDIT: I'd probably need more time to think about a full team.

[Erick]

Well to be fair, when Dominguez was dealt, I don't think thought that trading Hanley was going to be necessary. They thought that adding Lee to the middle of the order would jump-start the offense and they'd play well...and Hanley would be the 3B this year. Once the team tanked and Hanley was dealt and Cox was acquired, the "vision" was obviously to go with a stopgap until Cox was ready. I don't necessarily blame them for this series of moves...I blame the front office for being bad at drafting players and having no depth. But then again, as we've all seen this offseason, 3B is a pretty tough position to fill right now.

I feel like that trade is a good reason to cite a lack of vision if you're going to say the organization lacks vision. Not that I've disagreed with you in this thread but to play devil's advocate to things we've said, I feel the Dominguez example is a good one.

They were unrealistic at the time, imo. They were under .500 with one of the worst run differentials in baseball. There was really very little reason to believe that team was playoff caliber at the time of the trade.

If they wanted to try to make the team a lot better, fine. But they traded Dominguez for Carlos Lee who sucks. You could make a case that the trade only made the team worse, and it was rather predictable because Carlos Lee sucks.

They had to know trading Hanley Ramirez was a possibility 2-3 weeks before trading Hanley Ramirez. If they didn't, that's a clear lack of vision. Thus, I feel like if one is going to say the team lacks vision, this is a good example.

You don't go all in by trading one of your young players for mediocrity and then decide two weeks later that it's time to begin a firesale. It should be one or the other. That's why I never liked the trade. By early July last year, I already wanted the firesale. That team was never going to win anything, especially in this division.
--------------------

I can't say what my vision for this team would've been because I honestly didn't see that much through. All I know is I would've made sure Eric Chavez was a Marlin from the get go. 1 year, $3 million. I'm sure we could've offered that and some, and that move would've made me happy at 3B.

I meant like ignore everything the front office did. You clearly disagree with the firesale so pretend you're the GM. You're keeping basically the same team, right? It seems like you didn't like the Hanley trade and Hanley (with the exception of Bell) had, arguably, the worst contract on the team so I assume you would've basically kept things the same.

I'm asking what people would have done differently. Because apparently the problem isn't the Polanco signing but rather that we had to sign Polanco, which is something I can agree with, I guess.

[dim]

On second look, our starting rotation looks shitty no matter what after we trade JJ, although this team has decent pitching depth in the minors.