Marlins 2013 Off-season Thread

[Erick]

Christ. You're right. They shouldn't do anything.

Is there something about his performance that indicates he's worth spending that much money on, especially in this case since the Marlins are on such a limited budget? Phil Hughes would be our highest paid player.

[Bobbob1313]

Is there something about his performance that indicates he's worth spending that much money on, especially in this case since the Marlins are on such a limited budget? Phil Hughes would be our highest paid player.

He's got decent peripherals, besides a high flyball rate. If you can turn some home runs into deep outs and he maintains an 8-ish K/9 and 2.5 BB/9, he could probably appear to be a better pitcher than he actually is, thus inflating his value.

It's not about him being good. It's about him possibly being able to repair his perception and selling high if it works out.

If you've got a park that suppresses home runs, why not sign flyball pitchers and try to make them appear better than they are, so you can trade them off?

That's pretty much exactly how the Padres got Cameron Maybin for two alright relievers with pretty ERAs.

[fauowls44]

He's got decent peripherals, besides a high flyball rate. If you can turn some home runs into deep outs and he maintains an 8-ish K/9 and 2.5 BB/9, he could probably appear to be a better pitcher than he actually is, thus inflating his value.

It's not about him being good. It's about him possibly being able to repair his perception and selling high if it works out.

If you've got a park that suppresses home runs, why not sign flyball pitchers and try to make them appear better than they are, so you can trade them off?

That's pretty much exactly how the Padres got Cameron Maybin for two alright relievers with pretty ERAs.

So what you are saying is Cameron Maybin is either worth 2 alright relievers or the greatest right-handed hitter of all time.

Actually, considering the contract that they gave Maybin and his performance since, the Padres may want to take that trade back...but I get your point. Even so I wouldn't sign Hughes at the expense of signing/trading for someone who can actually help score runs. If it wasn't likely an either/or with this ownership I'd be with you that it's worth a gamble.

[Bobbob1313]

I don't think adding a bat via a short-term free agent contract is worth this organizations' time at all.

Let's say they add Napoli for 2/$20m, score 40 more runs than they might otherwise, and lose 90 games instead of 100. Alright, what's the end game?

This team needs players who can contribute 5 years from now, when they'll hopefully actually be competing for something. Scoring more runs and being marginally less terrible next season is kind of pointless.

Maybe Hughes sucks in Miami and they can't trade him for anything of value. At least there is some possibility he turns into a long-term piece via trade. I'm not sure any of the potential bats they could add for a similar price hold the same possibility, especially since Marlins' Park artificially deflates hitters' values.

[lou]

Loria's perfect offseason is a 74 win team

[Bobbob1313]

Right, well, either way.

[fauowls44]

I don't think adding a bat via a short-term free agent contract is worth this organizations' time at all.

Let's say they add Napoli for 2/$20m, score 40 more runs than they might otherwise, and lose 90 games instead of 100. Alright, what's the end game?

This team needs players who can contribute 5 years from now, when they'll hopefully actually be competing for something. Scoring more runs and being marginally less terrible next season is kind of pointless.

Maybe Hughes sucks in Miami and they can't trade him for anything of value. At least there is some possibility he turns into a long-term piece via trade. I'm not sure any of the potential bats they could add for a similar price hold the same possibility, especially since Marlins' Park artificially deflates hitters' values.

I don't think trying to score more runs and trying to improve is pointless especially when you have good young starting pitching. With a full season of Yelich and Ozuna, adding 2 more bats could go a long way in at least having a respectable season. Are they competing for anything next season? Of course not, but you can't just not try to get better. Signing Hughes in hopes of trading him 3 months later isn't a good use of our limited resources. Not instead of using that money to get a bat or 2 anyway.

[Big Z]

Doubt they do that,more than likely it would be a arm or 2 for him. LoMo's trade value is high for him however that is not saying much. The reason why teams wanna take a chance is because he is cheap and has potential. They also know tho if he gets hurt again he prolly won't be here next year

DeScalfani is seen more as a RP than a SP around the league and if we are patient with Cishek he can bring a massive haul back. When I mean patient I mean,wait for a closer to get hurt or some contender needing a closer-in fact some FO guys think the plan is to deal Cishek at the deadline since Wittgren and Suggs will be at AA

They want to trade Alvarez for Trumbo but LAA still has no interest in Alvarez and not too much in Turner. LAA is waiting for us to say Eovaldi but looks like we arent looking to move him at all.
--------------------
A perfect offseason for Loria would be

Trade Alvarez or Turner to LAA for Trumbo
Sign a Vet Innings eater to replace who they deal
Then either play Trumbo at 3B or Trade Morrison and play Trumbo at 1B
Sign Uribe to play 1B or 3B
Sign 2 Minor League FA RP
Look into another Catcher to split time with Mathis

In that case I'm keeping LoMo, unless we are able to trade for Trumbo.

[marlinsfan24]

He's got decent peripherals, besides a high flyball rate. If you can turn some home runs into deep outs and he maintains an 8-ish K/9 and 2.5 BB/9, he could probably appear to be a better pitcher than he actually is, thus inflating his value.

It's not about him being good. It's about him possibly being able to repair his perception and selling high if it works out.

If you've got a park that suppresses home runs, why not sign flyball pitchers and try to make them appear better than they are, so you can trade them off?

That's pretty much exactly how the Padres got Cameron Maybin for two alright relievers with pretty ERAs.

I have been on board with this from the get-go. Hughes for the Marlins could be like Javier Vazquez. Probably not as good as Vazquez pitched that season, but somewhere along those lines as a good pickup.

[Namaste]

Remember last year when we all said that "it's all about 2014".

It's all about 2015, boyssssssssss

[Erick]

Over the past 3 years, Phil Hughes has a 4.78 ERA with an unintriguing 4.45 xFIP. Spending 8 million per year on that guy hoping that his trade value goes up seems like a waste of time to me, especially since this team doesn't really need pitching (not more than they need hitting, anyway).

I don't understand the Padres example either. Are we suggesting that the Padres do this type of thing? Because they actually don't. The Padres bring crappy guys they don't have to pay nearly as much to, like Eric Stults, and get good pitching out of those guys. If anything, their free agent signings (like Volquez) are the ones that have failed. The only recent thing the Padres have done that's similar to this is signing Josh Johnson. To be fair, JJ's peripherals are way better than Phil Hughes.

Ryan Webb (the primary reason for the Maybin trade) probably wasn't a case of a sell-high considering that he's been the same guy here. Ryan Webb isn't even a flyball pitcher so I don't understand why that trade was brought up, really. That was just a case of the Marlins making a dumb trade for two relievers with minimal upside. It's not shocking considering the type of metrics that this franchise values.
--------------------

I don't think adding a bat via a short-term free agent contract is worth this organizations' time at all.

Let's say they add Napoli for 2/$20m, score 40 more runs than they might otherwise, and lose 90 games instead of 100. Alright, what's the end game?

The only problem here is that Napoli is going to get a lot more than 2/20. So, in the realistic case, you're right. Such an overpayment for a hitter would make no sense.

However, using your hypothetical scenario, are you saying that you'd rather sign Hughes for the rumored 2/16 than Napoli for 2/20? Because that makes no sense to me. The end game would be pretty much the same thing except that Napoli is the better player and, thus, would probably have more trade value.

[Bobbob1313]

I don't think trying to score more runs and trying to improve is pointless especially when you have good young starting pitching. With a full season of Yelich and Ozuna, adding 2 more bats could go a long way in at least having a respectable season. Are they competing for anything next season? Of course not, but you can't just not try to get better. Signing Hughes in hopes of trading him 3 months later isn't a good use of our limited resources. Not instead of using that money to get a bat or 2 anyway.

I mean... Full seasons of Yelich and (especially) Ozuna might not be anything. This team is a lot of competent offensive players away from even being decent.
--------------------

The only problem here is that Napoli is going to get a lot more than 2/20. So, in the realistic case, you're right. Such an overpayment for a hitter would make no sense.

However, using your hypothetical scenario, are you saying that you'd rather sign Hughes for the rumored 2/16 than Napoli for 2/20? Because that makes no sense to me. The end game would be pretty much the same thing except that Napoli is the better player and, thus, would probably have more trade value.

I think you're probably getting too bogged down in the specific details of the contract numbers I literally made up for the purposes of discussing a hypothetical.
--------------------

I don't understand the Padres example either.

I think you do.

[Erick]

I think you're probably getting too bogged down in the specific details of the contract numbers I literally made up for the purposes of discussing a hypothetical.

Basically, you're saying we're not close to contending for anything. I agree.

You're saying "why not sign a pitcher and hope he builds up trade value to get more assets at the trade deadline? (paraphrasing)" Fair. Couldn't we do the same with a hitter though? We're going into the season in need of hitters, not pitchers. Couldn't we sign a mid-market hitter and then trade him when we're in last place on July 31st?
--------------------

I think you do.

I don't.

[Bobbob1313]

I think there's a better chance of Hughes gaining more value as a buy-low candidate than any hypothetical hitter. Especially given the park the Marlins play in.
--------------------
Or, y'know, this thing that I said:

Maybe Hughes sucks in Miami and they can't trade him for anything of value. At least there is some possibility he turns into a long-term piece via trade. I'm not sure any of the potential bats they could add for a similar price hold the same possibility, especially since Marlins' Park artificially deflates hitters' values.

[Erick]

I think there's a better chance of Hughes gaining more value as a buy-low candidate than any hypothetical hitter. Especially given the park the Marlins play in.
--------------------
Or, y'know, this thing that I said:

You could probably say the same for other mediocre pitchers who aren't going to get nearly as much money though.