Offseason Discussion - Positions Players/Bench

[Swifty]

Honestly, is there any aspect where you can say we're remarkably ahead of, or at least on par with, the general curve?

Maybe pocketing revenue sharing, we've been doing that for 4 seasons now, while most others are just coming around to the idea.

[Metes]

We are extremely good at starting Hanley Ramirez, something most other clubs are not very proficient, if not piss poor, at doing. Aside from that, there is little.

[m26555]

Honestly, is there any aspect where you can say we're remarkably ahead of, or at least on par with, the general curve?

Maybe pocketing revenue sharing, we've been doing that for 4 seasons now, while most others are just coming around to the idea.

Well, if you count scouting, then yeah.

[Swifty]

Ummmmm, I don't think you want our scouting in your corner, champ.

[lou]

To be honest, if you look at the expansive list of players not offered, including Randy Wolf, Felipe Lopez, Rich Harden, Johnny Damon, etc, who are easily going to get multi year deals, I think some of the criticism may be a bit much.

Yea we can "afford" it. But I mean, a lot better players than NJ and Kiko weren't tendered.

[Omar]

This year, certainly. But how much of that is an aberration versus the Marlins' history of not offering arbitration to a large chunk of its higher salary players?

[Swifty]

Well, in the case of Damon, there's a very good chance he'd take arbitration, and Matsui would 100%, it's not even a question really.

I'm not sure if the 80% guarantee is of the prorated earnings or actual recent year earnings, but in the event it's just of prorated earnings, Damon would be guaranteed at least $10.4 mil in arbitration. To me, that's far more than he'll stand to earn as part of any multi year deal or even on a one year deal. Then factor in that the arbitrators love home-runs and you can see how a $13-$15 million award isn't out of the question for Damon.

By and large, the big names that weren't offered are simply a product of the 80% guarantee well exceeding what should be their fair-market value this offseason.

That being said, if we just pretended to be a major league organization, getting NJ on a 1 year deal would be like hitting the jackpot, and type B compensation upgrades Thompson so we just slam dunk that trade.

[wanks1212]

The Marlins ability to acquire talent in the midst of a mini-firesale isn't remarkably awful. It's not great by any means, and they hit (Hanley) about as much as they miss (early returns on the Cabs deal) but it's at least on par with the general curve, which I assume you're equating with "average." It's not like we're talking about the Pirates or Royals here.

[Swifty]

You act as if trying to get good young talent for expensive foot-out-the-door players is some novel concept the Marlins created.

The thing is, "scouting" another team's system is far different from a scouting department. We are laughably bad internationally to the point where I wonder if we even have anything other than the Dutch Academy. The sad thing is, internationally, the Marlins should have far more clout than they flex. We can send the entire fucking baseball operations department on a day trip to the Dominican and not even miss that evening's game.

Getting players from another team isn't scouting. Any reasonably intelligent person with access to a stat sheet can tell you the 15 or 20 guys worth watching. Hell, we put together an organizational top 30 list without seeing any more than 4 or 5 of those guys play live, and those 4 or 5 are usually just seen in spring training. Getting a player in trade is like taking an open book exam. Sure, there's intelligence required on your part, but if you did your due diligence you know where to look and you're never really over-extending yourself, the safety net is always there. The other team's done the hard work for you. They found an 18 or 22 year old they believed in (or sometimes an international 16 year old). They gave them meaningful at bats. They developed them. They tweaked their mechanics and put them on a gym program. Going to see them is the easiest fucking job in the world, and you know what, 9 times out of 10 when a player like that is scouted, it isn't even to see what he does right, that book's long been written, it's to see what he does wrong.

Scouting, the true plug in the mouth and messenger bag filled with notes scouting, is something we're abhorrent at. The next super-duper star we discover, groom and have thrive at the major league level as a Marlin will be the second we've done start to finish under Beinfest (JJ being the first, and even then, I'd argue the jury is still out on him).

[wanks1212]

I disagree with essentially nothing you've said, especially the shot at their player development/drafting.

Getting players from another team isn't scouting. Any reasonably intelligent person with access to a stat sheet can tell you the 15 or 20 guys worth watching. Hell, we put together an organizational top 30 list without seeing any more than 4 or 5 of those guys play live, and those 4 or 5 are usually just seen in spring training.

Indeed. But it's not like every time a team deals off a big-name player, they get a good return. Teams that are perpetually awful and constantly going through "rebuilding" modes fail at getting a good return on their players when they decide it's time to rebuild again. This may be because the hot-shot prospects are overhyped and aren't that good (which is a problem in scouting), but it may also because they value certain prospects wrong and ask for the wrongly valued prospects in the trade as opposed to the players who actually turn into productive major leaguers.

Even teams with good front offices occasionally fail when dealing off a big-name/big-money player (Twins when dealing Johan, the A's the past few years). That the Marlins are able to remain competitive despite dealing off these guys (which I'm not arguing is good policy, but with the ownership in place that's what happens) shows they're at least on par with the general curve in maximizing their return.

[Bobbob1313]

I mean, I know Swift doesn't care about prospects until they do something, but, like we do have one of the top minor league systems in baseball. At least some people think we do a decent job of scouting and developing, and barely any of our top prospects are from trades.

You have to consider Morrison and Stanton HUGE finds in the draft, and huge wins for our scouting department.

[lou]

I mean, I know Swift doesn't care about prospects until they do something, but, like we do have one of the top minor league systems in baseball. At least some people think we do a decent job of scouting and developing, and barely any of our top prospects are from trades.

You have to consider Morrison and Stanton HUGE finds in the draft, and huge wins for our scouting department.

I'd say system depth counts big time too. Cousins a 3rd rounder. Gaby, Petersen was a 4. Cishek a 5. Leroux a 7. Voss, Galloway 8s. Jennings 9. Carroll was a 10. Wood was a 44th rounder in 2002. All of those guys besides Carroll, are top 20 prospects in one of the top 5 minor league systems in baseball. Even beyond the Stanton, Dominguez, West, Volstad, Coghlan, Tucker, hopefully Skipworth, James, Hand, and Berglund, first two round picks, they do a pretty good job of identifying a few players who turn out to be major leaguers. Morrison is king of that class by leaps and bounds, but adding those extra 3rd-4th RHP relievers in the pen, some solid bench outfielders, potential average starters like Gaby. This helps tons.

They've drafted a nice assortment of starters - Johnson, Olsen, Volstad, West. Hermida has "busted," but he's still a MLB level player and young which is more than a lot of first rounders can say. I'm not thrilled with some things (sinkbiel, skipworth so far, not taking ellsbury at some point in 2005), but they aren't doing a bad job. They're doing an acceptable drafting job. And if at least half of the above names start working out, I think perception on their drafting ability is going to change rapidly. Because the team is going to look pretty homegrown if Johnson, Volstad, and West are anchoring the rotation, Coghlan, Stanton, Morrison, Dominguez, Skipworth, Cousins/Petersen/Gaby/Galloway, all in the field, and an assortment of potential relievers.

I can't fault them for trading for other teams talents. No one thought Hanley was going to be this good. No one thought Dontrelle was going to be that good. No one thought Nolasco was going to be that good. They have some big wins here even if they take a Yusmiero Petit and Emilio Bonifacio back some times.

[Swifty]

Frisario today basically confirmed that Cantu will be on the 2010 roster.

Nothing wrong with him, but pinching a penny until it screams and paying Jorge Cantu for a 7something OPS don't exactly harmonize.

[lou]

Frisario today basically confirmed that Cantu will be on the 2010 roster.

Nothing wrong with him, but pinching a penny until it screams and paying Jorge Cantu for a 7something OPS don't exactly harmonize.

I know most of you hate him, but I like the idea of having Cantu in his free agency year, on a clear 1 year commitment, potentially getting type A if he's good and a lock for type B and he'll be in his prime so despite all our non-arbitrationness lately he'd be an easy one to put a tender on as long as he doesn't tank, having a relatively established contact hitter behind Hanley even if he doesn't have .850 OPS potential (which I mean, he was pretty wicked to start 2009 before he got hurt and looked great the last 30 games), and not having Bonifacio at 3B. At least eliminating 1 of the 2 places he can play.

The cheapness with JJ is disappointing, but I like keeping both Cantu and Ross. They were the two I wanted to keep this offseason first among all of the bats.

[Ramp]

F Cantu