Fishin2004

I don't know why but JJ hasn't played a game (in PR winter league) since November 18th. 10 at bats, four hits. That was it. Frisaro is saying (I assume from the Marlins FO) he will be given the opportunity to win the third base job this spring. If so, there's so many questions that opens up. I don't have to put up a list of players that potentially affects but besides the obvious Sanchez and Morrison are the two at the bottom who could fall off the quickest. I think the reason Frisaro said that is because under Rule 5 rules, if he doesn't make the opening day roster, he gets sent back to Boston. So it seems that they wouldn't take this guy if they didn't think there was a chance he was better than their other 3b options. Of course, doesn't mean that Gaby and Morrison are any less valuable, just means that they may be in the minors one more year....

arrange for a bond underwriter to place the bonds with investors, corporate or individual. believe me you don't want to know the intricacies of bond financing. I see....so basically what the city and county have agreed to do here is sell a bunch of bonds and use that money to pay for the stadium. Thanks. Correct. They just need to make sure that the bonds do, in fact, sell on the open market. If they don't, then we have problems. If they can't sell those bonds, then there are bigger problems than just this stadium financing. Fishin2004 - I'm not sure what the money is going toward matters as to the "safeness" of the investment, in and of itself. If an investor is looking to purchase those bonds, they are looking at the overall financial situation of the county, not what the specific money is going toward. Everything else looks good, though. Right - I suppose the reason no one is concerned is likely because these days, you'd think people who have money to invest are looking for something secure like government bonds.

arrange for a bond underwriter to place the bonds with investors, corporate or individual. believe me you don't want to know the intricacies of bond financing. I see....so basically what the city and county have agreed to do here is sell a bunch of bonds and use that money to pay for the stadium. Thanks.

I'm no expert, but I think it means if they can't secure the bonds, they can kill the deal. Nobody involved in the deal thinks this will be a problem. OK...so I'm gonna really expose my ignorance and ask what it means to "secure the bonds". Here's what I'm taking away from all of this: the city, county, and Marlins all agreed to put themselves on the hook for the money, but they don't actually have that kind of money lying around right now to spend. Now they need to seek investors who actually have that kind of money lying around, and because investing in a deal backed by earmarked government funds is generally a low-risk investment, they expect that finding such financing should not be difficult. Is that a fair assessment?

Reading the article in the Herald about the new stadium, I noticed this line: "If the county, city or Marlins can't find proper financing by July 1, any of the entities can kill the deal." Can someone please explain to me what this means? These days, hearing someone say "OK, great, we're all set....now all we need is $500 million in financing" doesn't really instill a lot of confidence, but no one really seems all that concerned. Why is that? What was all this county and city voting about, if they still need to find financing for the stadium? Article: http://www.miamiherald.com/486/story/964612-p2.html

I've gotta think that if he signs anywhere for the minimum, it will be here. He could easily be our everyday catcher by showing he's even just 70% of what he once was. Most other teams either have a better option, or an option they are hoping to groom. But if he's going to play for the minimum, there's no point in signing until he absolutely needs to. That offer will always be on the table. Plus, there's always the chance that he only wants to play b/c he sees this as his last chance to make a few extra million. In that case, he may just wait until spring training to see if someone's catcher gets hurt.

the marlins arent ever going to get a stadium. and if they do...it wont be here. and if they do...we wont be around long enough to see it. im going out on a limb here but i think... if the marlins dont get their stadium they will renogotiate with new dolphins owner and extend the lease at dolphin stadium another 8 to 10 years. guys....they have NOWHERE to go. plus, did you know that the marlins franchise is one of the most profitable in all of sports? why would they go anywhere? (i will find the si article where i read those statistics and post it later). alone in tv deals they make a killing. at the end, of the day i think they will get their stadium...but dont buy into this "relocation" sh*t. its just a strategy. if they were really going to relocate they wouldve done it by now. NOBODY is going to build them a stadium. and another scenario, if they cant they dont work it out with the city and county, is that loria will have to sell the team or partner up with someone who is willing to invest big bucks. there is also alot of influence from mlb...they want baseball in miami. you're not out on a limb at all...you're 100% right. in this economic climate, who has $500 million bucks. Vegas? Forget it...they've been hit harder than anyone. what we saw at the commissioner's meeting was note a vote against the stadium, it was negotiation. the threat of relocation has been greatly reduced over the past 6 months, and commissioners know this. so they want to re-negotiate. Samson was rightfully upset at the way that they did it, but let's face it - the commissioners thought the city could get a better deal. And it appears that they were right. because the team didn't respond by saying "if you don't take this deal, we're out of here", they said "if you don't take this deal, we've gotta re-negotiate". those are two very different things. yup check out this article http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/baseball/story/904998.html I'd also like to point out that - as much of a jerk as that commissioner was - at least two of his three terms were not really unreasonable. He wanted to cap the amount paid on the garage...the Marlins accepted that on the spot. So then there's the other two. I think that his request for naming rights money will be tough, but honestly it seems totally reasonable to me that they want to dissuade Loria from flipping the team. The Marlins are sitting up there crying to the city about how this about the honor of keeping baseball in Miami, but let's not forget that the value of this team likely doubles once the ground is broken on this new stadium. I don't blame the city at all wanting a piece of that...I don't see what it's more fair that Loria gets it when he didn't want to pony up the money for the stadium in the first place.

the marlins arent ever going to get a stadium. and if they do...it wont be here. and if they do...we wont be around long enough to see it. im going out on a limb here but i think... if the marlins dont get their stadium they will renogotiate with new dolphins owner and extend the lease at dolphin stadium another 8 to 10 years. guys....they have NOWHERE to go. plus, did you know that the marlins franchise is one of the most profitable in all of sports? why would they go anywhere? (i will find the si article where i read those statistics and post it later). alone in tv deals they make a killing. at the end, of the day i think they will get their stadium...but dont buy into this "relocation" sh*t. its just a strategy. if they were really going to relocate they wouldve done it by now. NOBODY is going to build them a stadium. and another scenario, if they cant they dont work it out with the city and county, is that loria will have to sell the team or partner up with someone who is willing to invest big bucks. there is also alot of influence from mlb...they want baseball in miami. you're not out on a limb at all...you're 100% right. in this economic climate, who has $500 million bucks. Vegas? Forget it...they've been hit harder than anyone. what we saw at the commissioner's meeting was note a vote against the stadium, it was negotiation. the threat of relocation has been greatly reduced over the past 6 months, and commissioners know this. so they want to re-negotiate. Samson was rightfully upset at the way that they did it, but let's face it - the commissioners thought the city could get a better deal. And it appears that they were right. because the team didn't respond by saying "if you don't take this deal, we're out of here", they said "if you don't take this deal, we've gotta re-negotiate". those are two very different things.

Here's what PECOTA does: it takes the last three years worth of stats that a given player has had, finds players throughout baseball history who have had similar statistics over a three-year stretch at the same age, and then tries to predict what will happen in 2009 for today's player based upon what happened to all of those players in the past in the year after that three year stretch. You can see why this would cause problems for the Marlins players. Many of them - Cantu, Nolasco, Anibal for example - have had at least one lost season in the past three years. PECOTA is going to find many disfavorable comparative players who have had a three year stretch like they have had, and that will bring down their projections. Then again, PECOTA's skepticism just goes to show how difficult the things that we take for granted (i.e, Anibal's return to no-hitter form) really are.

Cantu just put us in the lead with a monster but to respond, yes I do know great attorneys and I do know people who are up there in city management. If you watched those webcasts a while back, you saw him. No one that I know who has worked directly with this stadium deal is concerned AT ALL about ANY of these issues. I dont blame any marlins fan for being scared. Like I said in my post before, its understandable, BUT listen to me people. I promise you this is done and in the bag. There has already been too much money put into this deal for it to be turned around. Its done, finished, complete, and guaranteed. We need to start having some positive discussion about what we want in the stadium I think it's good to remember the County Commission vote. Remember how they were all ready to postpone the deal, claimed they were going to kill it, and one guy even tore it up...all because they were trying to get their own piece of the pie a little bit bigger? One wanted more assurances of inner city baseball, another wanted more assurances that local business would be used.... But then, when they realized that voting "no" might actually kill the stadium for real, they all voted for it. Same thing will happen here. County and City cops are posturing b/c they want a bigger piece of the pie, but neither side wants no pie at all. Assuming they have professionals dealing with these negotiations who are negotiating rationally and not emotionally, this will eventually get done.

Maybe they could spring for an extra pair or two, just in case. maybe he could. it's not like he isn't making enough money to pay for them. i'm surprised he doesn't have multiple pairs in his car and at home. even i buy prescription glasses three at a time. I like how suddenly Gregg is the token "rich guy" on the Marlins....

MIAMI (CBS4) ― It's stadium so our police officers will patrol it. With that sentiment in mind, the Miami Dade County Commission voted Tuesday to require county police officers and firefighters to provide security, police and fire rescue services at the new Miami Marlins stadium when it's completed. The vote was just another step toward a showdown with the City of Miami feels their officers should provide security and fire services for the new stadium since it sits inside the city's limits. CBS4's news partners at the Miami Herald report last week Miami commissioners voted to demand that off-duty City of Miami police officers to get the dozens of hourly jobs such as stadium security, traffic control and paramedic services. The county is likely to reject this demand saying while the ballpark will be within the city limits, the stadium itself will be owned by the county government. The unions which represent both city and county officers are preparing for their own battle to secure the police and fire contract rights to the stadium. In an effort to make some sort of concession to their city counterparts, county commissioners have considered giving city police the outside-the-stadium traffic spots, as well as all positions at a new soccer stadium the city has plans to build next door. http://cbs4.com/local/miami.dade.commission.2.669222.html How exactly does this issue get negotiated? Do the unions negotiate with one another? Is it purely up to the county and city commissions?

Can someone explain to me what Braman's angle is in all this? Is he simply a fiscal conservative who doesn't believe tax money should go towards a stadium? Or does he have some other angle here I'm not seeing?

I've always found it expensive to argue with lawyers, my own or otherwise so I'll defer to you. Haha...hey, believe me, nobody hopes I'm wrong on this more than me! In fact, if the Marlins legal team was looking for help to defend against this Braman case, I'd consider working pro bono.....

I'm not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV) but I'm sure a number of them will opine as the day goes on. Here's my read. This is only a "subsidy" if the Marlins owned the stadium which they do not. The county has decided in its infinite wisdom with excellent legal advice before moving forward, to construct a building in which baseball may be played. They have been lucky enough to find a tenant for said building before even beginning construction and further that tenant has agreed to "give" the county $150+ million towards their project. The county is not subsidizing the Marlins, the Marlins are in fact subsidizing a municipally owned building to the tune of $150,000,000+. Every time the county commits $500 million to a project they should be so lucky as to find someone in the private sector who is willing to give them a third of the construction costs before they start building. Am I being disingenuous? Just a bit. The point is the flaw in the argument above is that it isn't the Marlins' stadium, it's Miami-Dade's stadium built on Miami-Dade county land and which will be theirs forever. Nowhere in the deal does it anticipate turning over ownership of the building to the Marlins or any other privately-held company. Were the county to use it's taxing powers to create a revenue stream they would turn over to the Marlins to build their own stadium, THAT would illegal. It isn't by accident this deal has been structured the way it has. Don't lose a minute of sleep over this, it was a waste of your time and mine just reading it. I actually am a lawyer...and I disagree with your reading. The language of the statute says: "neither the state nor any county shall....give, lend or use its taxing power or credit to aid any corporation, association, partnership or person." While you're correct to say that the issue of Marlins ownership or some city-team partnership would come in conflict with this statute, by the letter of the statute so would any "aid" whatsoever to a particular corporation, association, partnership, or person. Can anyone argue that by building a baseball-only stadium using public funds the county is not giving "aid" to the Marlins? Now, what the author of the original post said is correct - if this statute is enforced here, it could be enforced against ANY of Florida's teams, which is a compelling reason to disregard it. But the "you didn't enforce it before, so you can't enforce it now!" defense doesn't really hold much water in court, and assuming their lawyers are any good, I suspect you're gonna hear this argument if these lawsuits get before a judge.