greenhat

Backloading the deal and the opt-out clause were both Stanton's ideas but keep assuming things if it fits your ignorant stance. I've given up trying with some people. They were his ideas with the intention that it would free up money. Then we took a lesser trade so that the Dodgers would give us 12.5 million. We'll still have the lowest payroll in the league even with Stanton at a bargain price this year. Hurray for freeing up money. Stanton might have supported the backloading but it clearly fits the pattern that Loria has used on EVERY long term contract he has done. How many of them has he ended up paying out? I'll wait while you count. You're being intentionally naive if you think Stanton went to them and said please give me most of money later and not sooner and put most of it after my option. Loria probably sold him on the idea just like he did to the other guys. But keep assuming things that fit your naive stance. The Marlins know 30 mil will be a below market salary for an elite player in 6 years and they know Stanton will want one last long contract at 31 that most players of his stature try to sign. They know he will opt out unless something terrible happens to Stanton. It only makes sense for Stanton to opt in if something bad happens. The Marlins are risking that in exchange for a super cheap 6 year deal. Its a great cheap six year deal for the Marlins with a 200 million dollar insurance policy for Stanton (which the Marlins will take insurance on). I could easily see Loria and/or Samson bragging about how they swindled Stanton into taking such a deal much more easily than I could see a random reporter making up a story about an out of market team that no one cares about nationally or the president of a team making up a story about a different team. So which scenario do you believe it is then? The reporter made up this story or the President did? Both have really no motive to come up with this extremely specific story for another team.

Stanton would have to hover around .300 and average over 35 home runs to give himself a shot at topping $30MM a year. The opt out I believe is incase Salaries get to stupid territory, like 35-40MM a year and he's not locked into a below market deal. His contract is designed for him to lose the value of the contract if he opts out, by playing below market in the first 6 years. He would have never signed that contract as it is if he intended to opt out in 6 years, he would have pushed for more money in the front end to cash as much of the $325 he can. He also wouldn't have pushed for escalators and incentives if he thought his deal would be too team friendly The opt out was so they could get away with paying him less now. If everything goes to complete shit he is still guaranteed 325 million. It won't take a .300 average and over 35 hrs to top 30 million. Stanton would top 30 million today if he was a free agent. And as you touched on in your post, salaries are trending upwards and are heading to a large increase with all the new money coming into baseball. In 6 years 30 million will be an undermarket rate which Stanton will opt out of (assuming nothing goes horribly wrong on his side) and sign a longer deal at a higher AAV

Idk why people think he's going to opt out anyway. The way the deal was built its very unlikely he does. He would have to go on a Pujols/Cabrera run to get a team willing to even match the second half of that contract at 31. You're ignoring inflation of salaries. At 31 he will likely want to opt out just to get a longer deal at the same salary which he would easily be able to do at that age (assuming no major injury or extreme decline in skill) In 6 years 30 million a year will buy you a lot less. The elite players will probably be making a lot more. I think he will opt out and look for a 10+ year deal as long as he is healthy and hasn't taken a huge dive in ability. Basically the only way we will get him for those last 7 years is if we don't want him at that salary for those 7 years.

I don't believe that happened but a lot of the Loria haters will run with it I'm sure The three scenarios are: The report is false. For whatever reason some member of the Pittsburgh media made up a story about the Miami Marlins for some reason with a quote from the Pirate's President. What would be the motive be for this Pittsburgh reporter to make this up? Its not like it will blow up into a national story. The president is lying about the conversation. For whatever reason the Pirate's President decides to regale a crowd of Pirate fans with a very specific made up story of the owner of another team bragging about getting Stanton for cheap in the first few years and then how he wouldn't have to pay the back end. Again what would be his incentive to do that? The report is true. Loria swindles Stanton into taking less early so they intentionally backloads a contract to get some cheap years with the intention of not having to pay the expensive back end years and then brags about it. Of course the fact that we have seen Loria do this on EVERY long term contract he has signed so far and has found a way to avoid paying the expensive years makes it even more believable. The third scenario seems by far the most likely.

The agreement is the Fish get the $10 Million regardless of whether he pitches or not. So if he retires, great, we get the money and grab a FA. If he doesn't retire, we got him in the rotation for free in 2015. So for someone to say that the trade was all about money is foolish until Haren makes up his mind, because if he decides to pitch, the money is rather irrelevant because we upgraded in two major areas. Even if Haren plays its still about money. They could have gotten more or given up less if they didn't ask the Dodgers to pay for Haren and more shamefully Dee Gordon's 1st year arbitration.

Congratulations, this is no longer Wild Card exclusive! Chapman has been amazing out of the bullpen, why change that? Each time the Reds have considered it, they decided, "keep him in the bullpen." And now, they're not even considering it anymore. Why? Cause amazing out of bullpen. He won't throw 102 consistently as a starter. He only has a fastball and slider, thus won't be so effective. Just ... ^^ picture. You try it because starters are way more valuable than relievers. He doesn't need to throw 102 consistently and he only needs two pitches when that fastball and slider are that good. Randy Johnson also only threw fastball and slider and early in his career he was thought to only be a reliever as well. The Reds keep him i the bullpen because Dusty Baker has the same kind of antiquated thinking that you have regarding relief pitchers. You try him as a starter. If it works out its a huge win (like C.J. Wilson for the Rangers), if it doesn't then you move him back. To not even try is dumb.

https://twitter.com/jaysonst/status/542948433036730368 Apologies if this is somewhere else. Looks just like the Gregg deal where they had to clear money to spend it. The good thing is it will probably be someone better this time.

Passan is being a dick for nothing... Just cuz the Marlins are ready to spend more doesn't mean they have unlimited funds. The team gave up prospects for an upgrade at 2B and also found a way to save money in the process. That's not being cheap, that's being smart. If Billy Beane does that nobody calls him cheap. If the team doesn't spend the money that's another story but to suddenly throw the asshole comments just because we wisely got the Dodgers to foot the bill here is unnecessary. Billy Beane has not sold prospects for money in this fashion. As cheap as the A's are thought to be they spent 36 million more than us next year. And they are ridiculed as a cheap franchise. If Loria spent as much as even the teams that are mocked for being super cheap (A's and Rays) we wouldn't have to sell prospects we could do both. Its weird that we get lumped in with the A's and Rays as far as cheapness when we are in reality two tiers below even them in terms of payroll. And both of those teams are fighting for new stadiums while we already just got one.

Also....whats the big deal? If the Marlins indeed traded Hatcher and Barnes for $12.5M that we can use to improve the team THIS year...I'm all for it. Its like saying you sold your house at half price to pay for heart surgery you needed. Sure that's a great idea. Its not a great idea if you already have millions of dollars sitting in the bank. Also its yet to be seen if that 12.5 million is used to improve the team this year. And again Loria is creating a false choice there. We shouldn't have to choose between the free agent and the prospects. We should have both like every real MLB franchise. Teams kick in prospects to get teams to cover 20+ million on contracts, not first year arbitration. Its a joke.

Even if he does re-invest the 12.5 million, it's amazing that we need to give up prospects for money because we can't afford free agents otherwise. Exactly. On the face of it selling prospects for 12.5 million and then using that 12.5 in free agency is a smart move. The problem is we are already nearly last in payroll by a wide margin. We should just be able to spend 12.5 million and keep our prospects. If we had even an average payroll and sold prospects to fit in another free agent or two I would consider it shrewd. At our current payroll its a false dilema. We shouldn't have to choose. We should have both.

Dodgers sold high. 2014 will be the best season of Dee Gordon's career. I would take that bet in a heartbeat.

Did we just trade a number 3 starter(Heaney's floor) a omar infante type utility player ( Kike's floor) a solid reliever (Hatcher) and a bench player(barnes' floor) for a 1-2 war second baseman(Dee's floor) and a pitcher who will retire? Heaney's floor is last season. No guarantee he ever becomes a regular starter. Better prospects have flamed out. Kike's floor could be he never cuts it as a major leaguer. I don't like this trade but you can't say Kike's floor is Infante and then say Gordon is a 1-2 war second basemen.

I'm just thinking in two years we've essentially traded our 2012 and 2013 first round draft picks for Jarred Cosart and Dee Gordon. In a bubble you could say we turned two first round picks into a starting pitcher and a starting 2nd baseman in the majors, which isn't all that awful. I just think when you're draft 6th and 9th that you want those picks to turn into cornerstone pieces of your team. I can't say Cosart and Gordon are key pieces of a championship caliber team. But then again top draft picks can easily bust out, so whatever. Hernandez/Barnes/Hatcher are casualties on the side of turning draft picks into major leaguers. On the small scale trading Heaney and Co. for Gordon/Haren doesn't seem all that good (although if Haren for whatever reason chooses to play for us and we're paying him nothing that deal gets a lot better), but in terms of turning assets into majors leaguers NOW the front office did alright. The problem is I don't see this team as a playoff team next year as currently constructed. Their on the verge, but there not in position to trade future pieces for a "Now" run, since that Now run is more likely an 80 to 85 win season. I don't want to look back and see Heaney being a great #2 starter and Hernandez is starting at 2B for somebody with Barnes doing his thing somewhere and being like "Those guys would look great in Marlins jerseys right now". You could look at it as our draft picks getting us a 2b and starting pitcher but the problem with Heaney is that he was a draft pick that "hit" and rose up the prospect charts after a good minor league season. Those guys are worth way more than draftees who haven't shown any success yet in pro ball. Plus we don't know that Gordon and Cosart will stick. Both could bomb next season and it wouldn't be that crazy. If Haren pitches for free that definitely helps. And I agree we aren't close enough to be trading top prospects. This trade should be the other way around.

His BABIP was an unsustainable (even with his speed) .346. He has no power and gets on base about as much as Salty (.326 for Dee, .320 for Salty). He's a bad defender, too. His projected 2015: .256/.307/.331. For reference, everyone's favorite Solano Bro is projected for a very similar 2015 (but with fewer steals, of course): .253/.303/.338. Those "fewer steals" were worth a whole win by themselves last year. 346 is high but not that crazy for him. He's not a bad defender, he's an average defender. The same projection you used for hitting projects him as an average defender next year. I don't think that both his babip and his baserunning will both crater like they do though. In his first full season this year he was worth 3 wins and made the minimum. He has four more years of control and has some upside on that 3 wins (could walk more, could raise his iso with more doubles and triples in our stadium, could be a slightly above average glove). If he regresses some he could be a two win guy which is still good for us. If it mostly goes bad he's a one win guy which is still a win for 500k. I would absolutely want him for some of these names being thrown around here. Hopefully the Dodgers agree but I think they would want more.

Get him and try him as a starter. He is only making 5 mil this year and even with another big year will still be affordable next season. Worth a lot more than that even if he is a reliever the whole time. As a starter he is worth way more than that. Of course it depends what they would want.