fish53

Seeing Homer out of his prison brings tears. Free Homer-let him roam free with his brethren.

"Marlins promised to pay Miami-Dade up to $2.5 million if Grooms opts to take his name " I doubt for an instant that Jeter is paying much of anything personally or out of his pocket share and if he is paying his 5% share, not a big outlay for him. But, everytime he does something that spends some money does not mean it proves he is not doing other things purely for the bottom line. There has been plenty to satisfy both sides of the argument. I just think that we are past his motives at this point and wait to see if his management ability gets us a winner. One could argue, keep the damn thing and be smart and use the $2.5 million for a decent player or two. If his goal is to build a winner, then use the money wisely. Oh yea, forgot, this new guy needs to space to sell tickets for people who want to look out the windows at the skyline instead of watching baseball.

Just joking, making light of the Lillie trade to our future timetable. oops

I was going to initially post the Jeter was doing it for his bonus, but it would have been taken seriously. There will always be someone, but in this case, the few that would freak out will be well short of a mad rush to freak out mode. Most of us, like the FO or not for their moves are indifferent here, although I respect Perry Hill and do feel he is a loss.

Why make a stupid post when you know no one is going to FREAK OUT MODE over this. Craig Mish in jerk mode over something. But, adding to the Lillie trade the other day, the timetable goes from 2020 to 2023.

This trade was bad knowing what we knew then also. It was Jeter in trade mode and everyone implying Yelich would be a clubhouse cancer (unlikely). It was a trade that would be available now and next year but with Yeli's contract, deserved a return of at least one player that was almost a certain top player. Brinson graded out well, but not great, and adding in his age, and the others had flaws that were and still are concerns. Hard to use the argument that we weren't going to win, because that fits 80% of the teams in baseball. But that is a different discussion, how the sport is reaching a methodology that to be a competitive, quality franchise is not worth it anymore. Either you win it all, or losing 100-110 games or 82 games is the same thing and no one should thus care if the product is good or utterly a sham. Professionalism, tickets costs etc-the sport will suffer because viewership will suffer, at the park and media, if the product is terrible because no one is trying to be good unless they think they are good enough to win it all. OH yea, on topic I think the trade was a bad trade and especially given the reasons the front office gave.

I am not against the latin music either, or the standing room section being discussed. My issue is how it was even brought forth initially as a basis for attracting more people. That, to me, has been the problem behind many of these "cultural" decisions. That in S Florida, people will pay to come to the park because they get a certain kind of music or food. People will not keep coming back because they can hear music or buy a certain food item, that is all part of providing decent choices and value, because they can eat, drink and listen to music anywhere but the product on the field is what matters most and until that happens, the few people you entice based on a weird view of our demographics will not matter much at all. It just seems like they couch their remarks that our community needs these cultural carrot sticks as opposed to other cities who do not need them, because we need to appeal to more basic needs for our people. They can try anything they want and I would not have any issues, but stop trying to sell it with really dumb reasons. And yes, it is really dumb to think people will come partly because they can spend their time looking out the back windows.

OK, here goes. From the beginning, I feel like we, down in here in unsophisticated S Florida (compared to the NY mentality) continue to be insulted. From "more fans will come if we play more latin music" to the comunidad 305 which will create more fans by forming separate segregated sections by nationality with loud music, banging drums etc. to this. I can understand they would rather move the sculpture, which I was never offended by, and that is fine. Create some more seats, standing room, all fine. But the need to justify it with such idiotic statements, that it will draw higher attendance from millennials (or the S Florida equivalent of a millennial-not as sophisticated as other places) because we can charge less and they will come out to watch shitty baseball BECAUSE, they get cheap baseball and while they are standing there they will also get to spend half their time looking back at the skyline and just be enthralled with the view. REALLY, seriously, how long can a person, and one who can see the same view just driving on the highway, look at the view of downtown and why is that a draw to come to the baseball stadium. From the article " The upper two levels would offer all ticket holders a place to stand and watch the game on one side and admire the sights outside the park through the retractable glass walls on the other." The only time we will see an uptick in attendance is when we start winning and have players that attract us. Even then, we know this is a long process that will require proof that this will be sustained. All this BS about loud sections of pot banging sections with flags waving, and views of downtown tells me that if they are paying this guy, Chip Bowers, more than $1, then he is overpaid. Try whatever you like, but these are not world changing marketing ideas. They are couched in stupidity that may be influenced by being an outsider with strange predispositions to stereotype our community. A group of millennials: "Hey guys, let's go see the baseball game" " nah, it's boring and the team stinks" "but hey, we can look out the back with our $10 warm beers and look at the buildings-ooh ahhh",

I think, most of us, who disagreed with this move, do understand mgts reasoning or the reasons given. We have all heard them. Just disagree on things, especially the clubhouse cancer. In cases like this you look at the person, who has no history of being a problem, and understand he was acting on emotion and would, as a professional, as Yelich is, perform to his best as well as helping the younger players. No difference when we traded all the vets in the first season of the new park when Stanton acted the same way. He calmed down and enjoyed his new teammates. Starlin Castro-the same this year. Sure, we have some hindsight based on Yelich's season and Brinson's to criticize the trade, but not foresight, so no one is right on this yet. I think the trade was rushed, I think the inexperienced Jeter was in a trade mode by this time and saw no current benefit to holding on to Yelich. Jeter certainly knows a lot more about baseball than I do, but that has not shielded him from a lot of the criticism that did go his way from others inside the sport. He has made his fair share of mistakes and is still learning on the job.

You mean like trading Yelich, who had a ridiculous contract, for a centerpiece named Brinson, because, as Jeter explained, Yelich would have jumped up and down and soiled his panties if not traded? Good reason. I know, the same responses: 1. Attendance would not have increased anyway 2. They aren't going to win with Yelich and by the time they do, he will be too expensive and besides, Yelich, Stanton and Ozuna have proven that together they were not winners. I think the problem was the rush when there wasn't one and then the return, where there might never be one. This one just still irks me. I'm over it-maybe.

Just sounds like Jeter doesn't want to be bothered with these type of questions. He would rather control the narrative and make statements at his discretion. I take away nothing from his response.

Steck threw nothing but flat fastballs to thankfully, some god awful hitters. This is a recipe for disaster against good hitters and it still took him almost 30 pitches to get through it.

Not a bad idea, and for safety, just put the netting in front. This past year, they put a kids zone back behind the outfield, but it is a joke compared to other stadiums where kids can run on soft grass, have water shooting fountains, playground equip etc., but at Marlins Park it is a small area with nothing to do but climb on a few "animals". Billy shows up but is only available for about 1/2 inning and then he runs off to go back to the other stadium areas, leaving kids disappointed if time runs out to take a picture with Billy. Just a way to get young families back to the park and be able to bring the kids with something else to do if they are too young to really watch 3 hours of baseball.

Still can't grasp why they think this will be a big attendance booster. The WBC created the atmosphere of countries because those countries were actually on the field. Do they really think, like the "loud latin music will make people want to come", that all the people from different nationalities will want to flock to the stadium so they can pay an entrance fee to loudly compete against people from other countries to see which country can make the most noise in the stands. And of course, make sure everyone is segregated by country sections.

Now this is a darn good idea.

It is more than simple-encourage learning Spanish, but it should not be a requirement. It helps in S Florida but again, we are selling baseball and the universal language is winning. Our spanish only speaking fans do not need to communicate directly with every single player in Spanish in order to enjoy them and root for them. If Chen was 20-1, do we really need him to speak Spanish, or English, for that matter. Do we require that he learn both languages-find the time to be proficient in multiple languages-is that necessary? If Stanton stayed and we were a pennant contender and he hit 65 homers, would he really need to speak spanish to be a home town superstar or get along with certain players who do not speak English? C'mon, you can play the "you live here so you need to speak Spanish" but you would be offended if anyone says to the general populace, as many have said,"if you live in America, and Miami is still America, shouldn't "you" learn English". Works both ways and for baseball, it is silly to require it. As for the clubhouse, many teams have players who are not good at English or even speak it and yet, they can communicate and get along. Why is our clubhouse any different? Again, it is not. As an aside, what would a free agent consider if it is a choice of being "forced" to learn a language. This is baseball, not international studies and all players speaking Spanish will not gather you any increase in attendance, no matter how "automatic" you think this idea is.

It's all cute. Let's promote "the culture" which is what an outsider thinks is important. S. Floridians and us in Miami-Dade long enough already love our diversity but don't need to make it patronizing. We want good baseball, winning baseball.

I was being rhetorical, but it still begs the question-shouldn't they be winning first before expecting any mass demand for more expensive seats. I can see the demand being far less than even tepid and the net result a negative to those they moved.

So there will nice plush and empty seats in view. Is it the thought that people want to go to see the Marlins and sit down low but didn't buy tickets because the seats weren't plush enough?

I think the .180 major league average before the injury is a cause for concern more so than the .056.

So over Stanton. So what, he wants to see good things for the Marlins. Not much of a story. Instead, I love to watch Sierra power 150 ft drives deep to right instead. (I know, different trade).

I think you nailed it, no joke

Sorry, I cannot hear you, Hollandsworth hasn't stopped talking yet.

Marlins get Money back for Despaigne. [ATTACH]2113._xfImport[/ATTACH]

Balances the books.