fish53

I also hate when everything is justified because we "won two world series titles" and thus, you should accept everything else in between because it is a trade you should want every time. Relevance please. Basically, "shut up because you have two titles". ------------------------------------------- "Shortly after Le Batard said the Marlins don’t deserve any support in South Florida, Manfred said: “Let me just stop you. I understand the concerns that have been expressed in South Florida. The one thing you leave out is there have been two World Series champions in South Florida. “Whether people like everything that happened in between, after or before, there are a lot of markets who would make that trade in terms of having those two World Series championships.”　

Yes, the braves have done this but not successfully. Last 3 years have been 67,68 and 72 wins. What it would do is just keep us looking like a low rung major league team instead of a minor league team masquerading as major league. But this did result in bringing back Fredi.

Glad I renewed my tix now

If management listens to anything a player thinks, then they are more inept than believed. Who runs the team anyway? I doubt JT or most anyone with any integrity would not give his best for his teammates, regardless of who they are, and no matter what he is griping about in December. What is he going to do, hit .200 on purpose?

You have got to love Mike Hills response to the Ozuna trade. He says that Ozuna was such a talent and that is evident by the return they were able to get for him.

and to think, I was getting all negative about the upcoming season. Now there is hope.

But many analysts I have heard also agree that they did poorly in what they got in return. We all pretty much understood the inevitable, but we had hope that the old method of getting mediocre returns, relative to what many thought was a fair or good return, would end. So yea, we had to do it but....we did it poorly.

Bottom line, and this has nothing to do with their plan or even if it is ultimately successful beyond expectations, they do not give two craps about what we think and have to say. It will all be canned responses. Waste of time, unless the food is free and good for those going. Otherwise, they could just create a handout and post on the website a FAQ with all the questions and answers set.

Actually, after the belated fire sale in 2005, there was a forum under a tent outside the stadium. You're right, Loria was not there and never did this. They served drinks and some finger food and I think some hallucinogenics to calm us down. Basically, Samson ran the meeting and let some of the new players field question, like Scott Olson, etc. There was a decent amount of acrimony but just like Jeter, it is all for the optics.

Are you saying we do not fit that description

We should share if any of us get invited so we can bring questions from the forum. I have not received my gold plated invitation yet.

The knife keeps getting twisted when you listen to all of the commentators on the baseball network who, almost to a consensus, agree that for two years of control for someone with Ozuna's numbers , the Marlins should have received a lot more and they did.

Read it. It is on ESPN and says it is an insider story but the whole thing comes out. Just spot on and regardless of the counter views we have here it makes the point that if you are just dumping and not getting back talent, then you are not rebuilding or re-tooling but will be garbage for a long time. No talent means no Astros in 3-4 years because the talent is not there, so all that is getting done is making sure the bottom line pays the executive's salaries without Sherman digging in his pocket. Without top talent coming back you will have nothing in the future to trade and build on to keep the line moving. You will not win with the low level talent coming back and you will never get anything but low level talent back in future trades. If we inclined to move every player of any value then ownership will need to be prepared to take some losses instead of quickly looking to have a good financial statement. So, the Stanton deal is done and we can argue all day about it, but the true telling of this management team is what they will do now and what we get back for Ozuna, Yelich, Realmuto and even Bour. If we cave and just dump then this group will not deserve any support and no other team will respect our position. I doubt anyone here wants to spend our money for tickets or merchandise just to be sure Jeter can recoup his investment and Sherman is not out a buck. We can handle a rebuild if it looks like a rebuild. Lining up 8 JT Riddles is not going to get it done. http://www.espn.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=7918

After all these pages of posts on the trade and the impact, we are really morphing into another attendance discussion? Might as well close the discussion.more importantly, when Ozuna goes, whose going to pitch to Bour, what's the power coming from. No power, no runs, no pitching, this will be very hard to watch.

That is an interesting point in JT. Where will we be in 3-4 years? What does management think? Will we build like the Astros and have a chance to be good in 3 years? Houston added money this year to get over the hump. So, when JT gets expensive, wouldn't he be a big part of the team being good? Having a contract or two that is more than the minimum will be necessary. With all the low priced players expected on the roster in 3 years, why can't we afford to keep JT and/or Yelich, unless we trade for almost can't miss prospects (if there is such a thing)?

In the old Marlins method, once they starting a trading culling, they could not help themselves and just got rid of players as quickly as possible. Hoping this regime has patience and let's the market come to them, especially with the reduction of Stanton's nut. They set payroll at $90, then said $75, but will they just keep on going lower and lower once they figure less payroll=more profit. We better net top prospects for any Ozuna, Yelich, Bour and Realmuto deals. God forbid we hold on to a cheap JT and Justin for a year or so.

And this: https://www.si.com/mlb/2017/12/09/giancarlo-stanton-trade-yankees-marlins-brian-cashman-aaron-judge-gary-sanchez "And then there are the Marlins. What else can you call this trade other than an abject disaster for a franchise seemingly committed to being a pointless mess for the rest of its existence? Jeter can’t be faulted for the no-trade clause that Stanton used to blow up his plans; that was the parting gift of Jeffrey Loria, steadfast in his devotion to screwing the fans of south Florida. But no one forced Jeter to work out trades before even knowing if Stanton would approve them, and no one made him offload his franchise player despite Stanton’s refusals destroying Miami’s leverage. Conspiracy theories will follow Jeter trading his best player to his old team right after taking over, but it’s not that complicated. This is just an owner completely in over his head getting worked by someone far savvier. Pity, then, Marlins fans, who have stuck by this team through firesale after firesale only to be rewarded with yet another, and this time by an ownership group that looks poised to do less for the franchise than even Loria. By dealing Stanton, Jeter and company have showed that all they care about is the bottom line, not the product on the field. The result will be a completely awful and unwatchable team that should, to Jeter’s great joy, cost nothing. The Marlins will be burned down for the insurance money under the guise of rebuilding and getting rid of onerous debts that the owners would claim impeded winning. But a team in one of America’s largest media markets shouldn’t have to sell off its best assets for pennies on the dollar or punt on fielding even a nominally competitive squad. This is a terribly sad day for baseball in Miami, and a shameful moment for MLB, which never should have allowed Jeter and Bruce Sherman to buy the team."

But does the possibility of adding Stanton make them reconsider? I mentioned this earlier, but I heard on MLB radio that the Dodgers have $60 mill coming off the books next year, so maybe they take the hit for one year or somehow convey to Stanton to just say no and wait for next year. Plenty of intrigue.

How does anyone know that the Dodgers and Yanks would require the Marlins to take on a lot more money, while the Cards and Giants would take on the contract or most of it? All speculation. The more teams in it, the better for us. No team has publicly told anyone anything so right now it is all posturing, even leaked information. This is where, in the past, the Marlins always caved-hoping it is different now.

All part of the Stanton plan. They told G that these guys will start on the 25 man roster, so you better agree to go anywhere because we will really suck.

This is a good haul, Neidert is considered an elite prospect but a bit old: Nick Niedert - Eliteprospects.com www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=24143 Eliteprospects.com hockey player profile of Nick Niedert, 1982-06-16 Hudson, IA, USA USA. Most recently in the FHL with Carolina Thunderbirds. Complete player biography and stats.

And if the Dodgers really want him, they may have to offer a fair competing offer relative to the Giants. Otherwise, Stanton does not get what he wants and neither do the Dodgers, he stays here or the hated Giants get him. The Marlins are resigned to getting rid of whatever they have to in order to meet their payroll desires. If that means keeping Stanton and immediately unloading Ozuna, Gordon and Yelich and even more, if necessary, they will do it. All of those pieces are going anyway, sooner or later. I just do not think the Marlins are without leverage, and maybe this new administration will know how to use it. We have the nicest house in the neighborhood and someone really wants it bad. We all are looking at who will blink, but only Stanton truly has all the leverage and the only thing he risks is wasting 3 years on a losing team, and that is the only leverage we have on him. It really sucks because that means we have one guy and lots of losing to look forward to. I heard this morning on MLB radio that the Dodgers have $60 million coming off the books next year. Could be the thing that makes Stanton wait a year to agree to a trade.

Standard logic doesn't fully apply here, even given fiscal sanity. We usually overvalue our own pieces, but in this case, someone will want him bad enough because there are few like him. Should be interesting at the meetings, and maybe the Dodgers will just come through with their massive budget capabilities.

How would you then otherwise define "jumping ship" in a figurative sense?

It should be pointed out that the article had this statement also: "The Marlins have a talented front-office team led by president of baseball operations Michael Hill and general manager Dan Jennings, and it's understandable that they would want to keep their linchpin player in the fold."