MarlinsWPB

1) The 2 Mill extra for Manny is just a rumor. I highly doubt the commissioners office would allow that and the Marlins now that. If you have a credible source stating that this rumor is true, please post it because I would like to read it. 2) Manny and Pudge will be both be long gone when Hermida is in his prime. We might be better off in the SHORT term (this season) with those guys, but keeping those prospects, and Hermida was the best thing to do in the LONG run. 1) http://www.miamiherald.com/1262/story/627441.html 2) I'm not convinced that Hermida is in our long term plans. I think making the deals for Pudge/Manny would have helped in the short run, but what's done is done. Time to move on with what we have and hope its enough to win.

If we had a chance to get Pudge and Manny by trading away Lindstrom, Hermida, and two prospects, you have to make those deals. The time for this team to win is now. We have many guys coming up for arbitration next year and this team is not going to pay to keep the team together. The fact that Beinfest begged for an extra $2 million in the Manny deal shows Loria just does not have money he is willing to spend to keep this team together. Yes, Hanley was signed long term but if we don't get the stadium, he will be gone too. When you have a chance to win, particularly where you don't get that chance very often, you have to go for it. I think we are close enough this year that Manny/Pudge instead of Hermida/Baker would have made a huge difference, and I think the front office will regret not making those moves for a long time.

McPherson deserves a chance. The logical thing to do is move Cantu to first, where he is much better defensively, and either bench or trade Jacobs. Jacobs does have 18 HRs but it just seems to me that he is trying to hit every ball over the right field wall, regardless of the situation. When you take that into consideration, the 18 HRs are not as impressive. If the Marlins can make room for McPherson by trading Jacobs for a catcher near the end of his contract, like Pudge or Bengie Molina, they should do it.

A-Rod: A bargain at $300 million Alex Rodriguez is the best player in baseball and his new contract will reflect that. Here's why he'll likely be worth every penny for whichever team signs him. Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Alex Rodriguez is about to do in November what he hasn't been able to do in October: Produce some real eye-popping numbers. The New York Yankees' star third baseman, already the highest paid U.S. athlete in professional team sports, is likely to sign a new multi-year contract soon that could be between $300 million and $400 million. A huge nine-figure deal is virtually certain. What's not known is where he'll sign. But you don't have to be Scott Boras, A-Rod's uber-agent, to argue that a team can give his client a hefty raise and still have the deal be a good one. Even if you don't believe all of Boras' arguments about the economic benefits of lavishing money on his top client (and I don't), the changes in the market for players' salaries, and the improvement in the game's overall economic outlook, means it makes sense to sign the game's most productive player, even at top dollar. First of all, A-Rod will bring in far more money to a team than the average fan bemoaning players' salaries might think. Vince Gennaro, a consultant to numerous major league teams and the author of "Diamonds and Dollars," a book about the economics of baseball, has done an analysis that suggests A-Rod could produce $48 million per year in revenue and asset appreciation for the Yankees, allowing the team to pay him $34 million in salary, along with a 40 percent luxury tax, and still break even. YES: The financial jewel of the Yankees empire Gennaro's estimate includes an extra $3 million a year benefit to the YES Network, the regional sports network of which the Yankees own 36 percent, along with a $9 million a year in the estimated increased value of that stake. CNNMoney.com sister publication FORTUNE has reported that the Yankees are looking at a possible sale of the team's ownership interest in YES, and that it could fetch $3.5 billion for the entire network. So re-signing A-Rod could be important for the Yankees in order to maximize the network's value. Still, some take issue with the notion that YES would suffer if A-Rod leaves the Yankees. The average number of YES viewers jumped during A-Rod's first year on the team in 2004, but fell each of the next two years. Viewership increased 9 percent this year despite the team's on-field struggles early in the season. It is worth pointing out that even when the Yankees were slumping this year, A-Rod was on his way to putting up one of the best statistical seasons in history. But Lee Berke, a consultant to regional sports networks, said that most of YES's revenue stream is already locked in through its industry-leading $2.15 monthly per-subscriber fee charged to cable and satellite TV operators that carry the network. Those long-term deals produce about two-thirds of the network's revenue, he estimates. So let's assume A-Rod leaves and that in a worst-case, but probably unlikely, scenario, viewership dips by 10 percent. A corresponding drop in ad revenue would equate to only about a 3 percent drop in overall revenue for YES. The Yankees stadium downfall What's more, it already is clear that the YES Network's fortunes aren't exclusively tied to ratings success. Revenue increased even in the years that ratings were lower, rising to $340.4 million in 2006 from $321.3 million the year before, according to SNL Kagan, a media research firm. Berke estimates YES has an operating profit margin of 60 percent -- twice the average for regional sports networks -- and this is why the network is worth so much. "A-Rod is a contributing factor, like all the players are," said Berke. "But he's not a big factor. The brand is much bigger than A-Rod." People tune into watch winning teams, not necessarily individuals. And Gennaro admits that as A-Rod gets older, he is less likely to have as much of an impact on how many games the Yankees win. So that means that if they end up paying him $30 million or more a year going forward, there's a very good chance that he will cost the team more than any extra revenue his presence brings in. Still, there is a good economic argument for the Yankees signing A-Rod, even if the deal doesn't strictly pay for itself: Because they can. Yankees face life after George The Yankees can afford to spend more than any other team. A new, albeit smaller, stadium is set to open in 2009 that will only greatly widen the revenue gap between the Yankees and the rest of the league. Even though attendance will dip because the new stadium doesn't hold as many people, the Yankees estimate that ticket and luxury suite revenue will increase by $100 million a year from 2005 levels. Having a major star like A-Rod should help the Yankees meet or pass these estimates by keeping demand for the tickets high. But A-Rod could also be a huge financial boon to many other teams, particularly those which have been underperforming in ticket sales or their television deals. The team that might see the greatest economic boost from signing A-Rod could be the lowly Florida Marlins, which paid its entire roster about $30.5 million this year, and is in negotiations with elected officials about a new stadium deal. If Miami-native A-Rod were to return to his hometown team, it wouldn't have to worry about paying 40 percent of his salary to the league as a luxury tax, as the Yankees would. And if good young players there continue to develop, A-Rod might actually help lead the team back into postseason, producing revenue that could be worth between $2 million to $15 million a year. The Yankees have a far better chance of making the playoffs without A-Rod than would the Marlins. "The Marlins are an interesting possibility," said Tim Mahon, principal for Anderson Economic Group, a business valuation service, who has studied team values. "I think it makes much more sense than it does for some of the other choices." Mahon said that for deep-pocketed successful teams like the Yankees, Mets, Cubs, Red Sox or Angels, "there's a marginal economic benefit from bringing him in, even as fabulous a player as he is. But look at the upside for the Marlins, not just in ticket revenue but also the structure of a new stadium deal." Finally, there is one reason why giving A-Rod pretty much a blank check makes sense. A 10-year deal that may seem shocking today might be considered a bargain by the end of the contract. Baseball's popularity is growing. Ticket sales are rising. Sports programming are increasingly important for advertisers in a world of TiVo and video downloads. Add in the increased dollars from new sources such as new media and international growth and that means revenue for all teams is likely to increase. Salaries should, and will, follow suit. So expect A-Rod to score huge dollars, somewhere north of $30 million a year, when he signs a new deal soon. But no team is likely to drastically overpay for him as the Texas Rangers did years ago. A-Rod would have to sign a contract worth more than $38 million a year in order for his salary to be as out of whack with the league's average salary as the $25.2 million a year deal he signed with Texas before the start of the 2001 baseball season. When the Rangers traded him to the Yankees before the 2004 season, the deal seemed so expensive that Texas agreed to assume a portion of the contract and pay $71 million to the Yankees in the coming years. But four years later, there's no question A-Rod will now do better. And his team, whichever one it is, is likely happy and better off writing those huge checks for years to come -- assuming they don't make the same mistake the Rangers did, writing the checks without keeping him on the team. Link: http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/19/commentary...tsbiz/index.htm

Hermida said in a post-game interview that he was running on contact when Amezaga lined out, which prevented him from not getting doubled off third. My question is, is there any real logic behind running him on contact with a man on third, one out, and the infield in? If Amezaga hits a ground ball, either Hermida is thrown out at the plate (he is not especially fast) or it goes into the outfield and Hermida scores anyway. If he hits a line drive, Hermida is doubled off third (which is what happened), or if the liner goes to the OF and is caught Hermida doesn't have a chance to go back to third and tag up. If he hits a fly ball, Hermida also doesn't have a chance to go back and tag up. If he hits a clean single, Hermida will score anyway, regardless of whether he goes on contact. So where is the logic in having Hermida go on contact in that situation? Maybe I am missing something.

That was phenomenal!

I believe we need to spend money to acquire a good CF for next year, either by free agency or trade. I would not be upset if we bring back none of the 7 players on the list above for next year. The team projects to have Jacobs, Uggla, Hanley, Willingham, and Hermida (5 of 8 everyday position players) making about $2 million total next year. And Anibal, Olsen, Johnson, Nolasco (4 of 5 starters) making another $2 million total. Dontrelle may make $7 million and Cabrera $4 million. That's $15 million total. If we bring back Olivo, it might be about $16.5 million total. If we have even a $32.5 million payroll next year, that would give us $16 million to field a bench and our two biggest weaknesses by far, center fielder and bullpen. In my opinion, there is no excuse for us using any of the seven names above in CF next year when we have the money to spend to acquire a real CF. I understand we had a $15 million opening-day payroll this year because the goal this year was to develop talent, not to win. But I think management needs to spend the money for next year, because this year's team has shown that they are not that far away from being a playoff team. I would be very disappointed if we kept the status quo in center for '07.

I think the important thing is that the Marlins don't bring back either the Miccosukee Airboat Race or the Bellsouth Yellow Pages Contest. They really should be able to come up with something better. Speaking of those promotions.. Is it just me, or does the youngest kid always win the air boat race? And does the head Mermaid ever actually check the winning phone book to make sure the contestant found the right listing?

Messenger is obviously terrible but I think the real mistake was made last night when Gary Tuck threw Moehler in the 9th inning with the team up 9-1. Anyone else (except Messenger) could have thrown the 9th without blowing that game. By using up Moehler yesterday Girardi basically had no choice but to use Messenger/Herges early today to hold the lead and the result was predictable.

I think if we claim Andruw Jones it would be a brilliant move by Beinfest. You would have to give up some prospects to get him, but you'd gain great prospects back in the offseason when you trade him away. And in the offseason, we'd be able to trade him to 29 teams, while the Braves can now only trade him to the one team that claimed him. The acquisition would just cost Loria a few million (in remaining '06 salary), and perhaps the Braves would even pick up part of that. I think if we keep our Major League roster intact it makes sense and makes us an immediate contender now. No one needs a CF more than we do and Jones is obviously one of the best in the league.

I think Aguila has been given enough chances. If Reggie ever learns base-stealing technique, at least he can be a great pinch-runner. Aguila has shown that he will never be great at anything.

It seems like when we talk about what this team needs for the future everyone talks about CF and catcher. I actually have been impressed by Olivo and hope we can keep him around. Center field is another story. But isn't anyone concerned about Willingham in left? To me he just doesn't look like the long-term answer. Since May 1 Josh is hitting .238 with 6 home runs and 25 RBI in 57 games played. That works out to 17 HR and 71 RBI when projected over a full 162 games. Is that enough out of a LF who is a liability defensively? Am I wrong in thinking we should use some of our pitching depth to acquire a LF for the future?

I have to agree with the original poster. In particular, I am very concerned with Willingham. In April, he looked like our best hitter, period. However, he has shown nothing for the last nine weeks. I can't remember when I actually saw him drive a ball. It seems like everything is on the ground. I sincerely hope he turns it around, and that he and Hermida supply some power. It will be difficult to contend without any power at all from our outfielders.

Anibal or Moehler?

I'm not sure if this is right place to post this, but has anyone seen the large framed photos of Marlins, past and present on the club level behind home plate? They're really awesome. I was wondering if anyone knew where I could purchase those or similar Marlins photos.

Actually I'm not retromarlins. I just thought it was amusing that our streak started just after that message was posted on May 22. Hermida also came off the DL the same day, and I would think that had a bit more to do with the streak than retromarlins post. Also almost everyone on the team started to play well at the same time. Obviously, I don't view us as a playoff team - we still do have the worst record in the NL.

http://www.marlinbaseball.com/forums/index...showtopic=61978 Since that was posted we have gone 9-3