83Gator

It doesnt affect me because Im not a season-ticket holder, but it seems some of you are missing the point.? It doesnt matter if thats the way it should be done, thats the way other teams do it, or thats the only way it can be done.? The Marlins promised it as one of the perks of buying season tickets for this year only and are now reneging on it. 905916[/snapback] I don't think they promised playoff tickets for buying 2005 season tickets. In the renewal package for 2005 that I got late last season, under "Playoff Priority" it read "Receive exclusive priority for purchasing playoff tickets. (Requires deposit for 2006 tickets)." That last part was in red. It pissed me off when I first read it and I'm still pretty pissed off about it, that they would take away that perk. But it is something that's been known since before the season. The Marlins didn't just spring it on us now. Maybe they should've made it more obvious but I noticed it before I renewed for 2005 and I'm not all that observant. I haven't got my renewal package for 2006 yet. I didn't realize they were raising the tickets another 10%. They raised them 33% after last season. Another 10% may be too rich for me. If it comes to giving up the season tickets, or downgrading where I sit, I'll probably just give up the season tickets and buy individual tickets for 10 or so games.

Tim McCarver 4 (59-80)

The way Luis has been getting on base lately I'd like to see him hitting leadoff. The odd thing with the way JP has been slumping is that it seems to affect the offense even more than it should. He goes 0-fer and the team can't get a run. He gets a hit (a triple, but still) and they score 4 in the inning. I know the leadoff hitter makes things go but it seems like this team takes that to the extreme. 818245[/snapback] Lately? You do know that after this recent heating up you speak of, he has lowest on base percentage he's had all year, right? 818406[/snapback] You talking about Luis or JP, ferry? I thought strandedx was talking about Luis. Luis's OBP is not the lowest all year. In fact, he's raised it from .411 on June 9th to .429. It was up to .435 after Saturday and then dropped a notch with the Sunday 1-5. There's only been 3 days all season that he's had a higher OBP than his current .429. The thing that scares me about JP is that he's hit like this before and it lasted all season. In 2002, his road splits (.247 average, .297 OBP) looked much like his overall numbers do this year. Coors raised his overall numbers and kinda hid how bad a year he had. I have no doubt that JP will snap out of it but it may not be this season.

As I've said before, Jack kept on putting Lowell in the midst of the lineup hoping that he won't screw us up in innings but Lowell continued slumping. And so too with Perisho, Jack will continue putting him in places where it counts and hope that he'll do good. 797236[/snapback] That's terrible logic. Unfortunately, you're probably right. That's probably exactly what Jack will do. It's awful tough to change Jack's mind with pesky things with facts.

too bad in baseball if you are to be a successful lefty specialist you need to have a success rate of 75-80% at least. 797125[/snapback] He had that last year... 797150[/snapback] No he didn't. OBP by lefites last year against Perisho was .317. For a lefty specialist, that's about average. And last year was a career year for him, when he surged to mediocrity. He's back to being what he always was, a bad pitcher that couldn't stick on some poor pitching staffs with Detroit and Texas.

Perisho doesn't usually get lefties out. Lefties OBP against Perisho this year is .500 after that home run. I bet Jack has no idea of that stat however. I don't care about the strategy though. That really isn't what makes or breaks a good manager. This loss is on Jack because he can't get the team out of the doldrums. He had a closed door meeting and they still came out and played listless, uninspired baseball. Jack is the best there is at turning around other teams - I don't know if he can turn around his own team.

Personally I'm glad the streak is over, if it really is. These kinds of streaks are meaningless because nobody is going to come close to Ripken but when the streak gets to a few hundred games, the player or sometimes even the manager feels compelled to force the player into the game to continue the streak.

Did Pierre only appear in tonight's game as a pinch-runner? Or did Jack put him in the field? If he only pinch-ran, I'm pretty sure his consecutive game playing streak is technically over. Rule 10.24C - CONSECUTIVE PLAYING STREAK. A consecutive game playing streak shall be extended if the player plays one half inning on defense, or if he completes a time at bat by reaching base or being put out. A pinch running appearance only shall not extend the streak. If a player is ejected from a game by an umpire before he can comply with the requirements of this rule, his streak shall continue.

Put Alfonseca on the 60-day DL to free up a 40-man roster spot, retroactive to April 22; he won't be back by June 22 anyways. Send down Kensing. Add Frank Castillo to the 40-man roster and start him on Thursday. He last started on Saturday so Thursday is his normal turn. Castillo is pitching pretty well in AAA and as a long-time ML veteran, he shouldn't be overwhelmed by the situation like Kensing would be.

Pretty good. :thumbup And that's just in 279 games. I don't know the top 10, but I bet he's in there. A-Rod is also probably in there as well. BTW: Jeff Conine is 5 home runs away from 300. 774125[/snapback] He's probably close to the top 10 but not quite in it. Here's the top 10 RBIs through age 22 and Cabrera most likely won't get another 126 RBI by his 23rd birthday to crack this list: 1. Mel Ott 485 2. Ty Cobb 383 3. Jimmie Foxx 378 4. Ted Williams 378 5. Al Kaline 365 6. George Davis 363 7. Alex Rodriguez 352 8. Mickey Mantle 346 9. Ken Griffey 344 10. Johnny Bench 326 And Conine is 5 HRs from 200, not 300.

Actually again, according to a recent article in Baseball America, he aggrevated his back and was released by the Twins in the spring of 2003, not at the end of 2002. I'm not arguing the gist of what you were saying - he was out of baseball and has made a nice comeback. I like him and hope he makes the team. I wanted to see him last year. I'm just criticizing you for once again being a total ###hole and having to make comments like "totally uninformed" when you were the one who was less informed. If you'd have left that comment out, I wouldn't be on your case yet again. Edit: By the way, that was kinda wimpy going back and changing your post after this response to make it seem like you said something else. Not surprising, just wimpy.

In 2002 Dillon was out of baseball. In 2003 he was "Assistant Voluntary Coach" for Texas Tech. (YES, that was his title!) In 2004 he was with our AAA 'Topes. Responses above, vis-a-vis his career, were totally uninformed. 643885[/snapback] Actually he had 344 ABs in 2002 with New Britain of the Eastern League, the AA team of the Twins. He had another 18 ABs in AAA for the Twins Edmonton team. Here's a link. Can't you disagree without being rude? I didn't take a shot at you, just disagreed. "Totally uninformed" - aren't you ever pleasant? Look at how hardw0od disagreed - no smart-ass remarks, just a valid point about Lenny Harris. Try it sometime.

I didn't think that Dillon was out of baseball for years and had to be convinced by friends to go back to it. I thought he missed one season because of the back surgery, though he played with the problem for a while. Barring an injury or trade, I think Dillon will be hard pressed to make the major league roster out of spring training. The Marlins will keep 2 backup infielders and they will probably be Damion Easley and Wilson Delgado. The Marlins will open with 5 or 6 bench players. I think 4 of them will be Mike DiFelice, Damion Easley, Wilson Delgado, and Lenny Harris. The 5th spot will be a backup OF, a role which Dillon can't fill. If the Marlins keep 12 pitchers, which is a possibility if they keep Hagerty, then there are no more slots. If they keep 11 pitchers, then there's one open slot that I would guess would go to Willingham. It would be a nice story if he makes it and now that he's on the 40-man roster, I'd imagine he'll be in majors at some point in 2005.

Neu is not with the Marlins any more so the 16 must be those 15 plus Miggy. 637902[/snapback] I think you're thinking of Mike Nanninni. He signed with the Blue Jays in November. Neu is still with the Marlins. In fact, he's on the 40-man roster.

I don't see how this is a good thing. It's not like we now have $1.7 million that we can go spend on a healthy pitcher. We kinda have to hold that money aside under the assumption that he'll earn it. By the time we know if he'll perform, the season will have started and it'll be too late to sign anybody. It's like the Chad Fox situation from last year - we're depending on a health risk to be our setup guy. It gets us more flexibility come spring if Alfonseca breaks down but it doesn't help us sign another pitcher now.

Maybe Free Agency rules are listed in Roman Numerals, as is standard practice, as opposed to Arabian numbers? They're not - they're Arabic numbers. That's why the MLB site refers to it as Rule 5. It doesn't mean anything - I just remember reading an article about it a couple of years ago, how everybody refers to it as Rule V instead of Rule 5 which is the official name of it. And it is my mission in life to pick on Rump everytime possible That's a noble mission. Carry on.

V = 5 631964[/snapback] No kidding. I made it through 2nd grade too. But everybody calls it the Rule V draft, like that's the official name of it, like the Super Bowl with the Roman numerals. It's not - it's the Rule 5 draft. So most of the time when somebody gets it right and writes it as "Rule 5" somebody else feels the need to correct it when it's not wrong to start with. I don't know if it was officially called the Rule V draft at one time and they changed it or if the media just screwed it up from the get-go. C'mon - Ramp/Maverick/Goldmember isn't right that often. Let him enjoy it when he is, even if he didn't realize it.

It's Rule V, punk. 631887[/snapback] Actually it is the Rule 5 draft, though it's been called the Rule V for years by just about everybody for some reason. Check out this from the mlb site ... Important Dates in 2004 BTW, the Rule 4 draft is the June amateur draft.

IMO every position starter is poised for a good year, including Encarnacion. Why? I don't think you could pick 8 guys in all of baseball before the season and have them all have good years. Enc will almost certainly be better than last year but the most I'm hoping for from him is mediocrity - I've given up on him ever having a breakout season. And the bench with Easley, Mordy, Harris, Willingham, Aguila is the best we've ever had.? Hopefully, Treanor will cover for the loss of Redmond vs the questionable durability of LoDuca. I don't agree. I hate this bench but when you have limited financial resources, you have to cut corners somewhere. This bench has very very little power. Easley can't pinch hit. Harris has no power. Mordy may not be in the majors anymore if not for us. Willingham is going to be a 26-year old rookie that won't be getting better by sitting on the bench. Treanor was a nice story but he was pretty terrible offensively last year - much worse than Redmond and that's tough to do. Aguila won me over though. I like him and he has some pop. I don't want an aging over-valued big stick. Agreed. And I'm pleased the FO is taking its time. Sometimes wish Posters herein would be a little more patient and a little less subject to Fantasy Baseball mentality. All Front Offices are taking their time. Wait until December 7th. Once teams know if they'll have to give up a draft pick, then players will start signing. Some free agents will come off the market if they accept arbitration with their existing team. We're bottom feeders. We wait for somebody to slip in the market, that we can get on the cheap, and then we move in. If somebody like Magglio Ordonez can't get a deal, we'll be there trying to sign him to a 1-year contract to prove himself again. I like this approach. It's a creative way to deal with our low revenue and it's not much risk. 622581[/snapback]

Until you can show me the "data that is out there that does not project well for Delgado's future offensive output," than it's pretty clear that YOU are the amateur in this arguement. 622203[/snapback] Ya know, rferry has a point about Delgado. He's 32 years old. Anybody who gives Delgado a 5-year deal is probably going to regret it, not because of anything Delgado has done but because of what most 32-year olds have done in the past. Even a 3-year deal is iffy. He should still be a great player in 2005 but sometime in the next 5 years, he'll most likely start to decline. If it's sooner rather than later, then a 5-year deal is going to be very expensive. Unfortunately there's no way to tell when that decline will start - it may start when he's 39, it may start when he's 33. I don't want to be the team taking the chance on it.

Argue over the numbers if you like, overall the 2005's off maybe 1-2 million. 2004's are off $5 million, a figure that could have been made up by acquiring an Urbina and Conine, but instead traded for three players who will earn substantial raises this winter. The point that we're going to have to say goodbye to someone's bad contract if we intend to improve the club and remain within budget, whatever that budget may be, still stands. 622478[/snapback] I agree with your point but you should do a better job on your numbers, especially if you want to bill yourself as a numbers guy as much as you seem to like to. You were talking about a $70 million budget at one point there. That's just fantasy.

Exactly. That's why I said the 2004 budget, or meant to say. We can debate all day what the actual 2004 payrolls was, if Loria is cheap, why he and other Marlins owners might be and so on, but it gives little insight to what the 2005 payroll might be. Last year it was reported that the operating budget for player salaries was $48M (+12=60), an approximiate $5 increase from 2003. That's why I suggest the 2005 budget will likely be $65M. It could just as easily be less than that considering the lost gate revenue from 5 home games or other reasons. Conine (4.75), Castillo (5.33), Gonzalez (3.4), Lowell (8.5), Pierre (3.4,+.1 signing bonus,+incentives), Encarnacion (4.5), Cabrera (.6), Easley (.75), Aguila (.4), Harris (.4), Willis (.5), Bump (.4), Spooneybarger (.4), FCastillo (.3). Most come from this site. Take out Castillo, who was not added to the list above, and that makes it 13 people for 33M before adding Pierre's bonuses which added 600K to his 2004 contract. 622466[/snapback] Some of those numbers are too high. Conine is more like $3 million, Luis Castillo around $4.5 million, Lowell at $7.5 million. Even Cabrera is probably too high, though if we're smart we'll lock him up on a long-term deal. I'm surprised Frank Castillo is on that list - I thought he signed a minor league deal. The Conine and Castillo numbers are the two most common mistakes you'll see out there on amateur sites, or even real ones in the case of USA Today with Castillo. When Conine came here, he was due to make $4.75 million or so in 2004. He redid his deal to be $3 million in 2004 and $3 million in 2005. He gets more guaranteed money but it's spread out over two years. Castillo's bonus is deferred, just like Pudge's salary was deferred. If we're not prorating Pudge's salary why would we prorate Castillo's bonus? His entire bonus should show on the books the year it's paid, which will probably be 2006 after Hampton and Pudge come off the books. This ain't the NFL. The budget was reported to be $60 million by the same guy who reported that Mike Lowell was being traded to the Red Sox. He has no more insight into the Marlins front office than you or me. I can't believe Admin Beinfest left $7 million of unspent money on the table at the start of last season, especially since the trades that were made during the season were payroll neutral. $60 million at the beginning of 2004 might have meant that we'd now be the two-time defending champs - maybe we'd have kept Lee. Or Redman (a big improvement over Oliver until AJ was back and then it would've been easier to trade Penny sooner). Maybe we'd have done something about the bullpen. There really isn't much debate on how much the Marlins spent last season - it was around $53 million at the start of the season. To me, that's a lot clearer indicator on what the budget was than what Mike Berardino puts in his column. Also, I never said Loria was cheap (I never said he wasn't either). I don't really feel like debating you on anything. Just pointing out that your numbers are off.

P.S. Edited. Thanks 83Gator. 622451[/snapback] You're still off by $7 million. Go to this link, the USA Today salary database ... Link That comes to about $42 million in salaries and it's probably high because of the way they prorate Luis' bonus. Add in the $11 million for Hampton and Pudge and it's $53 million. They spent a little more during the season as guys got hurt and players were called up, but it wasn't more than $1 or $2 million. $60 million is a $7 million bump in payroll from 2004; we'll be lucky if it goes that high. Unless the stadium deal comes in, or Loria decides to do something special like he did with Pudge, I don't see the payroll going up to $65 million. Who are the 14 guys signed for 2005 and how do they make up $34 million? I haven't done the math on that but it sounds about right, maybe about $5 million or so high. Your $15 million for LoDuca, et. al. sounds about right too. That's $49 million. Add in Hampton and Pudge (I think it's less than $11 million in 2005) and we're pushing $60 million and we still need to add 7 players. Something doesn't add up.

...putting us close to the 2003's total salary of $60M (2004's was $65M). It's a safe bet that payroll will increase this year, but with the stadium deal still not secure and the lost revenue from the hurricanes, it's most likely just going to be another $5 million.622090[/snapback] Where are you getting these numbers? I had the 2004 payroll at around $53 million at the start of the season, including Hampton and Rodriguez. The Dodgers trade was payroll neutral and the Koch move only cost us a few hundred thousand. I'd be surprised to see the 2005 budget over $60 million.

Beinfest was Assistant GM in Seattle when Ichiro was signed. :whistle You sure about that Cape? Beinfest was hired by Montreal on 12/3/1999 while Ichiro was signed by Seattle in November 2000.