Out of the Past

Had Loria / Beinfest given in to Floyd and to pressure from fans and the local media and signed him to the ridiculously inflated $33 million deal he was looking for (which supposedly included a hometown discount!) then there's absolutely no way the we win the '03 WS. What would you take... the '03 WS or a malcontent liar who likes to play GM? I'll take the '03 WS.

I don't think Nolasco's fastball is that weak. He's got good velocity (91-94 consistently, topping out at 96-97). I think Swift is right. He throws too many strikes sometimes. I think he needs to be a little wild at times... throw fastballs inside and miss the plate a little bit. If he does that I think he'll be fine. His ERA will be 4.00-4.25 this season, IMO. I think you overstate his velocity by a couple of mph. No I don't. He's consistently 91-94mph. Low 90's fastball. And I've seen him top out at 96-97. I remember him getting his fastball up to 96-97 against the Cubs early in the season. I agree it's low 90's but I would say he's consistently 90-92 topping out at 95... pretty similar to our other starters. None of them throw as hard as the old batch (Beckett, Penny, AJ). Let's put it this way... Nolasco throws 96-97 as often as Beckett touched 99-100. It was almost never, but it happened. How often do you think Beckett hits 100 mph? The one time I remember him hitting 100 mph was the Sammy AB. If a radar gun shows Nolasco hitting 97 mph I woudl question the gun's accuracy.

I don't think Nolasco's fastball is that weak. He's got good velocity (91-94 consistently, topping out at 96-97). I think Swift is right. He throws too many strikes sometimes. I think he needs to be a little wild at times... throw fastballs inside and miss the plate a little bit. If he does that I think he'll be fine. His ERA will be 4.00-4.25 this season, IMO. I think you overstate his velocity by a couple of mph. No I don't. He's consistently 91-94mph. Low 90's fastball. And I've seen him top out at 96-97. I remember him getting his fastball up to 96-97 against the Cubs early in the season. I agree it's low 90's but I would say he's consistently 90-92 topping out at 95... pretty similar to our other starters. None of them throw as hard as the old batch (Beckett, Penny, AJ).

unless we don't get a legit CF via another trade, why trade from a position of weakness? Cody was valuable last year, and I don't think this spring is indicative of his talent level I agree. I think CF and RF are weaknesses. Hermida's productiveness for the '07 season has to be a question mark.

I don't think Nolasco's fastball is that weak. He's got good velocity (91-94 consistently, topping out at 96-97). I think Swift is right. He throws too many strikes sometimes. I think he needs to be a little wild at times... throw fastballs inside and miss the plate a little bit. If he does that I think he'll be fine. His ERA will be 4.00-4.25 this season, IMO. I think you overstate his velocity by a couple of mph.

I believe it. CJ And Floyd, who were supposed to be veteran leaders on a young team, became disruptive malcontents over money (Floyd) and playing time (CJ). Both were extremely bitter after getting traded in what turned out to be great trades.

I'm a little surprised he went with Olsen for the No. 2 spot and not Anibal. I think Anibal has shown that he is the second best (maybe the best) pitcher on the team. The Mets, Phillies and Braves all hit better off righties than lefties last year and by putting Olsen after DTrain we get better matchups early in the season when we face them. I think it's great Fredi is doing something like this and I was thrilled when I read his reasoning. Earlier in ST I read he was thinking about having Hanley bunt a runenr over until the bench coach talked him out of it and I cringed when I read that but it's great to read about moves like this one with the rotation.

We also know Alex Sanchez sucks. Yep. They all suck but I couple of them, Ross and Borchard, can be useful if used correctly in certain situations. Sanchez and Reed are worthless any way you look at them. I dont see how you can realistically call Reed worthless after 41 major league at bats. 41. There's more to it than the 41 ABs. He's a singles hitter who doesn't take many walks and I don't have much use for players like that unless they hit well over .300. He's 26 so he's no longer a kid and I think he is what he'll be. His upside is a JP clone and I don't think JP is a good player. In addition to that I think our CF, whoever it is, will hit 7th or 8th and I think a Borchard / Ross platoon could provide some pop and run production in the bottom of the lineup. If we continuously toss aside our CF candidates at the first moment they fail or one of their competitors succeed, we'll finish more than 10 games below. Sanchez may suck. Borchard may suck. Ross may suck. Reed may suck. We know Abercrombie sucks. But if they aren't given a chance to prove themselves, we stand the chance of accentuating their suckiness. I don't agree. If a guy is given a shot and he sucks then he needs to be benched so the next guy gets his shot. Last year we stuck with the Reed / Reggie disaster for much too long and paid the price for it. There's a difference between letting them suck and letting them prove they suck. I am not talking about months in the case of Abercrombie, but in the face of competition [of such mediocre talent], we should allow the player to get his feet wet and bat together before we promote the guy who went 2/3 the other day or is tearing up AAA or trading away talent for some marginal talent. None will likely to be the answer. But we'll likely turn this season into a disaster if we grease the revolving door to CFq. So how long would you give them to prove they suck before moving to the next guy? Please give a straight answer. I think we may agree on this one.

RFerry... I do think the overwhelming majority of relievers other than closers and set-up men are bad pitchers compared to the average MLB pitcher and if you disagree with this premise, as apparently you do, then there's really no point in continuing with this debate.

We also know Alex Sanchez sucks. Yep. They all suck but I couple of them, Ross and Borchard, can be useful if used correctly in certain situations. Sanchez and Reed are worthless any way you look at them.

This would be a god awful trade if it happens. Among the worst in the franchise's history. Why? Is this because of your other-worldly closer theory? Just because I don't play by the book doesn't mean I'm wrong. I don't see anyone rationally discrediting my logic. The only response I get is this: "Umm, it takes a lot of stress to pitch in the 9th inning, I think." it's idiotic to use your best reliever in the 6th or 7th to preserve a small lead and then turn the game to your worst relievers in the 7th, 8th and 9th and watch them blow the small lead as they'll be prone to do.

If we continuously toss aside our CF candidates at the first moment they fail or one of their competitors succeed, we'll finish more than 10 games below. Sanchez may suck. Borchard may suck. Ross may suck. Reed may suck. We know Abercrombie sucks. But if they aren't given a chance to prove themselves, we stand the chance of accentuating their suckiness. I don't agree. If a guy is given a shot and he sucks then he needs to be benched so the next guy gets his shot. Last year we stuck with the Reed / Reggie disaster for much too long and paid the price for it.

Willis and Olsen being back-to-back in the rotation is good not because they are both lefties but because they are two best available pitchers. I always want my best pitcher on the mound in any situation to hell if they are lefty or righty. I agree with the move because of the matchups but why do you think Olsen is better than Sanchez? It can't possibly be performance given that Sanchez clearly outpitched Olsen last year so I'm just wondering.

Marlins would have received Jorge Julio and Mike Jacobs Mets get Carlos Delgado, John Maine, and Orlando Hernandez Arizona gets Yusmeiro Petit Orioles get Kris Benson Kind of unfair because the Marlins shed a lot of salary in the process which has to count for something. Also, Grant Psomas is pissed off somewhere. It would count for something if the shed salary was used to acquire other players. Sadly with our owner that was not the case.

Unfortunately the PAC crowd, not the baseball crowd, calls the shots in Miami-Dade so we spend $500 million (and counting...) on a building that a miniscule number of people will ever use. It's ridiculous.

As we wait for the season to begin, and as we wait with hope for a stadium deal....I'd like to clarify the situation that the franchise will find itself in revenue and cost wise...in a new stadium. We'll have to make some educated guesses here, but I call on all to add their thoughts, especially those with a firmer grip on the money aspect of the game. . . To make a long story short, I see a new stadium as being revenue neutral for the Marlins. I do not see it equating to a surge in profits. . . . Some rough numbers: 2007 in Joe Robbie ............. 2011 in New Stadium Skybox and Club Seat 0 .......... $8,000,000 Other Season Tickets $4,000,000 ......... 25,000,000 Non-season Tickets 4,000,000 ......... 8,000,000 Parking 0 .......... 0 Concessions 1,000,000 ........ 6,000,000 Advertising 0 ......... 15,000,000 Media Money from MLB 30,000,000 ........ 30,000,000 Merchandise Sales 5,000,000 ........ 5,000,000 Revenue Sharing 30,000,000 ........ 0 Total 74,000,000 ......... 97,000,000 Cost of Lease(Rent) (1,000,000).......... (10,000,000) Gross Profit 73,000,000 .......... 87,000,000 Not a great difference. Almost revenue neutral. But I imagine that I'm missing something, understating other things, overstating others. Please add your thoughts. I am making the following leap of faith assumptions: 200 skyboxes or 3200 seats will be close to a sell out. There will be 15,000 season tickets sold in addition to the skyboxes. I think you may have understimated some of the increased revenues. My guesstimate would be an additional $37 million Year 1 and each following year the additional revenues would increase because revenues will continue to increase (inflation) but the lease payment will remain constant. (Numbers in $ millions) PPS / New Ticket Recepits 19.4 / 48.1 Skyboxes 0.0 / 15.8 Concessions 2.4 / 10.9 Stadium Ads 0.0 / 15.0 Parking Revenue 2.0 / 0.0 MLB Media $ 30.0 / 30.0 Revenue Sharing 30.0 / 5.0 Merchandise 5.0 / 10.0 Rent (1.0) / (10.0) Gross Profit 87.9 / 124.8 ======================= Some assumptions: Tickets PPS - 15k fans per game / $15 average price New - 27k fans per game / $22 average price Skyboxes PPS - Nada New - The Phillies get around $17 million. I'm assuming 70 boxes @ $225k. Concessions PPS - $2 profit per fan New - $5 profit per fan Merchandise Sales Should increase with the higher attendance Rent PPS - I don't know so I'll go with your number New- $10 million should cover the debt service

Fasano wants to get his Lightning a second rebate to update the St. Pete Times Forum. Other than that, looks good. That "other than that" is a big one. I think by the time the full House and Senate vote on this thing it will be $540 million tax break ($60 million * 9 teams) and that's a lot of money especially considering the reduction in tax receipts (about a $1 billion) compared to last year.

Jeremy Hermida earned his roster spot back in the 2005 season. He is/was one of the best prospects in baseball. He is on the team, and will receive the benefit of the doubt for the next few months. I remember reading right after the end of last season Beinfest saying Jeremy wasn't guaranteed to have the RF job. I think it was a Barry Jackson column. I agree with much of what 2003 wrote but I would keep Jeremy as the opening day RF and if he struggles the first 3 or 4 weeks then I would send him down. If we had anyone else to play RF right now then I would be more inclined to have him open the season in AAA but we don't really have any other options.

He should ahve removed injury replacements / spot starters from his analysis. They skew the numbers.

Last year was also Hanley's best season. From what I remember, he was always considered a 'potential' guy after performing well in the low minors, but never had any recent stellar seasons until last year. I guess I'm the only one who wouldn't consider him a lock for a repeat performance. Yes, it was also Hanley's best year but you may want to consider that before last year Hanley was basically a baby in baseball terms and Uggla was not. Uggla may be a late bloomer, a one year wonder or sopmewhere in between. I'll pick somewhere in between. 07 OPS Predictions: Hammer: .925 - .975 Hanley: .825 - .875 Uggla: .725 - .800

First, your attendance math is flawed, because it only calculates your $12 increase for the additional 15K a night. That would be spread across the board. Wow, I screwed that up. After fixing that screw up I agree with the Marlins could have a $100 million payroll in 2012 and break even.

There is no way that a new stadium puts the franchise in a worse situation than it is now, or even anything remotely similar. Between MLB contracts, attendance, various revenue sources (we haven't even touched on advertising sold on every square inch of the place from cup holders to seatbacks to jumbotrons, to wall space above urinals and internet connections) within a couple of years of recapturing their losses between now and opening day (I'm assuming 10% in cost overruns they'll have to absorb) there's no reason why this franchise can't field a team in the $85-120 million annual payroll area starting somewhere around 2012-13 and still break-even. I'm wondering how you came up with your estimate? I ask because to me it seems extremely high. How much incremental revenues do you think will be generated in the new stadium from luxury suites, naming rights, stadium advertising, parking, ticket receipts, concessions, etc.? Some quick guesstimates on my part: Luxury suites: 70 suites @ $250k per year = $17.5 million Naming rights: $2.5 million Stadium Advertising: $10 million Ticket receipts: $15 million (*) Concessions: $12 million Parking: Not much unless Loria starts buying parking lots around the stadium The above adds up to $57 million. If you take the reduction in revenue sharing of about $25 million (using the Phillies example) that lives Loria +$32 million. Unless these estimates are waaaaaaaaaay off or unless I'm missing revenue streams that will generate many millions a year then I don't see how we can field a $100 million payroll and still break even. I think he could break even with a payroll in the $75 million range. What do you think I'm missing? (*) assuming an attendance increase of 15k per game and $12 increase in the average ticket price. I think dealing with the issue of a 100-200 Million cost overrun is the first flaw that I'll point out. I suspect that this issue is the key one in the negotiations right now. Saddling the franchise with a cost overrun of 100-200 Million would be crippling, and undermines the rest of your thoughts. But I hope that this issue gets worked out somehow to spread any cost overrun over a certain amount between the parties involved. According to the Burgess memo the team is responsible for all cost overruns over $490 million.

Last year it was obvious the best CF option was the Cody / Alfredo platoon and I think that's the best option we now have. I don't follow ST that closely so I could be wrong about this but it seems to me the Cody / Alfredo option is not even an option. I don't get it.

*waits for some genius to say we should have traded him* I'm waiting for some genius to blame Girardi.

I think Loria is looking at something in the $50 million neighborhood in increased revenues from things such as luxury suites, naming rights, stadium advertisement, concessions, increases in attendance, increased in ticket prices, etc. If his welfare check is cut from $30 million to $5 million (using the Phillies example) then his increase in revenues will be "only" in the $25 million neighborhood and if he continues to make his wallet the top priority (as he did in '06 and '07) then we'll continue to be towards the bottom of the league in payroll. I hope with the new stadium he goes back into his ways before '06 when he was spendign money and that would allow us to have about a league average payroll.