rferry

I think Beinfest and Fredi have a lot more to worry about what place Hanley "should" hit. You would think where Hanley hit wouldn't matter much in the big picture they're responsible for.

There are members here who have been unsuccessful in making a clear and strong argument for why Hanley batting third or cleanup benefits the team despite spent the bulk of the past year and half trying to do so. What makes you think Beinfest and Fredi can do it?

Hanley doesn't hit 1st because no one else can. Thank goodness we aren't giving the most plate appearances merely because he fits the leadoff player model. Any argument of where Hanley should hit should be part of a much larger argument focused on the overall offense.

South Florida has a better raw market than Washington. While South Florida may have problem courting the New Yorkers or senior citizens or certain immigrants, they've at least settled down to make their homes there. They're more likely to adopt the Marlins and stick with them whether good, bad or terrible. Washington's essentially a city during 2 times of the year: when congress is in session and when interns are in town. And then, baseball's only a diversion to real sport of Washington.

Can we change the title of the thread? Even the beat writer said it wasn't anything but a hunch on his part. "I suspect" is not "according to sources" or "management is considering". The only difference between this statement and a message board post claiming the benefits of re-signing Hanley is that the guy is affiliated with the Marlins and MLB.com but not in a decision making role.

Sounds like typical beat reporter talk to me. No commitment behind it.

I hope it's not Future Considerations. That prospect has decent curve.

At least Miller struck people out. Strikeouts and walks are the two most important peripheral stats in predicting pitcher performance.

You think Loria is going to raise payroll? He has made a ton of money every year and still refused to put any of it into the team. Why would things change with a new ballpark, when he will have even more money to funnel into his piggybank without the Marlins seeing nary a dime of it? Because he said he would? He also said he was losing money every year when that simply wasnt close to being true. Prove it. Aside from 2006, and what many expect from 2007, this has never been the case. When it suited his interests. Good luck on that. Think any owner, or any man or woman off the street, would play it any differently? Besides, the entire point of the stadium was to grant the Marlins a permanent home to grow fan interest and access to revenue generating opportunities. Being able to realize the benefits of fan loyalties, luxury boxes, game day revenues and strong attendance numbers will force the team to assure they're operating at peak efficiency. The days of Marlins owners being able to sit back, helpless to improve attendance while collecting huge revenue sharing checks are over. The Delgados will be signed to win championships to attract fan interest, not politician interest.

I think that's true for the most part, it seemed to be a pointless change in titles this season. Hill is a very well thought-of guy around the league. If Beinfest ever leaves I hope he sticks around. As you probably know but needs to be restated, Hill wasn't thought to stick around for much longer without a better title, pay and job. He got all three although Beinfest plays a prominent role in all baseball matters.

I guess Hanley should just start hitting doubles to start off innings.

And you guys prefer him over your 2006 manager. I prefer managers that are speaking terms with the front office

What's the point of batting him lead-off if he has to cut down on stealing bases? Perhaps that's the motivation behind it. Fredi wants Hanley to focus on becoming a cleanup hitter. People need to stop trying to change awesome ballplayers. Let them be awesome.

If there's ever a time to have 3 catchers on the roster (there's really never a time), this is the case. They're all beat up, we've got a flexible bench staff and have no need for extra pitching help yet. However, we may have trouble finding 2 that are cleared to play.

What happened that would make you think Castillo and the Marlins are clashing. Teams regularly allow veterans seek out other jobs when they lose out on a starting job. It's not seen as anything terrible. It's rather respectful and professional of the two parties. The team doesn't want to tie the player to a back-up position. If the player wants to seek out other opportunities, they are often allowed to.

Hanley more than makes up for his defense with his bat. You DO NOT move him from shortstop at this point. He provides the team too much value hitting that well from a "defensive-first" position. There's plenty more center-fielders and third-basemen who can hit and defend than there are shortstops. Maybe they're not making themselves known in our system right now but they will certainly be available when we're ready to take the next step.

The deal is not complete.Anyone who says it's complete, is biased and lying. How the feck is the stadium deal contingent on the signing off of any independent party aside from the Marlins? All that needs to be done is the city, county and Marlins need to nail down some details before the stadium opens. They can extend deadlines forever. The agreement of who's going is to pay was the important one. The second most important matter, covering cost overruns, was also decided. Every thing after that is trivial. The police unions are just trying to make it into something bigger than it is. But in no way do they have the leverage to stop the ballpark from being built. This issue ranks just above what shovels they're going to use at the ground-breaking. (Rumor: I heard Loria's going to move the team to San Antonio if they don't feature orange handles!!!)

Not even a school teacher's union in Massachusetts would have that power. Not enough for the city or county to reverse the deal. Especially as people pointed out that no such problem would even exist without a stadium. They disagree to a minor matter related to the stadium. They can fight all they want about the matter, but at the end of the day, it's not going to affect the ballpark. If the argument is that such matters should have been resolved in the process of crafting the proposal, then guess what? They've already lost the argument. The politicians pushed ahead. Now they can concern themselves with the minor matter instead of arguing how much sway they should have had. That's not important any more. It's not anything for the union to get upset about. How the matter is resolved might be.

Nope. He's still a bad owner. So the stadium got approved, yet we have to wallow in low payroll for 3 more years? Why can't he at least apply the profits from the last two seasons towards a slight increase? There's no excuse for that. Two reasons 1 - What does payroll have to do with it? Really. Is signing a $10 mil a year OF and a $10 mil a year pitcher making this a playoff team? No. This team is being built around Hanley/Hermida/Maybin, and the 20+ arms we have that could develop. When the time is right, meaning 2-3 years down the road when everyone is MLB ready and we have some experience, then it might be necessary to add a FA player to compliment what we have. Adding payroll right now, to defer against future income, is absolutely retarded unless you believe a $5 million dollar Kenny Lofton lofts this team above Atlanta, Philly, and NYM. I say, no. He does not do that. (And any rational baseball person would agree.) Therefore, adding payroll is a horrid idea. Meaning not a Loria issue. 2 - The stadium is approved, but cost over runs are not accounted for. The Marlins are on the hook for this, so until a realistic stadium cost is realized, which will take 1-2 years into construction, the Marlins do not have flexibility until they know how much they are going to have to spend on the stadium. It is a smart idea to be cautious and not add payroll. Let the kids develop. We'll see what we have post 09. I am not a Loria fan by any stretch, but if this is your argument against him, you need to rethink this and come up with a more compelling reason. Exactly. What does a few extra butts in the seats at Dolphins Stadium mean? Nothing. While it is necessary for the club to rebuild its name and keep fans interested, it is not necessary to generate peak interest yet. The Marlins earned a giant boost in signing on to be in South Florida for the next few dozen years. Think people were upset over skimpy payrolls? Please. Try fearing losing your team, feeling your owner didn't care, knowing your favorite player would be traded, and rooting for a team without an uncertain past, present or future. That's what killed fan interest in recent years. Loria and Samson could have had the best personalities and said all the right things, Miggy and Dontrelle could have been kept until they left as free agents, but it would have meant nothing without a new stadium and a secure future for the franchise. Only now can the Marlins build fan interest. And it is in their best interests to focus on their efforts on the beginning years of a new stadium when they have the opportunity to win games and fans (and earn an profit).

2003, you're OBJECTIVELY right about this, but it doesn't mean cooler heads will prevail. imo it is a very big issue, because the county has dug its heels in opposition to the city police getting the bulk of the services, and if they don't budge (which they probably shouldn't on principle considering they lost out on the AAA and PAC policing entirely), I'm not sure the city budges either. The city can't afford to have its own area NOT use its city police/fire services. I think everyone can agree that everyone will lose if the stadium doesn't get built, but we're not talking about politicians pandering to just anybody. The city of miami fire/police are the biggest lobbiests for the city representatives...if they can't be reasoned with to share the pie, then the city and the county are in a stare-down that neither can really afford to lose. in the past, the county folded, but i don't think this can happen again considering the abuse the county commisionsers took from failing to account for the county services before. I could care less (as am sure every person on the board could care less) WHO does the fire/policing, but this is more than just politics. the herald is really not sensationalizing it imo. its a big issue, and hopefully the city and county can agree to a 50/50 split on this (probably as it should be). cooler heads should prevail, but in light of the beatings the county took in the past, you really are asking cooler heads to prevail with the CITY, which is asking a lot. What can the police lobbyists do? The deal is done. All parties signed on. Some groups don't like the details. For this to go anywhere, the county or city would have to relent to their demands and reverse the vote in an appropriate matter of time. As this is an incidental matter, the politicians will likely work to resolve it. Had the police made some noise before the vote, maybe this would have been an issue. Not now. The politicians would lose much more than votes and campaign dollars if they reverse the deal now. They'd lose all their credibility. Can you imagine any one voting to re-elect a politician because they reversed a decision due only to the threats of a lobbyist group? No amount of support from that group would allow that politician to be re-elected. Now this may be a big deal and it may take some work to craft an appropriate resolution, but to suggest the stadium deal is in jeopardy is a load of you know what.

The hard part is over. The politicians have signed off.

Wow not even a 100k raise.Loria you cheap bastard You can bet in discussions (can't really call them negotiations when one side has maximum leverage), a significant raise was talked about. This is a tactic by Hanley's agent to seek concessions from the team in the future. It allows them to point to a history of salary grievances. Despite it being purely a creation of Hanley's agent's own making.

The 3rd spot may not be ideal because he'd likely be batting with 1 or 2 outs and a rally dead or beyond starting.

It's not too difficult to drive in a guy who's on 2nd (and I ain't talking about a bunt single and steal either) with 0 outs

Honestly I haven't been paying too much attention, but the statute seems to exempt funds such as those that were collected from the so-called tourist taxes