This was not a mistake because with Pudge's money, we probably wouldn't have gotten 'Mando, I don't believe that any of our starters would have been traded simply because our on-field budget is lower than last year and the payments owed to Pudge and Hampton bring our total a little under the originally expected budget.

 

I think we can call it a mistake only when we trade for a catcher who is more than just a stretch run rental, and if that trade involves Castro and/or a blue-chip prospect, and if the contract is big enough that the difference is negligible between what we'd pay there and what Pudge wanted.

 

I wish we kept him, but the logic used in allowing him to leave was sound, so as long as they don't contradict themselves by going out and getting Kendall, I'm fine with it...

I am inclined to think we are under budget. Last I hear, our payroll was around $47M. I may be wrong, but we need to verify that first. I understand Loria is loosing $20M a year - that figure hasnt changed since H Bomb claimed it. But if our budget was supposed to be aroun $52-$54M, then we have between $5-7M we could spend. My question is, why havent we?

I think the main reason we haven't spend the excess budget under $54 million is because there is none. Adding in the Hampton and Pudge deferrals, the 2004 payroll is a little over $53 million. I think your base assumption that we have $6 million to play with is wrong. Keeping Pudge would've meant losing some combination of other players who are contributing now. Pudge would help at C but we'd be weaker elsewhere. We'd be robbing Peter to pay Paul.

 

I think you're kinda beating a dead horse on this one. We don't have extra payroll that we didn't use. If we find ourselves in the middle of the race in late July (which we should) then I think Loria will find special money to help the team but it looks like we're at the budget level he set. Though I never did actually read anything where somebody in the front office said what the budget was. All I ever read was speculation.

I agree we're somehwat under budget, but with the stadium deal as top priority I'm cutting management a little slack. Besides, with attendance what it was this weekend (a lackluster 17,000 Friday and 16,000 Sunday), we fans aren't really holding up our end of the bargain.

 

That said, the Pudge issue is dead and gone. If you are prone to nostalgia, pine away. The rest of us have moved on.

Again, assuming this is some form of 'nostalgia', or an inability to get over the past is missing the point entirely. That is not my intention, as I am the one who started calling the former Marlin C 'Fudge'.

 

But what is closest to the point I have been trying to make here, and trying to explore, TSwift demonstrated and seems to be the only one getting at what I am suggesting here.

 

Some of you want us to upgrade C, but forget about our financial concerns. I question whether or not we even have any financial concerns because NO ONE has come forward and stated specifically what our payroll is vs. the 'speculated' budget.

 

But if we go out and trade or somehow acquire a catcher to replace the tandem we have now, or essentially replace Fudge, then YES we did make a mistake if the cost is anywhere near what Fudge was going to cost us. And that is before said player even takes a swing in the box.

 

That has not happened yet - and that is precisely my point. I dont think it will unless something drastic happens on the financial front. Our offense is struggling, Fudge would definetly have helped us thus far. But we are also still in first place.

 

So if you find yourself asking 'what is the big deal?', then stop to think that this team is not so bad off. A lot of you out there are suggesting all kinds of ridiculous trades. This either demonstrates a trade is possible or not possible. Also, it would call for us to question whether or not we did make a mistake. At that point, you would be addressing the point of this thread. Anything short of that misses the point.

I'm not sure I understand our "mistake".

 

In order to make a deal you need two parties willing to make one. That certainly wasn't the case in these negotiations. Even if you fault the Marlins for not offering enough the other side was dug into their 4 year/$40 million position and didn't move an inch. That's not negotiating.

 

Where I do potentially find fault with the Marlins organization was not going hard after Javy Lopez who wound up signing for $6 million or so in Baltimore. Of course it's easy for me to say because it isn't my money but if there was ever a catcher worth that kind of money with a swing made for PPS it's Javy.

Some of you want us to upgrade C, but forget about our financial concerns.? I question whether or not we even have any financial concerns because NO ONE has come forward and stated specifically what our payroll is vs. the 'speculated' budget.?

You stated that our budget was $54 million and payroll was $47 million. I stated that you were wrong and our payroll is $53-$54 million. Now you're grasping at straws. Now you're gonna say that the payroll is really $60 million to make your point? Your point when you started this thread was that we were $6 million under our budget of $54 million. That's incorrect. Now you're changing the budget number to keep the thread going?

Our payroll at the beginning of 2003 was slightly over $50M. Our payroll at the start of 2004 was slightly under $50M. So our payroll is essentially unchanged from last year.

 

Both of these include the payouts to Hampton and Pudge (this year).

looks liek a cat.

Our payroll at the beginning of 2003 was slightly over $50M. Our payroll at the start of 2004 was slightly under $50M. So our payroll is essentially unchanged from last year.

 

Both of these include the payouts to Hampton and Pudge (this year).

According to USA Today, our payroll is $42.1 million, not counting Pudge and Hampton. That comes to $53.1 million with those deferrals. I tracked the numbers too as we signed players and I came up with real similar numbers. Add in Gracesqui ML salary now and it's closer to $53.4 million.

Our payroll at the beginning of 2003 was slightly over $50M. Our payroll at the start of 2004 was slightly under $50M. So our payroll is essentially unchanged from last year.

 

Both of these include the payouts to Hampton and Pudge (this year).

According to USA Today, our payroll is $42.1 million, not counting Pudge and Hampton. That comes to $53.1 million with those deferrals. I tracked the numbers too as we signed players and I came up with real similar numbers. Add in Gracesqui ML salary now and it's closer to $53.4 million. This is the information I have for salary at the start of the season. If you have something different I'd like to see it.

 

Mike Hampton/Pudge 11,000,000

Juan Pierre 2,500,000

Luis Castillo 4,000,000

Miguel Cabrera 320,000

Mike Lowell 6,500,000

Jeff Conine 3,000,000

Hee Sop Choi 310,000

Ramon Castro 400,000

Alex Gonzalez 2,800,000

Brad Penny 3,725,000

Darren Oliver 750,000

Josh Beckett 1,509,375

Carl Pavano 3,800,000

Dontrelle Willis 353,000

Armando Benitez 3,500,000

Chad Fox 1,250,000

Matt Perisho 300,000

Tommy Phelps 307,500

Nate Bump 305,000

Justin Wayne 301,000

Mike Redmond 840,000

Mike Mordecai 425,000

Damian Easely 300,000

Lenny Harris 400,000

Abraham Nunez 300,000

Wil Cordero 600,000

Total 49,795,875

This is the information I have for salary at the start of the season. If you have something different I'd like to see it.

Where's AJ and Spooney? They're on the major league payroll.

They weren't on the 25 man roster last time I checked.

They weren't on the 25 man roster last time I checked.

They are still on the payroll.

They weren't on the 25 man roster last time I checked.

They are still on the payroll. It all depends on what you want to include. With AJ and Spooney it is $52.6M

They weren't on the 25 man roster last time I checked.

They are still on the payroll. It all depends on what you want to include. With AJ and Spooney it is $52.6M The Marlins have to write checks to them twice a month. They're on the MLB payroll. They're on the ML roster - they're just on the DL, just like Chad Fox. You're not subtracting off Chad Fox.

 

Here's a link to the the numbers on ESPN, which is the same as on USA Today. That's without the $11 million Pudge/Hampton numbers ...

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1778397

If I can chime in here for a minute.

 

This argument about $$$ is irrelevant to the thread in that none of us know the difinitive answer to who is being paid and how much, nor does it take into account proration of certain contracts that include bonuses, etc.

 

Payroll is what it is. The question really is will (not "can") the Marlins spend more when the opportunity arises and as it regards Pudge, did they have the $$$ to pay him $10 million a year for the this and next three years?

 

I believe the answer to the first part is yes and the second part, no. Committing $40 million (give or take) to him over four years would have been unduely burdensome for the franchise.

If I can chime in here for a minute.

 

This argument about $$$ is irrelevant to the thread in that none of us know the difinitive answer to who is being paid and how much, nor does it take into account proration of certain contracts that include bonuses, etc.

Actually I think we do know. I believe USA Today is publishing correct accurate numbers, and are adjusting for deferrals, and are including bonuses in the year they're being paid. There is some guesswork involved - our payroll could be even higher this year if we choose to pay Castillo his bonus now - but I have faith in these numbers.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think the argument over $$$ is irrelevant to this thread because that was Jonny's supposition - that at $47 million we're $6 million under budget and that maybe we could've afforded Pudge. And if we can afford Kendall, we certainly could've afforded Pudge. I'm just trying to show jonny that the $47 million part of the assumption is incorrect.

 

I agree with part of Jonny's logic - if we can afford Kendall now we could've afforded Pudge. But I disagree with his answer to the question in the title of the thread. The answer is not that we made a mistake with Pudge; the answer is that we can't afford Kendall either.

 

Payroll is what it is. The question really is will (not "can") the Marlins spend more when the opportunity arises and as it regards Pudge, did they have the $$$ to pay him $10 million a year for the this and next three years?

 

I believe the answer to the first part is yes and the second part, no. Committing $40 million (give or take) to him over four years would have been unduely burdensome for the franchise.

I agree with you on this. Loria will spend the money when the opportunity arises. I don't think there's any way we will trade for Kendall now unless the Pirates pay his salary and that ain't gonna happen. In late July, when we're in the middle of the race, then you add payroll. But not in early May, when a rash of injuries to key players could knock us out of it.

If I can chime in here for a minute.

 

This argument about $$$ is irrelevant to the thread in that none of us know the difinitive answer to who is being paid and how much, nor does it take into account proration of certain contracts that include bonuses, etc.

Actually I think we do know. I believe USA Today is publishing correct accurate numbers, and are adjusting for deferrals, and are including bonuses in the year they're being paid. There is some guesswork involved - our payroll could be even higher this year if we choose to pay Castillo his bonus now - but I have faith in these numbers.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think the argument over $$$ is irrelevant to this thread because that was Jonny's supposition - that at $47 million we're $6 million under budget and that maybe we could've afforded Pudge. And if we can afford Kendall, we certainly could've afforded Pudge. I'm just trying to show jonny that the $47 million part of the assumption is incorrect.

 

I agree with part of Jonny's logic - if we can afford Kendall now we could've afforded Pudge. But I disagree with his answer to the question in the title of the thread. The answer is not that we made a mistake with Pudge; the answer is that we can't afford Kendall either.

 

Payroll is what it is. The question really is will (not "can") the Marlins spend more when the opportunity arises and as it regards Pudge, did they have the $$$ to pay him $10 million a year for the this and next three years?

 

I believe the answer to the first part is yes and the second part, no. Committing $40 million (give or take) to him over four years would have been unduely burdensome for the franchise.

I agree with you on this. Loria will spend the money when the opportunity arises. I don't think there's any way we will trade for Kendall now unless the Pirates pay his salary and that ain't gonna happen. In late July, when we're in the middle of the race, then you add payroll. But not in early May, when a rash of injuries to key players could knock us out of it.

I'm not arguing with Jonny or you or anyone else, I just was trying to make the point that difinitive numbers are difficult to come by. USAToday may be right or they may be wrong, no one knows.

 

We can all make assumptions but what I didn't want to see happen to the thread was for it to turn into name-calling, bashing as each person starts defending their numbers.

letting fudge go was NOT a mistake

 

we have plenty of bats to get along this year. add in the fact he was holding us ransom and that our farm system will produce a quality catcher soon. we made a smart move showing him the door

If I can chime in here for a minute.

 

This argument about $$$ is irrelevant to the thread in that none of us know the difinitive answer to who is being paid and how much, nor does it take into account proration of certain contracts that include bonuses, etc.

Actually I think we do know. I believe USA Today is publishing correct accurate numbers, and are adjusting for deferrals, and are including bonuses in the year they're being paid. There is some guesswork involved - our payroll could be even higher this year if we choose to pay Castillo his bonus now - but I have faith in these numbers.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think the argument over $$$ is irrelevant to this thread because that was Jonny's supposition - that at $47 million we're $6 million under budget and that maybe we could've afforded Pudge. And if we can afford Kendall, we certainly could've afforded Pudge. I'm just trying to show jonny that the $47 million part of the assumption is incorrect.

 

I agree with part of Jonny's logic - if we can afford Kendall now we could've afforded Pudge. But I disagree with his answer to the question in the title of the thread. The answer is not that we made a mistake with Pudge; the answer is that we can't afford Kendall either.

 

Payroll is what it is. The question really is will (not "can") the Marlins spend more when the opportunity arises and as it regards Pudge, did they have the $$$ to pay him $10 million a year for the this and next three years?

 

I believe the answer to the first part is yes and the second part, no. Committing $40 million (give or take) to him over four years would have been unduely burdensome for the franchise.

I agree with you on this. Loria will spend the money when the opportunity arises. I don't think there's any way we will trade for Kendall now unless the Pirates pay his salary and that ain't gonna happen. In late July, when we're in the middle of the race, then you add payroll. But not in early May, when a rash of injuries to key players could knock us out of it. This is what I am looking for; great job Gator.

 

Because from what I read at the beginning of the season til now, our payroll has been published to fluctuate between $47M and $54M. I am not assuming anything - I am ASKING what the right answer is in regards to our payroll. And the dialogue between you and PBMarlin has been most illuminating.

 

And yes, the idea I am trying to extrapolate (sp?) is why was it ok for us NOT to pay for Fudge and then turn around and trade for a guy like Kendall? More importantly, I am trying to get other people here to think critically about this issue.

 

The other trend that seems to be going on here is that people somehow think we are getting Nomar this season. Again, I dont think people realize financially what is going on with this franchise.

 

I also want to point out that things are not as bad as they may seem. We are still in first place, and teams will struggle from time to time. We know that the players on this roster can perform better in some cases. It is just a matter of time. So I also dont think the need is there to make a deal for ANOTHER bat. We have plenty it seems to me. If anything, we may want to consider dealing a bat for a relief pitcher (Riedling is hot rumor right now).

 

But you got it right: if we couldnt afford Fudge, why would we get Kendall? To me, that is admitting a mistake. And money is most certainly part of the issue it seems (sorry Marlins2003). Because if it wasnt about money, Fudge would still be wearing teal. And if it isnt about money, then we most assuredly made a glaring miscalculation in the talent of Fudge.

The only reason I didnt like losing Pudge was that he was really a perfect third hole hitter for us, we dont have one now which is causing us to loose runs for both JP and Louie, even with Cabs leading the league in Jacks and Mikey having another bonafide all star year id still really like to see pudge in that three hole.

if we get Kendall, one has to believe he would be paid for(atleast alot of it)

 

paying Pudge $10mil a year over the next 4 is just flat out dumb....

 

no matter how you slice it

I, for one miss Ivan "Pudge" Rodriguez. He did not hit HRs like he is known for and may never again because of his age, but the man was clutch, and his Defense is the best from a catcher that I have ever seen. I think we should have coughed up the extra dough and payed the man what he is worth. We are missing an extra bat in the line up and he could have been it. Can you imagine, this line up...

 

Pierre

Castillo

Pudge

Lowell

Cabs

Conine

Choi

Gonzalez

Pitcher

 

I think we would have won 1/3 of the games we have lost so far had Pudge been on our team. Defense wins championships, and he was a huge contributor...

I, for one miss Ivan "Pudge" Rodriguez. He did not hit HRs like he is known for and may never again because of his age, but the man was clutch, and his Defense is the best from a catcher that I have ever seen. I think we should have coughed up the extra dough and payed the man what he is worth. We are missing an extra bat in the line up and he could have been it. Can you imagine, this line up...

 

Pierre

Castillo

Pudge

Lowell

Cabs

Conine

Choi

Gonzalez

Pitcher

 

I think we would have won 1/3 of the games we have lost so far had Pudge been on our team. Defense wins championships, and he was a huge contributor...

Did you see the April and May games of the 2003 season?

I, for one miss Ivan "Pudge" Rodriguez. He did not hit HRs like he is known for and may never again because of his age, but the man was clutch, and his Defense is the best from a catcher that I have ever seen. I think we should have coughed up the extra dough and payed the man what he is worth. We are missing an extra bat in the line up and he could have been it. Can you imagine, this line up...

and in CJ's early years as a Marlin, he was better than Pudge was last year