July 2, 200323 yr This ownership has done us nothing wrong, yet the press unfairly attacks them claiming to be the bearers of the truth.How quickly you forget that this whole problem with Lowell exists because of management, who forgot to sign him to a decent, long-term contract. So, yes, they did do us wrong. but when a team makes a commitment to a player, they try to make it seem as the team is lying and going to use it only as a PR ploy. What commitment? They have him under contract and are not trading him. Sounds like they are honoring an existing deal(for the time being), nothing more. There is no negotiations right now, no money changed hands...What commitment? You are a perfect example of the ploy working, you bought it hook, line and sinker and see it as the FO working hard to make things right, when in fact they're cutting off their nose despite their face. They all said Lowell was as good as gone by July 31st, and now they must eat their words, and they cannot admit they were wrong and say so. Yes, they all said he'd be gone...Because it made sense. Why would they apoligize because the marlins screwed the pooch on this one? That's like me saying to you drive slow you won't get hurt. Then on purpose you drive real slow in front of a train. Well, I guess I would of been wrong about driving slow then, wouldn't I?
July 2, 200323 yr What you are accusing him of is tantamount to professional suicide. If he were ever to assume a personal vendetta against any player, organization etc.. He would be reduced to writing obituaries in the MooseJaw Saskatchuan Daily Bugle in no time flat. Get your facts straight Fishy - it's the Moose Jaw Times-Herald! http://www.mjtimes.sk.ca/ :w00t
July 2, 200323 yr What you are accusing him of is tantamount to professional suicide. If he were ever to assume a personal vendetta against any player, organization etc.. He would be reduced to writing obituaries in the MooseJaw Saskatchuan Daily Bugle in no time flat. Get your facts straight Fishy - it's the Moose Jaw Times-Herald! http://www.mjtimes.sk.ca/ :w00t LMFAO Although I think this is indicative of the fact that you may have way too much free time on your hands.
July 2, 200323 yr What you are accusing him of is tantamount to professional suicide. If he were ever to assume a personal vendetta against any player, organization etc.. He would be reduced to writing obituaries in the MooseJaw Saskatchuan Daily Bugle in no time flat. Get your facts straight Fishy - it's the Moose Jaw Times-Herald! http://www.mjtimes.sk.ca/ :w00t I must say, I am jealous of that witty reference
July 2, 200323 yr I have to agree with Mike B here. Something doesn't seem to fit...Cubs best prospects (Sisco + Guzman) get injured and other clubs want us to take on salary in proposed deals (Beltre + Cirillo). So the FO gave up and tried to gain some leverage in dealings with Lowell by announcing publicly he was going nowhere? Something they could have done at the beginning of the season by signing him to a long, healthy extention? Its not like they are playing high stakes poker on the guy hes a sure bet to be in the lineup 170 games and hit .285 with 20+ homers and 90+ RBI with gold glove 3B defense. At first I was ecstatic about the announcement, but Mike B and fillet have brought me back to reality. . If the Marlins try to sign him long term and he gives them a "hometown" discount it will still cost them 5 yrs @8-11 million a season.
July 2, 200323 yr First why do we even reponse and waste our time answering Fillet Brain's idiotic posts. This guy IS NOT A FAN OF OUR TEAM SERIOUSLY. This forum is for Marlins' fans, not for some idiot just trying to get under our skin. He come here with NO favorite team trashing us as stupid fans. I'm done responsing to this moron. Now Mike Berardino WHY? your a good baseball writer but you have falling BIGTIME with this column. Its OK to be wrong in life. I really thought his column was childish and very unprofessional. I could go quote by quote and correct him again but Hotcorner beat me to it. I will though post to two thing to make this a little clearer for Mr. Berardino "The Dodgers have tons of young pitching, but some scouts question whether Joe Thurston, likely the key cog in their offer, is an everyday second baseman. Plus, they weren't finding any takers for current third baseman Adrian Beltre." *WRONG the Dodgers offered Thurston but were quickly turned down a month ago. The last offer on the table was Mota/Beltre and a prospect for Lowell. The Mariners are stacked with prospects as well, but first they would have had to unload Jeff Cirillo. Again, no dice. * Well the Mariners never made an offer and were never in the game. Those Playstation guys don't spend money. The Cubs? They seemed a fitting trade partner until Marlins scouts decided Bobby Hill, the former University of Miami standout, wasn't good enough to replace Castillo. "What the heck can [Hill] do?" one of those scouts said this week. "He's a second-division ballplayer." The final straw might have come with last week's shoulder injury to Double-A right-hander Angel Guzman, often compared to a young Pedro Martinez. According to industry sources, the Marlins would have demanded Guzman, the Cubs' top prospect, in any deal for Lowell. Guzman spent Monday in Birmingham visiting Dr. James Andrews and could miss the rest of the season. Less than 24 hours later, Lowell was magically taken off the trading block." *Well I didn't know that Guzman was the guy that was a must in any trade. I thought it was Sisco according to many reports out Chicago.Also the Cubs system is very deep I doubt one guy going down made them look at other opitions. Bobby Hill? please he was the one guy the Cubs wanted the Marlins to take. Mike very disappointed :confused
July 2, 200323 yr Shamrock I seriously doubt Guzman going down made them look at other opitions. Plus was it Mike Sunday's column that said Zambrano was the key to any deal with the Cubs. I think Mike was reaching.Its Sad....
July 2, 200323 yr Author You are a perfect example of the ploy working, you bought it hook, line and sinker and see it as the FO working hard to make things right, when in fact they're cutting off their nose despite their face. Sorry for the anal-retentive reply but the phrase is "cut off your nose to spite your face" not "despite your face". i know, i know, i'm getting help for this, really... :wacko :
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.