Left field is wide open. Chris Aguila and Reggie Abercrombie are possibilities. My personal sleeper choice for left field is Bernie Williams. The longtime Yankees great was offered salary arbritration by the club and could end up back in New York, but if the Yankees can't work out a contract with Williams by Jan. 8, he could end up as a free agent. Maybe his connections to Joe Girardi, and the possible willingness to sign a reasonable contract (with deferred payments if necessary) would make Florida attractive. He's already won championships, and perhaps the prospect of helping groom a young team in a market like Miami -- which is a short flight from his native Puerto Rico -- would appeal to him.

 

http://florida.marlins.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/...t=.jsp&c_id=fla

 

Joe Frisaro, beat writer for the Marlins does make a great point here! What do you guys think? Yea or NO? In my opinion it really depends on how cheap he will sign for... If its pretty cheap I say why not! He doesnt have to start... Pretty good bat of the bench if he cant win the starting job...

If we didn't sign Niner, why would we sign Bernie?

Boras is his agent, if we low-ball Conine, I guarantee we don't come close to meeting Bernie's demands.

 

Plus, the Yankees offered Bernie arbitration...not worth the cost.

Too old, too injury prone.....just stick Aguila there and be done with it.

Do it up.....I'd welcome here with open arms.

MLB.com beat writers rarely ever make good points, and this is not one of them.

 

 

Although I'm not unopposed to the idea of bringing in a flamed out veteran for nothing more than to finish out his career and give a kid an extra year to develop.

Although I'm not unopposed to the idea of bringing in a flamed out veteran for nothing more than to finish out his career and give a kid an extra year to develop.

 

 

Not unopposed = opposed

Thanks. I won't even bother editing my post now

Get him for the min contract, im a Yankee fan and I could care less about him.

I don't pay much attention to other teams, and I have no idea what the stats show, but isn't there some question about his defense. Or is it a definite that his defense at this point is miserable..

.

Speaking of stats....I love that one about the Marlins ranking very low in defensive efficiency last year. As I understand that stat, it's worthless. If the Marlins play team B. Team B puts the ball in play 4 times. Each time a sharp shot right up the middle for a clean single that's uncatchable by anyone........the Marlins defensive efficiency rates at .000 for this game. In the same game, the Marlins put the ball in play 4 times. Each time a routine groundball to second. Twice it's played for an easy out. Once the second baseman boots the ball into right field. One other time it rolls under his glove. The other team now has a higher defensive efficiency of .500. If that's true, that's some stat.

Get him for the min contract, im a Yankee fan and I could care less about him.

 

Then I'm guessing you're a bandwagon Yankee fan. Even though Bernie is declining rapidly, that'd be like us saying we could care less about Conine.

i'd rather pass. only give a veteran a starting job if no kid proves to be at least somewhat close to ready in spring.

Not going to happen. I don't want him anyway, he's not going to get any better at his age, barring steroids.

Let's see...

 

Aging, declining offensive skills, can't run, decreasing bat speed, can no longer play center field, has an arm that makes Pierre look like Vladdy...

 

Where do we sign?

 

:plain

Get him for the min contract, im a Yankee fan and I could care less about him.

 

Then I'm guessing you're a bandwagon Yankee fan. Even though Bernie is declining rapidly, that'd be like us saying we could care less about Conine.

Seriously, Bernie always hits frickin pop ups and cant do anything, heck even Mariano Rivera can hit better than him. Conine can still do things.

Bernie to start in left??

 

I hope not...

If we didn't sign Niner, why would we sign Bernie?

 

It doesn't sound like the Conine situation was about money.

 

In part, I think it was.

 

Just given that we made him an offer, he declined and then we didn't offer him arbitration.

I don't pay much attention to other teams, and I have no idea what the stats show, but isn't there some question about his defense. Or is it a definite that his defense at this point is miserable..

.

Speaking of stats....I love that one about the Marlins ranking very low in defensive efficiency last year. As I understand that stat, it's worthless. If the Marlins play team B. Team B puts the ball in play 4 times. Each time a sharp shot right up the middle for a clean single that's uncatchable by anyone........the Marlins defensive efficiency rates at .000 for this game. In the same game, the Marlins put the ball in play 4 times. Each time a routine groundball to second. Twice it's played for an easy out. Once the second baseman boots the ball into right field. One other time it rolls under his glove. The other team now has a higher defensive efficiency of .500. If that's true, that's some stat.

 

There are thousands of balls put into play against a team per year by a set of players whose skill sets are nearly identical from schedule to schedule. That helps keep the outliers from effecting the result.

Although it's not a surprise that you (and most people) would bring up that example. Two of the four regular Marlins' middle of the field defenders last year have ranked poorly in some of the more advanced defensive metrics which factor in speed and landing spot of batted balls (Easley and Pierre).

Get him for the min contract, im a Yankee fan and I could care less about him.

 

Then I'm guessing you're a bandwagon Yankee fan. Even though Bernie is declining rapidly, that'd be like us saying we could care less about Conine.

 

Aren't most Yankee fans "Bandwagoners"? I think most of them own a Mets cap....just in case.

I don't see this happening

I don't pay much attention to other teams, and I have no idea what the stats show, but isn't there some question about his defense. Or is it a definite that his defense at this point is miserable..

.

Speaking of stats....I love that one about the Marlins ranking very low in defensive efficiency last year. As I understand that stat, it's worthless. If the Marlins play team B. Team B puts the ball in play 4 times. Each time a sharp shot right up the middle for a clean single that's uncatchable by anyone........the Marlins defensive efficiency rates at .000 for this game. In the same game, the Marlins put the ball in play 4 times. Each time a routine groundball to second. Twice it's played for an easy out. Once the second baseman boots the ball into right field. One other time it rolls under his glove. The other team now has a higher defensive efficiency of .500. If that's true, that's some stat.

 

There are thousands of balls put into play against a team per year by a set of players whose skill sets are nearly identical from schedule to schedule. That helps keep the outliers from effecting the result.

Although it's not a surprise that you (and most people) would bring up that example. Two of the four regular Marlins' middle of the field defenders last year have ranked poorly in some of the more advanced defensive metrics which factor in speed and landing spot of batted balls (Easley and Pierre).

 

Altough I agree with you, I'd like to see if the findings were statistically significant. Also, home runs count in these calculations. So if a team has 5 starters that give up 35+ homeruns per year, then that means there will be a lot of balls put into play that have no shot of being caught for an out. Like I said before, I'd like to see if these stats are statistically significant. I suspect they're not.

I don't pay much attention to other teams, and I have no idea what the stats show, but isn't there some question about his defense. Or is it a definite that his defense at this point is miserable..

.

Speaking of stats....I love that one about the Marlins ranking very low in defensive efficiency last year. As I understand that stat, it's worthless. If the Marlins play team B. Team B puts the ball in play 4 times. Each time a sharp shot right up the middle for a clean single that's uncatchable by anyone........the Marlins defensive efficiency rates at .000 for this game. In the same game, the Marlins put the ball in play 4 times. Each time a routine groundball to second. Twice it's played for an easy out. Once the second baseman boots the ball into right field. One other time it rolls under his glove. The other team now has a higher defensive efficiency of .500. If that's true, that's some stat.

 

There are thousands of balls put into play against a team per year by a set of players whose skill sets are nearly identical from schedule to schedule. That helps keep the outliers from effecting the result.

Although it's not a surprise that you (and most people) would bring up that example. Two of the four regular Marlins' middle of the field defenders last year have ranked poorly in some of the more advanced defensive metrics which factor in speed and landing spot of batted balls (Easley and Pierre).

 

Altough I agree with you, I'd like to see if the findings were statistically significant. Also, home runs count in these calculations. So if a team has 5 starters that give up 35+ homeruns per year, then that means there will be a lot of balls put into play that have no shot of being caught for an out. Like I said before, I'd like to see if these stats are statistically significant. I suspect they're not.

I understand the statistical significance comment, though I would like to point out that the Marlins were in fact the most miserly in home runs given up, 116 last year, therefore as you have stated that would make them look even better. On the flip side this would imply more balls put into play perhaps that were uncatchable etc. that were XBH.

I don't pay much attention to other teams, and I have no idea what the stats show, but isn't there some question about his defense. Or is it a definite that his defense at this point is miserable..

.

Speaking of stats....I love that one about the Marlins ranking very low in defensive efficiency last year. As I understand that stat, it's worthless. If the Marlins play team B. Team B puts the ball in play 4 times. Each time a sharp shot right up the middle for a clean single that's uncatchable by anyone........the Marlins defensive efficiency rates at .000 for this game. In the same game, the Marlins put the ball in play 4 times. Each time a routine groundball to second. Twice it's played for an easy out. Once the second baseman boots the ball into right field. One other time it rolls under his glove. The other team now has a higher defensive efficiency of .500. If that's true, that's some stat.

 

There are thousands of balls put into play against a team per year by a set of players whose skill sets are nearly identical from schedule to schedule. That helps keep the outliers from effecting the result.

Although it's not a surprise that you (and most people) would bring up that example. Two of the four regular Marlins' middle of the field defenders last year have ranked poorly in some of the more advanced defensive metrics which factor in speed and landing spot of batted balls (Easley and Pierre).

 

Altough I agree with you, I'd like to see if the findings were statistically significant. Also, home runs count in these calculations. So if a team has 5 starters that give up 35+ homeruns per year, then that means there will be a lot of balls put into play that have no shot of being caught for an out. Like I said before, I'd like to see if these stats are statistically significant. I suspect they're not.

I understand the statistical significance comment, though I would like to point out that the Marlins were in fact the most miserly in home runs given up, 116 last year, therefore as you have stated that would make them look even better. On the flip side this would imply more balls put into play perhaps that were uncatchable etc. that were XBH.

 

Yeah, I know the Marlins hardly gave up homeruns. I was just using that as an example where defensive efficiency could be signficantly affected because the pitchers were lobbing up 500 foot shots even though the defense had NO SHOT at getting to the ball. It's unfair to the defense.

Do we have to pay the giant fork sticking out of his back, too?

I don't pay much attention to other teams, and I have no idea what the stats show, but isn't there some question about his defense. Or is it a definite that his defense at this point is miserable..

.

Speaking of stats....I love that one about the Marlins ranking very low in defensive efficiency last year. As I understand that stat, it's worthless. If the Marlins play team B. Team B puts the ball in play 4 times. Each time a sharp shot right up the middle for a clean single that's uncatchable by anyone........the Marlins defensive efficiency rates at .000 for this game. In the same game, the Marlins put the ball in play 4 times. Each time a routine groundball to second. Twice it's played for an easy out. Once the second baseman boots the ball into right field. One other time it rolls under his glove. The other team now has a higher defensive efficiency of .500. If that's true, that's some stat.

 

There are thousands of balls put into play against a team per year by a set of players whose skill sets are nearly identical from schedule to schedule. That helps keep the outliers from effecting the result.

Although it's not a surprise that you (and most people) would bring up that example. Two of the four regular Marlins' middle of the field defenders last year have ranked poorly in some of the more advanced defensive metrics which factor in speed and landing spot of batted balls (Easley and Pierre).

 

Altough I agree with you, I'd like to see if the findings were statistically significant. Also, home runs count in these calculations. So if a team has 5 starters that give up 35+ homeruns per year, then that means there will be a lot of balls put into play that have no shot of being caught for an out. Like I said before, I'd like to see if these stats are statistically significant. I suspect they're not.

I understand the statistical significance comment, though I would like to point out that the Marlins were in fact the most miserly in home runs given up, 116 last year, therefore as you have stated that would make them look even better. On the flip side this would imply more balls put into play perhaps that were uncatchable etc. that were XBH.

 

Yeah, I know the Marlins hardly gave up homeruns. I was just using that as an example where defensive efficiency could be signficantly affected because the pitchers were lobbing up 500 foot shots even though the defense had NO SHOT at getting to the ball. It's unfair to the defense.

To seperate defense from pitching, you must do things like this. Strikeouts effect the result more IMO. A home run does not limit the amount of the amount of outs a defense must get to complete a game.