People are mistaking "being down" on Nolasco with "recognizing his value/ceiling." I'm not saying it's impossible he eclipses being a solid #4, but it's highly unlikely. There are quite a few pitchers in his situation, having one very good pitch and 2 averagish ones, with the possibility that one of those eventually grades to way above average. It just doesnt happen all that often. So, am I being understood now?

 

 

Speaking for myself I understood you the first time you said it, I just don't happen to agree.

 

And btw I was referring more to the "let's break up the team so we can get Shannon Stewart in left" crowd than your comments.

 

Since I'm assuming you're targeting me, please explain how continuing with a void in centerfield and Nolasco in the rotation (on the auxilary is Jacobs at first base) is beneficial for the team when the alternative I and others have proposed brings a good to great centerfielder in for Nolasco and Jacobs, sees Willingham slot in at first and Stewart in left.

 

The question isn't that we'd be better, the question is would Nolasco and Jacobs be enough.

People are mistaking "being down" on Nolasco with "recognizing his value/ceiling." I'm not saying it's impossible he eclipses being a solid #4, but it's highly unlikely. There are quite a few pitchers in his situation, having one very good pitch and 2 averagish ones, with the possibility that one of those eventually grades to way above average. It just doesnt happen all that often. So, am I being understood now?

 

 

Speaking for myself I understood you the first time you said it, I just don't happen to agree.

 

And btw I was referring more to the "let's break up the team so we can get Shannon Stewart in left" crowd than your comments.

 

Since I'm assuming you're targeting me, please explain how continuing with a void in centerfield and Nolasco in the rotation (on the auxilary is Jacobs at first base) is beneficial for the team when the alternative I and others have proposed brings a good to great centerfielder in for Nolasco and Jacobs, sees Willingham slot in at first and Stewart in left.

 

The question isn't that we'd be better, the question is would Nolasco and Jacobs be enough.

 

Oh Swifty, your paranoia is showing again.

 

Yeah, you made a comment about your head hurting but two people joined you in that opinion. It was a tongue in cheek retort to all of you. I would have said the same thing if you had been the second, third or not at all involved in the comment.

 

The mistake being made here (in my estimation) is combining all these things into one.

 

Needing a centerfielder doesn't mean we need to move Nolasco or Jacobs, and certainly doesn't mean we should be groveling to get a Shannon Stewart, who if news outlets are right has exactly zero interest from GMs in either league after two season-ending injuries in consecutive years. Texas is passing and Baltimore was really something conjured up by a columnist, right now the league sees him as damaged goods.

 

One would assume he's probably working out here in South Florida and the Marlins have had scouts following his progress. If the Marlins aren't interest I have to assume there's a reason.

 

You can not like Jacobs, you can not like Nolasco ("like" meant in the broadest sense) but thinking Shannon Stewart is the solution makes little sense, not to me, but to the decion-makers in baseball. They can all be wrong, I certainly can be wrong, but playing musical chairs with this young team, is for me not the way to go.

 

I believe, in the end, Beinfest will reach out and trade one of our top pitching prospects for an equivalent top centerfield prospect, or perhaps find a third party to get involved to give someone like Washington the starting pitcher they need for a Ryan Chruch (example only), again with us offering prospect(s) to the team in the middle.

 

Now if tomorrow Shannon Stewart gets a clean bill of health I might change part of my thinking on this, but until I see GMs showing interest I have to believe they all can't be wrong.

People are mistaking "being down" on Nolasco with "recognizing his value/ceiling." I'm not saying it's impossible he eclipses being a solid #4, but it's highly unlikely. There are quite a few pitchers in his situation, having one very good pitch and 2 averagish ones, with the possibility that one of those eventually grades to way above average. It just doesnt happen all that often. So, am I being understood now?

 

 

Speaking for myself I understood you the first time you said it, I just don't happen to agree.

 

And btw I was referring more to the "let's break up the team so we can get Shannon Stewart in left" crowd than your comments.

 

Since I'm assuming you're targeting me, please explain how continuing with a void in centerfield and Nolasco in the rotation (on the auxilary is Jacobs at first base) is beneficial for the team when the alternative I and others have proposed brings a good to great centerfielder in for Nolasco and Jacobs, sees Willingham slot in at first and Stewart in left.

 

The question isn't that we'd be better, the question is would Nolasco and Jacobs be enough.

 

Oh Swifty, your paranoia is showing again.

 

Yeah, you made a comment about your head hurting but two people joined you in that opinion. It was a tongue in cheek retort to all of you. I would have said the same thing if you had been the second, third or not at all involved in the comment.

 

The mistake being made here (in my estimation) is combining all these things into one.

 

Needing a centerfielder doesn't mean we need to move Nolasco or Jacobs, and certainly doesn't mean we should be groveling to get a Shannon Stewart, who if news outlets are right has exactly zero interest from GMs in either league after two season-ending injuries in consecutive years. Texas is passing and Baltimore was really something conjured up by a columnist, right now the league sees him as damaged goods.

 

One would assume he's probably working out here in South Florida and theMarlins have had scouts following his progress. If the Marlins aren't interest I have to assume there's a reason.

 

You can not like Jacobs, you can not like Nolasco ("like" meant in the broadest sense) but thinking Shannon Stewart is the solution makes little sense, not to me, but to the decion-makers in baseball. They can all be wrong, I certainly can be wrong, but playing musical chairs with this young team, is for me not the way to go.

 

I believe, in the end, Beinfest will reach out and trade one of our top pitching prospects for an equivalent top centerfield prospect, or perhaps find a third party to get involved to give someone like Washington the starting pitcher they need for a Ryan Chruch (example only), again with us offering prospect(s) to the team in the middle.

 

Now if tomorrow Shannon Stewart gets a clean bill of health I might change partof my thinking on this, but until I see GMs showing interest I have to believe they all can't be wrong.

 

Now you're just distorting what I said.

 

SHANNON STEWART IS NOT THE ANSWER.

 

Getting a good centerfielder is the "answer," and Shannon Stewart just makes the transition easier as we'd fill all 8 positions, instead of making a lateral move with Willingham going to first and creating a new hole in left.

People are mistaking "being down" on Nolasco with "recognizing his value/ceiling." I'm not saying it's impossible he eclipses being a solid #4, but it's highly unlikely. There are quite a few pitchers in his situation, having one very good pitch and 2 averagish ones, with the possibility that one of those eventually grades to way above average. It just doesnt happen all that often. So, am I being understood now?

 

 

Speaking for myself I understood you the first time you said it, I just don't happen to agree.

 

And btw I was referring more to the "let's break up the team so we can get Shannon Stewart in left" crowd than your comments.

 

Since I'm assuming you're targeting me, please explain how continuing with a void in centerfield and Nolasco in the rotation (on the auxilary is Jacobs at first base) is beneficial for the team when the alternative I and others have proposed brings a good to great centerfielder in for Nolasco and Jacobs, sees Willingham slot in at first and Stewart in left.

 

The question isn't that we'd be better, the question is would Nolasco and Jacobs be enough.

 

Oh Swifty, your paranoia is showing again.

 

Yeah, you made a comment about your head hurting but two people joined you in that opinion. It was a tongue in cheek retort to all of you. I would have said the same thing if you had been the second, third or not at all involved in the comment.

 

The mistake being made here (in my estimation) is combining all these things into one.

 

Needing a centerfielder doesn't mean we need to move Nolasco or Jacobs, and certainly doesn't mean we should be groveling to get a Shannon Stewart, who if news outlets are right has exactly zero interest from GMs in either league after two season-ending injuries in consecutive years. Texas is passing and Baltimore was really something conjured up by a columnist, right now the league sees him as damaged goods.

 

One would assume he's probably working out here in South Florida and theMarlins have had scouts following his progress. If the Marlins aren't interest I have to assume there's a reason.

 

You can not like Jacobs, you can not like Nolasco ("like" meant in the broadest sense) but thinking Shannon Stewart is the solution makes little sense, not to me, but to the decion-makers in baseball. They can all be wrong, I certainly can be wrong, but playing musical chairs with this young team, is for me not the way to go.

 

I believe, in the end, Beinfest will reach out and trade one of our top pitching prospects for an equivalent top centerfield prospect, or perhaps find a third party to get involved to give someone like Washington the starting pitcher they need for a Ryan Chruch (example only), again with us offering prospect(s) to the team in the middle.

 

Now if tomorrow Shannon Stewart gets a clean bill of health I might change partof my thinking on this, but until I see GMs showing interest I have to believe they all can't be wrong.

 

Now you're just distorting what I said.

 

SHANNON STEWART IS NOT THE ANSWER.

 

Getting a good centerfielder is the "answer," and Shannon Stewart just makes the transition easier as we'd fill all 8 positions, instead of making a lateral move with Willingham going to first and creating a new hole in left.

 

I'm not distorting anything...geez.

 

I'm not implying you want Stewart in CF. I'm not even really arguing with you, except that you cling to Shannon Stewart who everyone in baseball seems think is still hurt. I would have less of a disagreement if you didn't name names (him) in your theory.

 

Don't you understand that?

To clarify my earlier post, what I ment was that we need to build a better bullpen and not worry so much

about a centerfielder. I know it's an important position, but how many games did it lose us last year?

is it really worth it to trade Nolasco and Jacobs for it? I rather see what they can do next year after

fairly good rookie seasons.

 

I'm all up for upgrading centerfied, and I do hope they find a good guy. At this point tho, finding better

pitchers for the bullpen should be first priority, at least in my opinion.

To clarify my earlier post, what I ment was that we need to build a better bullpen and not worry so much

about a centerfielder. I know it's an important position, but how many games did it lose us last year?

 

 

14 games.

To clarify my earlier post, what I ment was that we need to build a better bullpen and not worry so much

about a centerfielder. I know it's an important position, but how many games did it lose us last year?

is it really worth it to trade Nolasco and Jacobs for it? I rather see what they can do next year after

fairly good rookie seasons.

 

I'm all up for upgrading centerfied, and I do hope they find a good guy. At this point tho, finding better

pitchers for the bullpen should be first priority, at least in my opinion.

Last year the bullpen was 14th in ERA, 15th in saves and 12th in saves % so it was pretty bad and next year I think it will be even worse than that.

 

Last year our CFs were dead last in OPS with .642 but that was dragged down by Reed and to a lesser extent by Reggie. A platoon of Alfredo and Ross could be in the low .700s which would be bad but not "league worst" bad. Defensively they will be terrible.

 

I agree the bullpen is the bigger hole but if the goal is to contend for a playoff spot then we need to address both holes.

People are mistaking "being down" on Nolasco with "recognizing his value/ceiling." I'm not saying it's impossible he eclipses being a solid #4, but it's highly unlikely. There are quite a few pitchers in his situation, having one very good pitch and 2 averagish ones, with the possibility that one of those eventually grades to way above average. It just doesnt happen all that often. So, am I being understood now?

 

 

Speaking for myself I understood you the first time you said it, I just don't happen to agree.

 

And btw I was referring more to the "let's break up the team so we can get Shannon Stewart in left" crowd than your comments.

so you believe nolasco is already a #3 or has #3 or potential or above? if so please support with something.

 

....and btw I agree with your 2nd statement, but still, Nolasco is being homerized. My position is supported by many scouting reports and many hundreds of similar cases. If I get one more "omg, i feel it in my tummy" reason I'll give up rational discussion on this site.

People are mistaking "being down" on Nolasco with "recognizing his value/ceiling." I'm not saying it's impossible he eclipses being a solid #4, but it's highly unlikely. There are quite a few pitchers in his situation, having one very good pitch and 2 averagish ones, with the possibility that one of those eventually grades to way above average. It just doesnt happen all that often. So, am I being understood now?

 

 

Speaking for myself I understood you the first time you said it, I just don't happen to agree.

 

And btw I was referring more to the "let's break up the team so we can get Shannon Stewart in left" crowd than your comments.

so you believe nolasco is already a #3 or has #3 or potential or above? if so please support with something.

 

....and btw I agree with your 2nd statement, but still, Nolasco is being homerized. My position is supported by many scouting reports and many hundreds of similar cases. If I get one more "omg, i feel it in my tummy" reason I'll give up rational discussion on this site.

 

*Lately you seem inclined to pass off as "homerism" comments by anyone who has a higher opinion of player than you. Or who analyzes data at hand or stats and comes to a different conclusion than you as irrational*. Or subjective points of view after decades observing the game are what did you call it, "omg, i feel it in my tummy"?

 

If you look at Nolasco's *performance* throughout his minor league career culminating in being *named* Pitcher of the Year in 2005 in the Southern League, he has been a dominant pitcher at virtually every level he performed at for any length of time. Or read opposing team game summaries. Then look at his work as a rookie in 2006 before tiring after sixteen of eighteen months straight pitching. The fact he may not be a three on this team is a product of the guys ahead of him. In Tampa he's a two the day his plane sets down, other teams he's a three, four like Pittsburgh or others. *I get the impression you seem to already know what the future holds for him. I don't know and I'm not afraid to say so. From my perspective we need at least another season to really get a grasp on how good any of these kids, Nolasco included, can be.*

 

I think our disagreement is with his potential. In my mind it is way too soon to be determining his "ceiling" and pigeon-holing him. You have every right to do so if you wish, for myself I think it's premature and I reserve the right to do my research my way and come to any conclusion I come to as long as I'm not ignoring the body of evidence I think is important.

People are mistaking "being down" on Nolasco with "recognizing his value/ceiling." I'm not saying it's impossible he eclipses being a solid #4, but it's highly unlikely. There are quite a few pitchers in his situation, having one very good pitch and 2 averagish ones, with the possibility that one of those eventually grades to way above average. It just doesnt happen all that often. So, am I being understood now?

 

 

Speaking for myself I understood you the first time you said it, I just don't happen to agree.

 

And btw I was referring more to the "let's break up the team so we can get Shannon Stewart in left" crowd than your comments.

so you believe nolasco is already a #3 or has #3 or potential or above? if so please support with something.

 

....and btw I agree with your 2nd statement, but still, Nolasco is being homerized. My position is supported by many scouting reports and many hundreds of similar cases. If I get one more "omg, i feel it in my tummy" reason I'll give up rational discussion on this site.

 

*Lately you seem inclined to pass off as "homerism" comments by anyone who has a higher opinion of player than you. Or who analyzes data at hand or stats and comes to a different conclusion that you as irrational*. Or subjective points of view after decades observing the game are what did you call it, "omg, i feel it in my tummy"?

 

If you look at Nolasco's *performance* throughout his minor league career culminating in being *named* Pitcher of the Year in 2005 in the Southern League, he has been a dominant pitcher at virtually every level he performed at for any length of time. Or read opposing team game summaries. Then look at his work as a rookie in 2006 before tiring after sixteen of eighteen months straight pitching. The fact he may not be a three on this team is a product of the guys ahead of him. In Tampa he's a two the day his plane sets down, other teams he's a three, four like Pittsburgh or others. *I get the impression you seem to already know what the future holds for him. I don't know and I'm not afraid to say so. From my perspective we need at least another season to really get a grasp on how good any of these kids, Nolasco included, can be.*

 

I think our disagreement is with his potential. In my mind it is way too soon to be determining his "ceiling" and pigeon-holing him. You have every right to do so if you wish, for myself I think it's premature and I reserve the right to do my research my way and come to any conclusion I come to as long as I'm not ignoring the body of evidence I think is important.

 

 

 

Excellent post.

 

 

I've been wondering the same thing myself. How is that some posters have such a firm grasp on what Nolasco's (or any other young pitcher for that matter) ceiling is?

 

Did I miss the crystal ball give away at the stadium last year?

Did I miss the crystal ball give away at the stadium last year?

 

It was a thursday night against the Pirates but you had to sit through four rain delays to qualify for one.

People are mistaking "being down" on Nolasco with "recognizing his value/ceiling." I'm not saying it's impossible he eclipses being a solid #4, but it's highly unlikely. There are quite a few pitchers in his situation, having one very good pitch and 2 averagish ones, with the possibility that one of those eventually grades to way above average. It just doesnt happen all that often. So, am I being understood now?

 

 

Speaking for myself I understood you the first time you said it, I just don't happen to agree.

 

And btw I was referring more to the "let's break up the team so we can get Shannon Stewart in left" crowd than your comments.

so you believe nolasco is already a #3 or has #3 or potential or above? if so please support with something.

 

....and btw I agree with your 2nd statement, but still, Nolasco is being homerized. My position is supported by many scouting reports and many hundreds of similar cases. If I get one more "omg, i feel it in my tummy" reason I'll give up rational discussion on this site.

 

*Lately you seem inclined to pass off as "homerism" comments by anyone who has a higher opinion of player than you. Or who analyzes data at hand or stats and comes to a different conclusion than you as irrational*. Or subjective points of view after decades observing the game are what did you call it, "omg, i feel it in my tummy"?

 

If you look at Nolasco's *performance* throughout his minor league career culminating in being *named* Pitcher of the Year in 2005 in the Southern League, he has been a dominant pitcher at virtually every level he performed at for any length of time. Or read opposing team game summaries. Then look at his work as a rookie in 2006 before tiring after sixteen of eighteen months straight pitching. The fact he may not be a three on this team is a product of the guys ahead of him. In Tampa he's a two the day his plane sets down, other teams he's a three, four like Pittsburgh or others. *I get the impression you seem to already know what the future holds for him. I don't know and I'm not afraid to say so. From my perspective we need at least another season to really get a grasp on how good any of these kids, Nolasco included, can be.*

 

I think our disagreement is with his potential. In my mind it is way too soon to be determining his "ceiling" and pigeon-holing him. You have every right to do so if you wish, for myself I think it's premature and I reserve the right to do my research my way and come to any conclusion I come to as long as I'm not ignoring the body of evidence I think is important.

Id still like to get your information behind why Nolasco has such a high ceiling. Just because he performed well before bottoming out? Indication in the stats? Scouting report Im unaware of? What research? I agree you have the right to come to any conclusion you wish...fair enough. But I'm allowed to call it homerism when the data (major/minor) and scouting reports are ignored for what has gotta be the touchy feelies. He's got a plus curve, average FB w/ good command, and a slow developing (if it is at all) changeup. This limits him to #4 status if he doesnt regress, but more likely he'll become a setup man. There are plenty of pitchers in Nolasco's stuff/tools shoes (but of course he's cheaper) who *could* theoretically develop that 3rd pitch into average+ or plus, but only a select few actually make that jump. Why is Ricky so different...? because he's a Florida Marlin?

 

Basically, if you're allowed to say Im being down on Nolasco because Im going with the stats/scouts approach then I'm allowed to say you're being a homer for going with intuition. I like Ricky and think his 06 was fine. He has more upside than he showed and Im sure he was tired as hell. But Im not going to make him out to be more than he'll probably be because he plays for my team. You and others are readily willing to do that even though almost every team has a player in Nolasco's boatbut you wouldnt make the same concessions for them. Here's the picture... 1.Ceiling likely reached based on tools and performance (minor/major) 2.adjustments can be made to further enhance status, but no big jumps should be *expected* 3.if changeup develops and endurance/durability adjust he's a #3.

Here's the primary difference in our positions. You think it's more likely than not that he'll exceed his tools/performance because _______? (when a very small minority actually makes that step beyond their tools/performance). I'm saying he has a good chance to approach and fulfill his potential tools based on performance minor/major. Now the gap there to me represents homerism, which isnt an insult necessary because Ive been guilty of it plenty of times.

 

As for the team comparison it's irrelevant. Im talking about #4, #3, #1, whatever for the major leagues

People are mistaking "being down" on Nolasco with "recognizing his value/ceiling." I'm not saying it's impossible he eclipses being a solid #4, but it's highly unlikely. There are quite a few pitchers in his situation, having one very good pitch and 2 averagish ones, with the possibility that one of those eventually grades to way above average. It just doesnt happen all that often. So, am I being understood now?

 

 

Speaking for myself I understood you the first time you said it, I just don't happen to agree.

 

And btw I was referring more to the "let's break up the team so we can get Shannon Stewart in left" crowd than your comments.

 

Since I'm assuming you're targeting me, please explain how continuing with a void in centerfield and Nolasco in the rotation (on the auxilary is Jacobs at first base) is beneficial for the team when the alternative I and others have proposed brings a good to great centerfielder in for Nolasco and Jacobs, sees Willingham slot in at first and Stewart in left.

 

The question isn't that we'd be better, the question is would Nolasco and Jacobs be enough.

 

Oh Swifty, your paranoia is showing again.

 

Yeah, you made a comment about your head hurting but two people joined you in that opinion. It was a tongue in cheek retort to all of you. I would have said the same thing if you had been the second, third or not at all involved in the comment.

 

The mistake being made here (in my estimation) is combining all these things into one.

 

Needing a centerfielder doesn't mean we need to move Nolasco or Jacobs, and certainly doesn't mean we should be groveling to get a Shannon Stewart, who if news outlets are right has exactly zero interest from GMs in either league after two season-ending injuries in consecutive years. Texas is passing and Baltimore was really something conjured up by a columnist, right now the league sees him as damaged goods.

 

One would assume he's probably working out here in South Florida and theMarlins have had scouts following his progress. If the Marlins aren't interest I have to assume there's a reason.

 

You can not like Jacobs, you can not like Nolasco ("like" meant in the broadest sense) but thinking Shannon Stewart is the solution makes little sense, not to me, but to the decion-makers in baseball. They can all be wrong, I certainly can be wrong, but playing musical chairs with this young team, is for me not the way to go.

 

I believe, in the end, Beinfest will reach out and trade one of our top pitching prospects for an equivalent top centerfield prospect, or perhaps find a third party to get involved to give someone like Washington the starting pitcher they need for a Ryan Chruch (example only), again with us offering prospect(s) to the team in the middle.

 

Now if tomorrow Shannon Stewart gets a clean bill of health I might change partof my thinking on this, but until I see GMs showing interest I have to believe they all can't be wrong.

 

Now you're just distorting what I said.

 

SHANNON STEWART IS NOT THE ANSWER.

 

Getting a good centerfielder is the "answer," and Shannon Stewart just makes the transition easier as we'd fill all 8 positions, instead of making a lateral move with Willingham going to first and creating a new hole in left.

 

I'm not distorting anything...geez.

 

I'm not implying you want Stewart in CF. I'm not even really arguing with you, except that you cling to Shannon Stewart who everyone in baseball seems think is still hurt. I would have less of a disagreement if you didn't name names (him) in your theory.

 

Don't you understand that?

 

If you don't name names, then discussion about something this major is downright idiotic.

 

We're in the middle of January, at a time when most rosters are set in stone until the end of Spring.

 

We still have a glaring hole, and there is one player, very open to playing for us who could help us make the "mega move" to plug the hole and not miss the talent sent away.

 

I'm the first person to say that trading Nolasco and Jacobs for a centerfielder and then leaving it at that is a poor decision, but trading Nolasco and Jacobs, moving Hammer and then having a replacement, veteran, left-fielder lined up makes the trade almost a no-brainer.

 

We need a plus centerfielder more than we need Nolasco and more than we need Jacobs, both occupy positions (#5 starter, poor defensive 1st baseman) that can be quickly remedied, in this case, quite easily from within. Adding Stewart (who is a name I have to discuss because this only makes it reasonable) means all 8 positions are still filled at the end of the trade, either with people who have a history of production or people we hope for solid production in the future (Hermida, new centerfielder).

 

You want to call him player X, that's fine, but it makes little sense to discuss player X in January, perhaps November when there are still myriad free agents, but not now when the pickings are slim.

I didn't miss a thing btw, how #^%$& condescending of you Shamster. When you've seen as much baseball as I have you can start lecturing me then, until you do don't even try.

 

If you bothered to read what I wrote Shamster I said:

 

look at his minor league numbers

look at the awards he won in the minor leagues

research game summaries and articles from the opposing teams' perspective

go through his major league gamelogs and while your at it see when he first showed signs of exhaustion and knee problems

 

I'm not going to do your work for you. If you're too lazy or you don't have the computer skills to do it don't blame me. You've posted nothing that backs up your contentions but you want to hold me to a different standard. Sorry, won't play that game.

 

Everything you present as fact is YOUR OPINION. Nothing more. You pass off speculation as truth. Rumor as fact.

 

 

What's funny here is a few weeks ago you seemed so surprised I quoted some kid's MLE, I guess it was your mistaken belief I never look at stats. I always look at stats, and gamelogs and game summaries, and press releases from leagues announcing all-stars and awards, and newspaper articles from opposing teams. I look at everything not just a couple of numbers or some bloggers view of the guy from two years ago.

 

And as for you Swift, no matter how many times you state things as fact, doesn't make it so. You keep talking about Stewart and ignore the body of evidence he's still not healthy enough that 29 major league teams won't even give him a minor league invite...sheesh.

 

Try making your case in the abstract. It is much stronger that way. Move Nolasco and Jacobs, make Willingham available to move to first (leaving yourself the option of signing a first baseman) or a left fielder, whichever comes available.

 

Much better case. Much more buy-in.

 

You have obviously 100% given up on Jacobs. You've repeated yourself ad nauseum on him for weeks. I hope you'll understand when I say my guess is you are in the minority and certainly your belief runs counter to that of the front office.

 

You said "We're in the middle of January, at a time when most rosters are set in stone until the end of Spring.".

 

This idea that rosters are already set in stone, implying we're the only team left trying to flesh out our roster is simply incorrect. Almost every team is still looking for someone, some teams are looking for three or four players, some are looking to move players. Tampa dumped a guy this morning. The Mets are still talking to Weaver and others about pitching, the Orioles need everything, the Braves and Pittsburgh just a did deal in the last couple of days and then Atlanta signed Wilson yesterday, the Nationals don't have a starting rotation, the Rockies, Seattle, the A's, I could go on and on, this isn't a time when things are set in stone at all, these are highly fluid days. The only constant right now is change.

 

 

 

What's wrong with both your posts is your belief you can see into the future. Let me break the news to you.

 

You can't.

 

You can't know what kind of pitcher Nolasco will turn out to be. Good, bad or in the middle. You can't know how Jacobs will do. You can't promise Stewart will be healthy enough to play or for that matter any player. You're not planning for contingencies. What happens if this season it's Willingham who twists an ankle the day after you trade away Jacobs? What happens if Mitre can never come back or Garcia blows out his shoulder or Benitez comes in, hurts his knee again?

 

Why do you think every team in baseball are inviting all these fringe players to camp under the guise of minor league contracts? Because sh*t happens. Trading away guys like Jacobs and Nolasco now in hopes of getting a "+ centerfielder" may work on your Nintendo but not where it really counts, and certainly not at this time of year. Right now teams are trying to accumulate all the talent it can.

 

If and when one of the prospect kids pushes his way into the starting rotation, or Pinto or Garcia "prove" they belong there, then and only then do you seriously consider moving a Nolasco. Until then its too dangerous.

 

If you want to fault the Marlins FO for not bringing MORE guys in you won't find any disagreement in this corner. I was amazed they didn't sign Craig Wilson all winter with his LHP numbers and his ability at 1B. There's been five or six players who signed minor league contractselsewhere I think we should have at least been in contention for. But like I said, this is not the time to be giving up proven major league talent, this is the time to be garnering it.

 

So you're going to say, what about a centerfielder? I believe, and I've been consistent on this, that the best way to find one is through a trade of equivalent prospects. Bring in a kid who fits with the rest of the team who can defend the position and has shown he can handle a bat at the major league level. They are out there. And they won't cost a Nolasco or a Jacobs.

 

They may cost a top five or ten pitching prospect but for me, that is the way I would go. You (anyone) can fantasize about a Rios, I don't think it's going to happen. I still think before it's done a Maier or Willits (or a kid we've never discussed) like that is the right way to go. If he hits .270+ and gets on base .350+ that is such a quantum improvement over the first half of the season from 2006 it's almost immeasurable.

 

I could go on and on but I have other things to do and no doubt you guys will want to explain to me why I'm wrong. Be my guest. But at least try reading what I wrote and if you can, between the lines.

My opinions are based on minor/major league numbers as I posted. Evaluation of his actual tools are based on scout opinions not some random bloggers. Dont be insulted. The only I *think you missed is that just because I think his ceiling is solid #4/setupman doesnt mean Im down on him...it's just what the numbers/scouts suggest. I combine that with my own personal observation/experience leading me to agree with their assertions. The key point here is that we both agree that we dont know for sure what his future holds, which seems fair enough to me. Maybe homer is a strong word for your position, but it was hard for me not to go there when there's literally a Nolasco on every team (at some level) that people overrate the same way. I'll just restate and say that your position is optimistic, but certainly legit.

 

One last thing....I could bring up scouting reports and the numbers, but I see MLou do it so fruitlessly that Id rather not. Nobody is changing any minds here anyway.

My opinions are based on minor/major league numbers as I posted. Evaluation of his actual tools are based on scout opinions not some random bloggers. Dont be insulted. The only I *think you missed is that just because I think his ceiling is solid #4/setupman doesnt mean Im down on him...it's just what the numbers/scouts suggest. I combine that with my own personal observation/experience leading me to agree with their assertions. The key point here is that we both agree that we dont know for sure what his future holds, which seems fair enough to me. Maybe homer is a strong word for your position, but it was hard for me not to go there when there's literally a Nolasco on every team (at some level) that people overrate the same way. I'll just restate and say that your position is optimistic, but certainly legit.

 

One last thing....I could bring up scouting reports and the numbers, but I see MLou do it so fruitlessly that Id rather not. Nobody is changing any minds here anyway.

 

:thumbup ditto...lol

I didn't miss a thing btw, how #^%$& condescending of you Shamster. When you've seen as much baseball as I have you can start lecturing me then, until you do don't even try.

 

Oh the irony.

 

Seriously, sometimes I wonder how many people "get it."

I didn't miss a thing btw, how #^%$& condescending of you Shamster. When you've seen as much baseball as I have you can start lecturing me then, until you do don't even try.

 

Oh the irony.

 

Seriously, sometimes I wonder how many people "get it."

 

:|

Anyway, back to the point.

 

2003, your contention is "I know very little personally, I'd rather let the experts decide." Am I correct?

 

OK, good.

 

Let's take that to the next step.

 

Admin Beinfest is an expert. Admin Beinfest has tried shopping Jacobs and Nolasco for a centerfielder. Admin Beinfest has not come away with anything. Therefore, the "experts" have said that Nolasco and Jacobs have very little value, at least in terms of a meaningful centerfielder.

 

Therefore, your stance that you know nothing and trust the experts, but you know that Jacobs and Nolasco have substantial value is in and of itself contradictory.

 

And with that, I'm done.

 

I didn't miss a thing btw, how #^%$& condescending of you Shamster. When you've seen as much baseball as I have you can start lecturing me then, until you do don't even try.

 

Oh the irony.

 

Seriously, sometimes I wonder how many people "get it."

 

:|

 

:| :| :| :| :|

 

+1

Anyway, back to the point.

 

2003, your contention is "I know very little personally, I'd rather let the experts decide." Am I correct?

 

OK, good.

 

Let's take that to the next step.

 

Admin Beinfest is an expert. Admin Beinfest has tried shopping Jacobs and Nolasco for a centerfielder. Admin Beinfest has not come away with anything. Therefore, the "experts" have said that Nolasco and Jacobs have very little value, at least in terms of a meaningful centerfielder.

 

Therefore, your stance that you know nothing and trust the experts, but you know that Jacobs and Nolasco have substantial value is in and of itself contradictory.

 

And with that, I'm done.

 

It's without doubt you know very little Swift and every time you post something like you just did above you confirm it...let's start by agreeing there. I'm always pleased when we can agree on something.

 

But, as you said, "Let's take the next step".

 

Since you're being cryptic regarding Nolasco and Jacobs being rejected in trades for a centerfielder and therefore have little or no value, you unwittingly became a prime example of an argument every budding young lawyer knows Post hoc ergo propter hoc .

 

I assume you're talking about rumors of offers involving Tampa Bay and the Marlins for whatever player TB needed to tout that day. But regardless of the situation (and that's the only one that comes to mind in whch both were allegedly offer in the same trade at some time or the other) whether you mean individually or collectively it simply does not follow that because an alleged trade wasn't consummated (any number of reasons - it was a rumor and nothing else, the teams didn't match up, one side or the other got greedy, there was a better offer from someone else) says nothing about the value of the players involved.

 

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

 

By that measure, the fact that Dontrelle Willis hasn't been traded to the Mets in the last year even though it's been the subject of articles about a hundred times if you want to believe the NY media, the only logical conclusion why it didn't happen is because Willis has "very little value" as you put it.

 

In much the same way that just because you say it doesn't make it true, rumored trades are a dime a dozen. None of us know who was or wasn't offered for who. How many times was Mike Lowell going to be traded in 2003? Was he without value then in the middle of a wildcard race? I think not. In fact the opposite was true.

 

As is the case with Willis. And Jacobs. And Nolasco.

 

And with that, I'm done.

 

 

 

(here's a better example of "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" http://www.cuyamaca.edu/bruce.thompson/fallacies/posthoc.asp )

Anyway, back to the point.

 

2003, your contention is "I know very little personally, I'd rather let the experts decide." Am I correct?

 

OK, good.

 

Let's take that to the next step.

 

Admin Beinfest is an expert. Admin Beinfest has tried shopping Jacobs and Nolasco for a centerfielder. Admin Beinfest has not come away with anything. Therefore, the "experts" have said that Nolasco and Jacobs have very little value, at least in terms of a meaningful centerfielder.

 

Therefore, your stance that you know nothing and trust the experts, but you know that Jacobs and Nolasco have substantial value is in and of itself contradictory.

 

And with that, I'm done.

 

It's without doubt you know very little Swift and every time you post something like you just did above you confirm it...let's start by agreeing there. I'm always pleased when we can agree on something.

 

But, as you said, "Let's take the next step".

 

Since you're being cryptic regarding Nolasco and Jacobs being rejected in trades for a centerfielder and therefore have little or no value, you unwittingly because a prime example of an argument every budding young lawyer knows Post hoc ergo propter hoc .

 

I assume you're talking about rumors of offers involving Tampa Bay and the Marlins for whatever player TB needed to tout that day. But regardless of the situation (and that's the only one that comes to mind in whch both were allegedly offer in the same trade at some time or the other) whether you mean individually or collectively it simply does not follow that because an alleged trade wasn't consummated (any number of reasons - it was a rumor and nothing else, the teams didn't match up, one side or the other got greedy, there was a better offer from someone else) says nothing about the value of the players involved.

 

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

 

By that measure, when Dontrelle Willis the fact that Dontrelle Willis hasn't been tradedto the Mets in the last year even though it's been the subject of articles about a hundred times if you want to believe the NY media, the only logical conclusion why it didn't happen is because Willis has "very little value" as you put it.

 

In much the same way that just because you say it doesn't make it true, rumored trades are a dime a dozen. None of us know who was or wasn't offered for who. How many times was Mike Lowell going to be traded in 2003? Was he without value then in the middle of a wildcard race? I think not. In fact the opposite was true.

 

As is the case with Willis. And Jacobs. And Nolasco.

 

And with that, I'm done.

 

Now, I know I said I'm done, but I can't stand when you twist my words.

 

Under your example, you clearly failed to identify the agressor.

 

In the Willis rumors, the Mets were the agressor, meaning that a failure to consumate a Willis trade spoke more to the Mets not coming with equal value, thus saying absolutely nothing about the value of Willis.

 

In the Tampa rumors, the Marlins were clearly the agressor. The failure to consumate a Baldelli deal when Jacobs and Nolasco were on the table speaks volumes that more than one expert sees Nolasco and Jacobs as less critical to a team's success than a ++ centerfielder. 1st, the Marlins' experts for making the offer, 2nd the Devil Rays' experts for rejecting the offer. If the Marlins thought that the two were more valuable, an offer would never have been made, and if Tampa thought the two were more valuable, a deal would have been consumated.

 

Now, of course I'm sure your next move will to be drumming up a media conspiracy theory whereby any of the plethora of local writers, by your own standard, clearly have an axe to grind with the Marlins and as such the should be categorically ignored, but I'll leave that next tounge-twisting position to you.

 

Now, let's not try to splice any more of my words by trying to use an analogy that has very little similarities to the discerning eye mmmmkay?

You missed the point ... THEY ARE RUMORS ... sheesh.

Ever tried a peanut butter and banana sandwich? How about peanut butter and honey?

you bumped a 3 day old thread for that?

Ever tried a peanut butter and banana sandwich? How about peanut butter and honey?

 

 

What the.............?