October 7, 200718 yr our defense is bad enough. and, we are pretty solid in our corner outfield positions. i think hes going to the angels. If we don't get Bonds, which we probably won't so it's a moot point, it certainly won't be because our defense is 'bad enough' and we are solid enough in the corner OF positions not to take a top 10 hitter in all of baseball. im just saying why i dont want him... i just dont see from even a baseball sense that it would help the team. if we can afford bonds we can afford a cf and a catcher. It will always help any team to have one of the best hitters in baseball in your lineup. A guy with .1045 OPS helps just a little bit, don't you think? no, i dont think a .1045 OPS helps at all :lol you honestly think he is going to hit that well next year??? hes going to be another year older, hes already into his 40s, and he always is an injury concern. imagine him in left with [insert random cf here] and hermida in right. that would be one of the worst, if not the worst, defensive outfields in major league history. yeah, it will bring out more fans (for like five minutes), but it wouldn't be a very smart baseball decision. that being said, im not concerned about his character. from what i remember, most players tend to think of him as a good teammate, and the steroids are of no concern to me. i never saw him as a cheater. i think that issue has been greatly overblown and barry has been unfairly persecuted. even if you think he is a cheater, if you consider yourself a marlins fan you should root for everyone who wears the uniform.
October 7, 200718 yr our defense is bad enough. and, we are pretty solid in our corner outfield positions. i think hes going to the angels. If we don't get Bonds, which we probably won't so it's a moot point, it certainly won't be because our defense is 'bad enough' and we are solid enough in the corner OF positions not to take a top 10 hitter in all of baseball. im just saying why i dont want him... i just dont see from even a baseball sense that it would help the team. if we can afford bonds we can afford a cf and a catcher. It will always help any team to have one of the best hitters in baseball in your lineup. A guy with .1045 OPS helps just a little bit, don't you think? no, i dont think a .1045 OPS helps at all :lol you honestly think he is going to hit that well next year??? hes going to be another year older, hes already into his 40s, and he always is an injury concern. imagine him in left with [insert random cf here] and hermida in right. that would be one of the worst, if not the worst, defensive outfields in major league history. yeah, it will bring out more fans (for like five minutes), but it wouldn't be a very smart baseball decision. that being said, im not concerned about his character. from what i remember, most players tend to think of him as a good teammate, and the steroids are of no concern to me. i never saw him as a cheater. i think that issue has been greatly overblown and barry has been unfairly persecuted. even if you think he is a cheater, if you consider yourself a marlins fan you should root for everyone who wears the uniform. ................................................................................ ................................................................................ ................................................................................ ................................................................................ ................................................................................ ................................................................................ .. :banghead
October 7, 200718 yr Yea, for that kind of money we could actually fill our real holes. Pass. So being unable to draw more than 500 people for a game isn't a hole? Look at the bigger picture.
October 7, 200718 yr Yea, for that kind of money we could actually fill our real holes. Pass. So being unable to draw more than 500 people for a game isn't a hole? Look at the bigger picture. -Is it good stragedy to avoid the onfield holes to plug an off the field hole with a temporary solution? -How much of a draw is a player nearing the end of his career with a subpar team surrounding him? -How much of a draw is a player who has already broken a record? -How much of a draw is a player who has turned off 6 out of every 10 fans? -How much will one player affect attendance numbers if he is playing in Team A's home ballpark 81 times a year compared to 3 or 4? Babe Ruth didn't do much to improve attendance in Boston when he was traded to a very bad Braves team. It didn't help they lost 115 games that year but the point remains. Hank Aaron helped attendance in Milwaukee but there was a past between the fans and him in that situation. South Fla and Bonds have no previous history. I'd rather see that $14-15 million dispersed through the roster in overall improvements rather than in a temporary player who may become a liability with his issues on the field with his health and issues off the field with potential time in court.
October 7, 200718 yr Google Search reveals no fines. Hooray the Internet. According to an N.L. club official who has spoken with the Giants, San Francisco's front office "wasn't happy about it by any means." Tampering charges seemed possible, but Loria says he and Giants president Peter Magowan have talked and smoothed things over. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m120..._n16521197/pg_2 Hooray. Intelligence - 1, BroncoBob - 0.
October 7, 200718 yr Yea, for that kind of money we could actually fill our real holes. Pass. So being unable to draw more than 500 people for a game isn't a hole? Look at the bigger picture. -Is it good stragedy to avoid the onfield holes to plug an off the field hole with a temporary solution? -How much of a draw is a player nearing the end of his career with a subpar team surrounding him? -How much of a draw is a player who has already broken a record? -How much of a draw is a player who has turned off 6 out of every 10 fans? -How much will one player affect attendance numbers if he is playing in Team A's home ballpark 81 times a year compared to 3 or 4? Babe Ruth didn't do much to improve attendance in Boston when he was traded to a very bad Braves team. It didn't help they lost 115 games that year but the point remains. Hank Aaron helped attendance in Milwaukee but there was a past between the fans and him in that situation. South Fla and Bonds have no previous history. I'd rather see that $14-15 million dispersed through the roster in overall improvements rather than in a temporary player who may become a liability with his issues on the field with his health and issues off the field with potential time in court. I agree with your points in theory, but we're the Marlins, it's a very different situation. What I've observed is that in the past 2 years, the Miami faithful has had two incredibly unique opportunities, they were the first crowd to get him after he hit 715...they gave him a standing O. They saw him hit 760...again, another standing O. Loria has to have seen this. He's a huge NAME with talent to spare that's received well by our "fans" and beloved by our owner. It's a no brainer that the powers that be would like it to happen. The ball's in Barry's court, IMO. Our mind is already made up.
October 7, 200718 yr I do find it somewhat bizarre that instead of discussing what young and/or available players we can find who might help this team we have two threads going, Bonds and Pudge, which even in the best deal scenario has to be $15-20 million for them while simultaneously wondering if Cabrera goes because we can't afford him. I'm sure if Admin Beinfest is given $10 million+/- over what's needed to keep DW and Cabs and fund the rest of the active roster, he'll find better uses for it than either Barry or Pudge.
October 7, 200718 yr I'm confused, are you suggesting that $10 million is a difference maker for a Miggy long-term contract or that $10 million is better spent? Because if it's the former, it's not, it's a drop in the proverbial bucket. If it's the latter, I have a hard time believing anyone who, objectively, thinks there's a better $10 million option out there than Bonds. No long term commitment (since that's a big thing for this frugal franchise), elite production, and exposure. No other player brings all three of those things to the table like Barry.
October 7, 200718 yr Yea, for that kind of money we could actually fill our real holes. Pass. So being unable to draw more than 500 people for a game isn't a hole? Look at the bigger picture. -Is it good stragedy to avoid the onfield holes to plug an off the field hole with a temporary solution? -How much of a draw is a player nearing the end of his career with a subpar team surrounding him? -How much of a draw is a player who has already broken a record? -How much of a draw is a player who has turned off 6 out of every 10 fans? -How much will one player affect attendance numbers if he is playing in Team A's home ballpark 81 times a year compared to 3 or 4? Babe Ruth didn't do much to improve attendance in Boston when he was traded to a very bad Braves team. It didn't help they lost 115 games that year but the point remains. Hank Aaron helped attendance in Milwaukee but there was a past between the fans and him in that situation. South Fla and Bonds have no previous history. I'd rather see that $14-15 million dispersed through the roster in overall improvements rather than in a temporary player who may become a liability with his issues on the field with his health and issues off the field with potential time in court. I agree with your points in theory, but we're the Marlins, it's a very different situation. What I've observed is that in the past 2 years, the Miami faithful has had two incredibly unique opportunities, they were the first crowd to get him after he hit 715...they gave him a standing O. They saw him hit 760...again, another standing O. Loria has to have seen this. He's a huge NAME with talent to spare that's received well by our "fans" and beloved by our owner. It's a no brainer that the powers that be would like it to happen. The ball's in Barry's court, IMO. Our mind is already made up. But Swift, when Bonds came to South Fla after 715 the crowds weren't exactly enormous. This year more people showed up but one of those days was a Super Saturday. You need to take into consideration we only play the Giants three times a season at home. When you have three games against one team all the fans of said player or team will come out in full force during those extremely limited opportunities. There is no question a player can affect the attendance of a particular series. And there is no question a starting pitcher can affect the day-to-day attendance numbers for a team. But I have serious doubts you can replicate that attendance boost over the course of 81 home dates and 30 times as many opportunities (compared to 3) for the fans to see a particular position player w/o some sort of bond (pun intended) between them (Aaron and Milwaukee). The FO should focus on bringing in more fans the old fashion way and improving the product on the field. Not this gimmicky rent an old star player policy.
October 7, 200718 yr Yea, for that kind of money we could actually fill our real holes. Pass. So being unable to draw more than 500 people for a game isn't a hole? Look at the bigger picture. -Is it good stragedy to avoid the onfield holes to plug an off the field hole with a temporary solution? -How much of a draw is a player nearing the end of his career with a subpar team surrounding him? -How much of a draw is a player who has already broken a record? -How much of a draw is a player who has turned off 6 out of every 10 fans? -How much will one player affect attendance numbers if he is playing in Team A's home ballpark 81 times a year compared to 3 or 4? Babe Ruth didn't do much to improve attendance in Boston when he was traded to a very bad Braves team. It didn't help they lost 115 games that year but the point remains. Hank Aaron helped attendance in Milwaukee but there was a past between the fans and him in that situation. South Fla and Bonds have no previous history. I'd rather see that $14-15 million dispersed through the roster in overall improvements rather than in a temporary player who may become a liability with his issues on the field with his health and issues off the field with potential time in court. I agree with your points in theory, but we're the Marlins, it's a very different situation. What I've observed is that in the past 2 years, the Miami faithful has had two incredibly unique opportunities, they were the first crowd to get him after he hit 715...they gave him a standing O. They saw him hit 760...again, another standing O. Loria has to have seen this. He's a huge NAME with talent to spare that's received well by our "fans" and beloved by our owner. It's a no brainer that the powers that be would like it to happen. The ball's in Barry's court, IMO. Our mind is already made up. But Swift, when Bonds came to South Fla after 715 the crowds weren't exactly enormous. This year more people showed up but one of those days was a Super Saturday. You need to take into consideration we only play the Giants three times a season at home. When you have three games against one team all the fans of said player or team will come out in full force during those extremely limited opportunities. There is no question a player can affect the attendance of a particular series. And there is no question a starting pitcher can affect the day-to-day attendance numbers for a team. But I have serious doubts you can replicate that attendance boost over the course of 81 home dates and 30 times as many opportunities (compared to 3) for the fans to see a particular position player w/o some sort of bond (pun intended) between them (Aaron and Milwaukee). The FO should focus on bringing in more fans the old fashion way and improving the product on the field. Not this gimmicky rent an old star player policy. I don't think anyone expects a tangible boost for 81 games, but if Barry gets a big turnout for the 20 weekend games, that's a categoric victory. If Barry's presence sells an extra 1,000 full or partial season ticket plans, that's a victory. Given what happened with Delgado and Pudge, that estimate may be OVERLY conservative. If Barry's presence turns Miggy, Hanley, Hermida and himself into the 2007 murderer's row it'll pay off in the September gates sales (because that'll put us in contention). Is this the BEST business strategy for the Marlins? No, but since I'd say that announcing matching 10 year deals for Miggy and Hanley is about as likely as the moon falling out of orbit, this is what would make the most conservative fiscal sense in the name of actively improving at the gate and on the field.
October 7, 200718 yr Barry Bonds doesn't run fast anymore. He will clog the bases and not allow our faster runners to score. Every ball into LF will be a double, or even triple, as well. Even for Sean Casey. Sign Posednik. He hit a HR in the world series.
October 7, 200718 yr Barry Bonds doesn't run fast anymore. He will clog the bases and not allow our faster runners to score. Every ball into LF will be a double, or even triple, as well. Even for Sean Casey. Sign Posednik. He hit a HR in the world series. He's also Puntolicious.
October 7, 200718 yr Unless MLB did it quietly there has never been any anouncement of a Fine against the Marlins for tampering. I only heard they had looked into the complaint, I believe Swift is right because that is a very serious charge to go by unnoticed
October 7, 200718 yr Marion Jines went down in flames and the word is that Bonds is next on the agenda I love when you pull things like this out of your ass. BTW I don't pull things out of my ass if you have that habit that's your problem. Have I ever been wrong at times? Absolutely but I have never made anything up. The comment that Bonds appears to be next on the agenda wasn't mine and neither should be a surprise to you, unless you are totally clueless Bob
October 7, 200718 yr Marion Jines went down in flames and the word is that Bonds is next on the agenda I love when you pull things like this out of your ass. BTW I don't pull things out of my ass if you have that habit that's your problem. Have I ever been wrong at times? Absolutely but I have never made anything up. The comment that Bonds appears to be next on the agenda wasn't mine and neither should be a surprise to you, unless you are totally clueless Bob
October 7, 200718 yr Marion Jines went down in flames and the word is that Bonds is next on the agenda I love when you pull things like this out of your ass. BTW I don't pull things out of my ass if you have that habit that's your problem. Have I ever been wrong at times? Absolutely but I have never made anything up. The comment that Bonds appears to be next on the agenda wasn't mine and neither should be a surprise to you, unless you are totally clueless Bob You do it constantly. "I've got my sources" "word is", etc.
October 7, 200718 yr I also dont get how Bonds "saved baseball". The vast majority A)didnt want him to break the record and B)dont recognize him as the HR king even after he did. If you think Selig does anymore than tolerate Bonds, your free to feel that way. You are wrong, but still free to feel that way. Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa did (at least play a large role to) save baseball and they were both cheaters as well.
October 7, 200718 yr Barry Bonds doesn't run fast anymore. He will clog the bases and not allow our faster runners to score. Every ball into LF will be a double, or even triple, as well. Even for Sean Casey. Sign Posednik. He hit a HR in the world series. :lol :lol :lol Anyone that can get on base at a .500 clip is not clogging the bases.
October 7, 200718 yr Barry Bonds doesn't run fast anymore. He will clog the bases and not allow our faster runners to score. Every ball into LF will be a double, or even triple, as well. Even for Sean Casey. Sign Posednik. He hit a HR in the world series. :lol :lol :lol Anyone that can get on base at a .500 clip is not clogging the bases. ...sarcasm.
October 7, 200718 yr Marion Jines went down in flames and the word is that Bonds is next on the agenda I love when you pull things like this out of your ass. BTW I don't pull things out of my ass if you have that habit that's your problem. Have I ever been wrong at times? Absolutely but I have never made anything up. The comment that Bonds appears to be next on the agenda wasn't mine and neither should be a surprise to you, unless you are totally clueless Bob You do it constantly. "I've got my sources" "word is", etc. It's official Bob your clueless end of story
October 7, 200718 yr our defense is bad enough. and, we are pretty solid in our corner outfield positions. i think hes going to the angels. If we don't get Bonds, which we probably won't so it's a moot point, it certainly won't be because our defense is 'bad enough' and we are solid enough in the corner OF positions not to take a top 10 hitter in all of baseball. im just saying why i dont want him... i just dont see from even a baseball sense that it would help the team. if we can afford bonds we can afford a cf and a catcher. It will always help any team to have one of the best hitters in baseball in your lineup. A guy with .1045 OPS helps just a little bit, don't you think? no, i dont think a .1045 OPS helps at all :lol you honestly think he is going to hit that well next year??? hes going to be another year older, hes already into his 40s, and he always is an injury concern. imagine him in left with [insert random cf here] and hermida in right. that would be one of the worst, if not the worst, defensive outfields in major league history. yeah, it will bring out more fans (for like five minutes), but it wouldn't be a very smart baseball decision. that being said, im not concerned about his character. from what i remember, most players tend to think of him as a good teammate, and the steroids are of no concern to me. i never saw him as a cheater. i think that issue has been greatly overblown and barry has been unfairly persecuted. even if you think he is a cheater, if you consider yourself a marlins fan you should root for everyone who wears the uniform. ................................................................................ ................................................................................ ................................................................................ ................................................................................ ................................................................................ ................................................................................ .. :banghead what kind of response is that?
October 8, 200718 yr Author Well if we're going to go out and spend a 1y/15 mil on someone it should be either Barry, or A-Rod (if he opts out) If we get Barry Barry to LF Hammer to 1B Jacobs traded, benched, or sent down If we get A-Rod Miggy stays at 3B Hanley to CF A-Rod to SS Personally, I like the A-rod better. He's better than Barry, will draw better than Barry, and works out for the team better than Barry. Plus he's from Miami.\ Whats your opinion?
October 8, 200718 yr ARod's definitely getting $15 million or less on a one year deal. Let's do that.
October 8, 200718 yr ARod's definitely getting $15 million or less on a one year deal. Let's do that. Oh, that is a great idea isn't it? Afterwards let's go to candy land and play in the gum drop forest. First one down the peppermint slide is a rotten egg!!!
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.