Posted November 9, 200717 yr Commentary: Marlins would be wise to hold on to Cabrera By Greg StodaGreg Stoda Palm Beach Post Staff Writer Friday, November 09, 2007 The Marlins might trade Miguel Cabrera. Probably will, in fact. If that does happen, the reasons they'll give will range from the exasperatingly familiar (the Groundhog Day hell of economics linked to the never-ending stadium issue) to the ridiculously inconsequential (he's fat and sassy). And that's just dumb. All of it. A trade of Cabrera would be brushed off - out of habit, by now - as just another installment in the franchise's almost annual deconstruction. It's the money, stupid, because it's always the money with the Marlins. But that convenient dodge doesn't, or shouldn't, work regarding Cabrera, whose situation is different than any previously dumped Florida player from Sheffield to Beckett. Cabrera, a slugging third baseman who'll turn 25 shortly after the start of next season, is a young, everyday player who already is one of the three or four or five best hitters in the game. He's worth whatever multimillions he'll warrant across the next several seasons. And beyond. Admin Beinfest, the Marlins' baseball operations president, faces his most difficult challenge. Beinfest has done a remarkable job rebuilding the Marlins time and time again on a tight budget. He should have received several pieces of jewelry when the 2003 World Series championship rings were presented. Cabrera, though, could be a cornerstone. And cornerstones get stadiums built. Which is why the Marlins should put Cabrera ahead of the stadium dream, instead of putting the stadium dream ahead of him. They should pay whatever price necessary - hey, save some millions by dealing left-handed starting pitcher Dontrelle Willis - to keep Cabrera as the core of a promising lineup. Think of it as a good-faith down payment on getting a place of their own. He's chunky? So was Tony Gwynn. He has a bad attitude and is a negative influence in the clubhouse? Barry Bonds is a jerk, too. And, no, it's not a stretch to invoke the names of Gwynn and Bonds in a Cabrera study. In the past four full seasons with the Marlins, Cabrera has batted a cumulative .316 with 126 home runs and 461 runs batted in. He has scored more than 400 runs. How is that kind of production going to be replaced? And don't bother me with chatter about getting a third baseman to replace him, plus a starting center fielder and a starting pitcher or a prospect in return. The Marlins need to overcome whatever disgust they harbor regarding Cabrera's petulant disposition, and pay him. Who knows? He might even interpret the gesture as a sign of respect, and respond with a more mature approach to the game. But as usual when it comes to the Marlins at this time of year, making a blockbuster deal has more to do with necessity than wisdom. "Good players are always in need, that's for sure," Beinfest told reporters at the general managers' meetings in Orlando this week. "I'm not talking specifically about Cabrera or Willis or Dan Uggla or (Hanley) Ramirez. When you trade really good players, you want really good players in return. You want talent for talent." Well, sure. But in Florida's case that has meant unproven talent for proven (read: high-dollar) talent. "I'm not going to speculate on who's being traded or not being traded," Beinfest said. "I think everyone is aware of our situation in South Florida. We're revenue-challenged. We run a reasonable payroll. We definitely have challenges. ... "We've had good teams with September hope. There's a lot of fans in a lot of cities who would like to have September hope, and they don't have it. Every year for the past four, not counting last year, we've had September hope. We don't expect sympathy. We expect to do well regardless of what our situation may be." That's all very nice. But there won't even be April hope for the Marlins next season if Cabrera isn't with them. Give him a long-term deal starting with whatever portion - 30 percent? - is required of the team's projected payroll of $30 million to $35 million. The Marlins could find their center fielder by getting rid of Willis, who was 10-15 with a 5.17 ERA last season. He's young (26 years old throughout next season) and is a lefty innings-eater. The Marlins ought to trade him and his effervescent personality. But not Cabrera.
November 9, 200717 yr If they aren't going to sign him, which they won't, then it would be stupid to hold on to him
November 9, 200717 yr If they aren't going to sign him, which they won't, then it would be stupid to hold on to him +1
November 9, 200717 yr Author If they aren't going to sign him, which they won't, then it would be stupid to hold on to him It is stupid to say they won't sign him when they haven't had serious negotiations with SFX. The Marlins intentions are clear, that much is obvious.
November 9, 200717 yr If they aren't going to sign him, which they won't, then it would be stupid to hold on to him It all depends on what we get. If the package is not that good then I would rather keep him for two more years and then get the draft picks, two of them, I think.
November 9, 200717 yr Author I'm going to admit ignorance over the contract negotiations that have taken place (or lack thereof) thus far. However, it doesn't take a genius to realize that Cabrera has the potential to get a mega-deal (and that some team will overpay) and that the Marlins don't have that kind of money. If all goes well on the stadium front we could potentially have a nice young talent core ready to make a run right around when our new park could open. No team can overpay for two years. The Marlins (well, scratch that, not the Marlins, but any other major league baseball club that operates in good faith) have leverage in the negotiations. Is it as strong as it was post 2005? No, not in the slightest. But there's no competition for him. Agents and players are tremendously risk-averse. If the Marlins were to give him a Soriano deal (by all estimates, a below market value contract) he'd be signed yesterday. The Marlins are no worse for wear, and Miggy's a bargain.
November 9, 200717 yr If they aren't going to sign him, which they won't, then it would be stupid to hold on to him This is exactly right and is the sole reason why I want him gone. It isn't about being too cheap to afford his remaining years of arbitration it is about the Marlins being unable to afford his contract when hitting the free market. It's just an unfortunate fact of nature that very few teams will have that kind of money. It's the burden of being a small market team and growing a mega superstar. It would be a waste to have him on our roster in two years and have him walk with no compensation. When other teams are offering the farm for him why not make the move? In the remote chance that Willis, Olsen, Nolasco, RVH and whoever else is in the rotation pitch well then we could compete with Miguel in the lineup but would not compete without him unless the deal is with the Dodgers. Other than the Dodgers I'm not impressed with the "farms" being offered. Howie Kendrick as the centerpiece for Cabrera? That's a f***ing joke.
November 9, 200717 yr If they aren't going to sign him, which they won't, then it would be stupid to hold on to him This is exactly right and is the sole reason why I want him gone. It isn't about being too cheap to afford his remaining years of arbitration it is about the Marlins being unable to afford his contract when hitting the free market. It's just an unfortunate fact of nature that very few teams will have that kind of money. It's the burden of being a small market team and growing a mega superstar. It would be a waste to have him on our roster in two years and have him walk with no compensation. When other teams are offering the farm for him why not make the move? In the remote chance that Willis, Olsen, Nolasco, RVH and whoever else is in the rotation pitch well then we could compete with Miguel in the lineup but would not compete without him unless the deal is with the Dodgers. Other than the Dodgers I'm not impressed with the "farms" being offered. Howie Kendrick as the centerpiece for Cabrera? That's a f***ing joke. It would be a deal built around Kendrick and Wood apparently.... but that's all guessing at this point Here's to hoping we make the deal with big blue
November 9, 200717 yr There is also a good argument to trade him: Why the Marlins Should Trade Miguel Cabrera
November 9, 200717 yr There is also a good argument to trade him: Why the Marlins Should Trade Miguel Cabrera bah... the one over at mvn.com is better and did you actually throw Uggla's name into a comparison with Cabs and Hanley? FOR SHAME!
November 9, 200717 yr There is also a good argument to trade him: Why the Marlins Should Trade Miguel Cabrera bah... the one over at mvn.com is better Agreed.
November 9, 200717 yr I've favored the "goods" that the Dodgers can offer, too. But I am starting to warm to a Wood-Kendrick-Adenhardt (and maybe a catcher?) package. Am I crazy? I would say that is a package centered around Wood more than Kendrick. I guess there is perhaps a little concern with Adenhardt, given his prior TJ surgery but that has almost become a rite of passage for pitchers nowadays.
November 9, 200717 yr If they aren't going to sign him, which they won't, then it would be stupid to hold on to him This is exactly right and is the sole reason why I want him gone. It isn't about being too cheap to afford his remaining years of arbitration it is about the Marlins being unable to afford his contract when hitting the free market. It's just an unfortunate fact of nature that very few teams will have that kind of money. It's the burden of being a small market team and growing a mega superstar. It would be a waste to have him on our roster in two years and have him walk with no compensation. When other teams are offering the farm for him why not make the move? Hit the nail right on the head.
November 9, 200717 yr I've favored the "goods" that the Dodgers can offer, too. But I am starting to warm to a Wood-Kendrick-Adenhardt (and maybe a catcher?) package. Am I crazy? I would say that is a package centered around Wood more than Kendrick. I guess there is perhaps a little concern with Adenhardt, given his prior TJ surgery but that has almost become a rite of passage for pitchers nowadays. No, it's not crazy, but they'd have to trade Dontrelle and Uggla too to fill out CF and C. Which isn't that big of a deal, but people would flip out at trading three of the 4 most recognizable names on the team.
November 9, 200717 yr I've favored the "goods" that the Dodgers can offer, too. But I am starting to warm to a Wood-Kendrick-Adenhardt (and maybe a catcher?) package. Am I crazy? I would say that is a package centered around Wood more than Kendrick. I guess there is perhaps a little concern with Adenhardt, given his prior TJ surgery but that has almost become a rite of passage for pitchers nowadays. No, it's not crazy, but they'd have to trade Dontrelle and Uggla too to fill out CF and C. Which isn't that big of a deal, but people would flip out at trading three of the 4 most recognizable names on the team. You would only need to deal either Uggla or Willis for a CFer and Catcher. Both of them are worth at least two average major league-ready prospects.
November 9, 200717 yr I've favored the "goods" that the Dodgers can offer, too. But I am starting to warm to a Wood-Kendrick-Adenhardt (and maybe a catcher?) package. Am I crazy? I would say that is a package centered around Wood more than Kendrick. I guess there is perhaps a little concern with Adenhardt, given his prior TJ surgery but that has almost become a rite of passage for pitchers nowadays. No, it's not crazy, but they'd have to trade Dontrelle and Uggla too to fill out CF and C. Which isn't that big of a deal, but people would flip out at trading three of the 4 most recognizable names on the team. You would only need to deal either Uggla or Willis for a CFer and Catcher. Both of them are worth at least two average major league-ready prospects. Good luck finding the perfect team to accomplish that. Someone like Cleveland might take Dontrelle for Shoppach and Ben Francisco, but wouldn't it make more sense to get 1 great prospect versus two "ok" starter types. If this was the feud, Show me Jeff Clement!
November 9, 200717 yr I've favored the "goods" that the Dodgers can offer, too. But I am starting to warm to a Wood-Kendrick-Adenhardt (and maybe a catcher?) package. Am I crazy? I would say that is a package centered around Wood more than Kendrick. I guess there is perhaps a little concern with Adenhardt, given his prior TJ surgery but that has almost become a rite of passage for pitchers nowadays. No, it's not crazy, but they'd have to trade Dontrelle and Uggla too to fill out CF and C. Which isn't that big of a deal, but people would flip out at trading three of the 4 most recognizable names on the team. You would only need to deal either Uggla or Willis for a CFer and Catcher. Both of them are worth at least two average major league-ready prospects. but wouldn't it make more sense to get 1 great prospect versus two "ok" starter types. Willis is worth at least one top prospect. Uggla's worth is a lot higher than some people may believe, considering his production apposed to his salary is huge. Not to mention any club that has him will be getting a power hitting second baseman over a four year period in which he's in his prime.
November 10, 200717 yr Does Colordo have anything behind Iannetta in the minors? I would take Iannetta over Clement in a heart beat...and the Rockies don't seem that dead-set on him (See: Trying to get another catcher to start over him even though he put up a .342! OBP while only batting .230 (And you know he's not going to hit that low again)). He's got .270/.370/.450 written all over him, and that's being conservative. And the reason I ask is COL has a hole at 2B (I really doubt Stewart will work there but...I guess we'll see)...and with all the talent they have they seem the best fit with us to me for an Uggla dropping.
November 10, 200717 yr Willis is worth at least one top prospect. Uggla's worth is a lot higher than some people may believe, considering his production apposed to his salary is huge. Not to mention any club that has him will be getting a power hitting second baseman over a four year period in which he's in his prime. And this means what? Whose going to give us a starting caliber CF and C for Dontrelle (or Uggla), that will be worth their respective value plus satisfying both the clubs needs. I don't see it. Where's the team? Colorado could use either, and doesn't have the combo. Seattle has a catcher, but good luck getting Jones. Arizona has some catchers that are alright, but you think they would trade Upton? LA doesn't have a catcher beyond their super one. SF has nothing. Oakland has stuff, but they'll hold onto it. Maybe KC would dish DeJesus and Buck, but is that really what you want for Dontrelle? Not me. Texas? No. Boston? No need for Train. DRays? No catcher. Just go right down the row, there isn't an option I can see where one of them would satisfy the holes by themselves. That Ben Francisco/Shoppach combo is like, the best one I can think of, and that's just like going after (potential) .750 OPS guys versus a potential impact player, which is what the Marlins need to demand for anyone. If that angels deal happens and there is no CF/C, they are gonna have to trade Dontrelle for one, and Uggla for the other, to get solid young players at the positions unless they go the stopgap route for a year. I'd rather "tank" 2008, to get everything set up for 2009. kendrick/wood/SP, uggla for kemp+prospect, and dontrelle for clement+prospect, makes a lot of sense if you plug in a depth chart.
November 10, 200717 yr I would take Iannetta over Clement in a heart beat I hope you just mean this on an, Iannetta will cost less than Clement, level.
November 10, 200717 yr If they aren't going to sign him, which they won't, then it would be stupid to hold on to him It is stupid to say they won't sign him when they haven't had serious negotiations with SFX. The Marlins intentions are clear, that much is obvious. So what your kind of saying is that A) We shouldnt trade him AND B) The Marlins intentions are to NOT sign him and therefore were gonna lose him anyway. Im confused.
November 10, 200717 yr I would take Iannetta over Clement in a heart beat I hope you just mean this on an, Iannetta will cost less than Clement, level. No Clement really doesn't impress as much as he seems to be to others. .261/.348/.433/.781 line against RHP in a notorious hitter's league in what was garnered as a bounce-back year for him after injury...meh I'm not saying he's not going to be good, he's going to be good and I'd love to have Clement, but I would take Iannetta over him. Clement has more power potential but not by all that much, and Iannetta has a better eye and hits better for average.
November 10, 200717 yr Author If they aren't going to sign him, which they won't, then it would be stupid to hold on to him It is stupid to say they won't sign him when they haven't had serious negotiations with SFX. The Marlins intentions are clear, that much is obvious. So what your kind of saying is that A) We shouldnt trade him AND B) The Marlins intentions are to NOT sign him and therefore were gonna lose him anyway. Im confused. No, I'm saying we should be done evaluating anything as a baseball move, it's pure economics from here on in. Me, I'm of the mindset that if you don't pay money to watch Goldman Sachs, why pay money for the Marlins? Therefore the resident geniuses that say this makes the 2010 team really good are sycophants or idiots (or both). Afterall, the '05 firesale was meant to "give" us the '08 division. Worked out great for all sides.
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.