Btw, guys...I think it's really cool how we've debated this, and we haven't really gotten into huge arguments.

Just sharing opinions & thoughts.

 

I just thought I'd thank all of you for being cool about the whole thing; I've posted for years on the ESPN message boards...a thread going 150+ posts without an argument over there is like Jorge Julio getting 2 consecutive saves...just rarely ever happens.

Btw, guys...I think it's really cool how we've debated this, and we haven't really gotten into huge arguments.

Just sharing opinions & thoughts.

 

Jerk.... :whistle

 

 

But back to the topic at hand. The team should sign Hermida as soon as he completes a season without more than 15 days on the DL. Hopefully that is this season. The only guy that I think the team should stay year-to-year on is Willingham, because his back problem is not going to go away, at least without major surgery. This is a team that could have one of the best lineups 1-6 in baseball, without going outside the organization, within 2 years. If Coughlin pans out, make that 1-7 in the new ballpark.

And why do you keep comparing him to Chase Utley??? Chase Utley is one of the best all around second basemen the game has EVER seen. So what if he isn't as good as Utley? Nobody is!!!

 

The Utley thing is from me. Dan's first 2 seasons are better than Utley's first 2 seasons. I brought that up and we got into a large, wide-ranging discussion about how Utley benefits from CBP (in addition to being awesome) and that Dan is harmed by DS (and is still awesome). Not even I am saying that Dan is better than Utley, or even as good, though I think Dan can get close. I see Dan becoming an even better Jeff Kent.

I wasn't comparing him to Utley...someone else was; I just proved Utley was better (with stats). Despite parks, Utley's career .OPS+ (which factors parks) is 128; Uggla's is 117.

 

OPS+ does not acount for park effects as regards handedness, only park effects overall. CBP overwhelmingly favors left handers, right handers not so much.

Dan Uggla is Chase Utley Jr

Dan Uggla is Dan Uggla. There's no need to compare him to anyone. There isn't a team in baseball, including the Phillies who wouldn't make room for him in their lineup. Right now he's taking a very defensive posture at the plate and making teams pitch to him and as long as he stays ahead of them this is going to continue. I don't mean he's hitting a HR every night or always going to have an OBP above .400 but he is much different batter than we saw last summer.

 

Presley really deserves a great deal of credit for the transformation. Hopefully you're voting for Uggla going to the All-Star Game, I know I am.

Dan Uggla is Chase Utley Jr

 

Sorry, Dan Uggla is not a little wiener...

If you give Uggla a 5yr/30 million dollar contract what is your downside? Your worst case scenario is he reverts back to last year. And he's still very tradeable w/o having to eat any of the $$$.

I agree completely with not decreasing, and perhaps increasing his value with a contract (where teams know their future financial commitment), but I have to point out that contract is highly unrealistic. My main problem with Uggla is not that I completely hate him as a player, it's that I don't see him valued properly through the arbitration process. If the Marlins can get away with that deal, do it immediately and that is a steal. But looking at Utley/A. Hill comparables, you're looking 5/$45-50 for Uggla (and that figure is a reversion back into his normal low .800 OPS for the rest of the season, and not this 1.600 OPS May insanity), and I think it would be a horrible idea to be committing $12+ million dollars a year to a 32 and 33 year old Uggla. Those years (2012 and 2013) are more likely than not going to be declining years for Dan, when we will have prime years from the Hermida, Maybin, A. Miller, Volstad, Johnson, Anibal, Olsen, Tucker, etc, group of players who will all be in arbitration or early free agency years. They don't need to commit money to Uggla with where they are as an organization right now, and where he is as a player. We have him for 3 years if we want him, and we can offer him a FA extension if we still want him in 2011. It's not like he is going to vanish. If anything, they can buy out his arbitration 3 years, and try and save a couple million through the process, or do the 'champ' argument and expect a value increase because of salary certainty. Either is fine. Anything more than that though, would be pretty irresponsible. Especially with a very nice 2B prospect in AA.

 

The only players on the 25 man roster that a 5-7 year contract might make sense for are Hermida, A. Miller, and Olsen. I need to clarify, I'm not saying to give those 3 guys large year buy outs, I wouldn't to any of those 3 right now (even Hermida, cause his early cost savings window was 1-2 years ago and we shouldn't do it this close to arbitration/free agency for a corner outfield, until he proves the .900 OPS reality), but they are just the only ones who meet the definition of age, upside, and getting guys who are likely to perform to contract expectations. Also, I'm sure someone is going to argue a lot of hitters are productive at 32/33, which is true, but my belief is Dan's contact rate and utterly unreal best in baseball XBH stabilize at some point to historical rates, and he will turn into an average 2B, which makes buying him out over spending. And I hate over spending. I know the organization shares this belief so I'm not that worried we end up with a Carlos Pena contract on the books. I just see a lot of "sign Uggla. He is good" type comments, and this issue is a bit more complicated than that. I'm going to attempt to break it down very simple.

 

Uggla can be a "better" player than Coghlan over the next 5 years, but playing Coghlan in a year or two, getting at least two excellent prospects for Dan, and using the limited money we wouldn't have to pay him could contribute to retaining more players on other parts of the team (that we would lose because we only have X to spend the next few years), is probably a "better" idea for the team. Just think about it. We're better without Cabrera. This looks like another one of those situations.

If you give Uggla a 5yr/30 million dollar contract what is your downside? Your worst case scenario is he reverts back to last year. And he's still very tradeable w/o having to eat any of the $$$.

I agree completely with not decreasing, and perhaps increasing his value with a contract (where teams know their future financial commitment), but I have to point out that contract is highly unrealistic. My main problem with Uggla is not that I completely hate him as a player, it's that I don't see him valued properly through the arbitration process. If the Marlins can get away with that deal, do it immediately and that is a steal. But looking at Utley/A. Hill comparables, you're looking 5/$45-50 for Uggla (and that figure is a reversion back into his normal low .800 OPS for the rest of the season, and not this 1.600 OPS May insanity), and I think it would be a horrible idea to be committing $12+ million dollars a year to a 32 and 33 year old Uggla. Those years (2012 and 2013) are more likely than not going to be declining years for Dan, when we will have prime years from the Hermida, Maybin, A. Miller, Volstad, Johnson, Anibal, Olsen, Tucker, etc, group of players who will all be in arbitration or early free agency years. They don't need to commit money to Uggla with where they are as an organization right now, and where he is as a player. We have him for 3 years if we want him, and we can offer him a FA extension if we still want him in 2011. It's not like he is going to vanish. If anything, they can buy out his arbitration 3 years, and try and save a couple million through the process, or do the 'champ' argument and expect a value increase because of salary certainty. Either is fine. Anything more than that though, would be pretty irresponsible. Especially with a very nice 2B prospect in AA.

 

The only players on the 25 man roster that a 5-7 year contract might make sense for are Hermida, A. Miller, and Olsen. I need to clarify, I'm not saying to give those 3 guys large year buy outs, I wouldn't to any of those 3 right now (even Hermida, cause his early cost savings window was 1-2 years ago and we shouldn't do it this close to arbitration/free agency for a corner outfield, until he proves the .900 OPS reality), but they are just the only ones who meet the definition of age, upside, and getting guys who are likely to perform to contract expectations. Also, I'm sure someone is going to argue a lot of hitters are productive at 32/33, which is true, but my belief is Dan's contact rate and utterly unreal best in baseball XBH stabilize at some point to historical rates, and he will turn into an average 2B, which makes buying him out over spending. And I hate over spending. I know the organization shares this belief so I'm not that worried we end up with a Carlos Pena contract on the books. I just see a lot of "sign Uggla. He is good" type comments, and this issue is a bit more complicated than that. I'm going to attempt to break it down very simple.

 

Uggla can be a "better" player than Coghlan over the next 5 years, but playing Coghlan in a year or two, getting at least two excellent prospects for Dan, and using the limited money we wouldn't have to pay him could contribute to retaining more players on other parts of the team (that we would lose because we only have X to spend the next few years), is probably a "better" idea for the team. Just think about it. We're better without Cabrera. This looks like another one of those situations.

Beautiful

If you give Uggla a 5yr/30 million dollar contract what is your downside? Your worst case scenario is he reverts back to last year. And he's still very tradeable w/o having to eat any of the $$$.

I agree completely with not decreasing, and perhaps increasing his value with a contract (where teams know their future financial commitment), but I have to point out that contract is highly unrealistic. My main problem with Uggla is not that I completely hate him as a player, it's that I don't see him valued properly through the arbitration process. If the Marlins can get away with that deal, do it immediately and that is a steal. But looking at Utley/A. Hill comparables, you're looking 5/$45-50 for Uggla (and that figure is a reversion back into his normal low .800 OPS for the rest of the season, and not this 1.600 OPS May insanity), and I think it would be a horrible idea to be committing $12+ million dollars a year to a 32 and 33 year old Uggla. Those years (2012 and 2013) are more likely than not going to be declining years for Dan, when we will have prime years from the Hermida, Maybin, A. Miller, Volstad, Johnson, Anibal, Olsen, Tucker, etc, group of players who will all be in arbitration or early free agency years. They don't need to commit money to Uggla with where they are as an organization right now, and where he is as a player. We have him for 3 years if we want him, and we can offer him a FA extension if we still want him in 2011. It's not like he is going to vanish. If anything, they can buy out his arbitration 3 years, and try and save a couple million through the process, or do the 'champ' argument and expect a value increase because of salary certainty. Either is fine. Anything more than that though, would be pretty irresponsible. Especially with a very nice 2B prospect in AA.

 

The only players on the 25 man roster that a 5-7 year contract might make sense for are Hermida, A. Miller, and Olsen. I need to clarify, I'm not saying to give those 3 guys large year buy outs, I wouldn't to any of those 3 right now (even Hermida, cause his early cost savings window was 1-2 years ago and we shouldn't do it this close to arbitration/free agency for a corner outfield, until he proves the .900 OPS reality), but they are just the only ones who meet the definition of age, upside, and getting guys who are likely to perform to contract expectations. Also, I'm sure someone is going to argue a lot of hitters are productive at 32/33, which is true, but my belief is Dan's contact rate and utterly unreal best in baseball XBH stabilize at some point to historical rates, and he will turn into an average 2B, which makes buying him out over spending. And I hate over spending. I know the organization shares this belief so I'm not that worried we end up with a Carlos Pena contract on the books. I just see a lot of "sign Uggla. He is good" type comments, and this issue is a bit more complicated than that. I'm going to attempt to break it down very simple.

 

Uggla can be a "better" player than Coghlan over the next 5 years, but playing Coghlan in a year or two, getting at least two excellent prospects for Dan, and using the limited money we wouldn't have to pay him could contribute to retaining more players on other parts of the team (that we would lose because we only have X to spend the next few years), is probably a "better" idea for the team. Just think about it. We're better without Cabrera. This looks like another one of those situations.

 

:wub:

If you give Uggla a 5yr/30 million dollar contract what is your downside? Your worst case scenario is he reverts back to last year. And he's still very tradeable w/o having to eat any of the $$.

I agree completely with not decreasing, and perhaps increasing his value with a contract (where teams know their future financial commitment), but I have to point out that contract is highly unrealistic. My main problem with Uggla is not that I completely hate him as a player, it's that I don't see him valued properly through the arbitration process. If the Marlins can get away with that deal, do it immediately and that is a steal. But looking at Utley/A. Hill comparables, you're looking 5/$45-50 for Uggla (and that figure is a reversion back into his normal low .800 OPS for the rest of the season, and not this 1.600 OPS May insanity), and I think it would be a horrible idea to be committing $12+ million dollars a year to a 32 and 33 year old Uggla. Those years (2012 and 2013) are more likely than not going to be declining years for Dan, when we will have prime years from the Hermida, Maybin, A. Miller, Volstad, Johnson, Anibal, Olsen, Tucker, etc, group of players who will all be in arbitration or early free agency years. They don't need to commit money to Uggla with where they are as an organization right now, and where he is as a player. We have him for 3 years if we want him, and we can offer him a FA extension if we still want him in 2011. It's not like he is going to vanish. If anything, they can buy out his arbitration 3 years, and try and save a couple million through the process, or do the 'champ' argument and expect a value increase because of salary certainty. Either is fine. Anything more than that though, would be pretty irresponsible. Especially with a very nice 2B prospect in AA.

 

The only players on the 25 man roster that a 5-7 year contract might make sense for are Hermida, A. Miller, and Olsen. I need to clarify, I'm not saying to give those 3 guys large year buy outs, I wouldn't to any of those 3 right now (even Hermida, cause his early cost savings window was 1-2 years ago and we shouldn't do it this close to arbitration/free agency for a corner outfield, until he proves the .900 OPS reality), but they are just the only ones who meet the definition of age, upside, and getting guys who are likely to perform to contract expectations. Also, I'm sure someone is going to argue a lot of hitters are productive at 32/33, which is true, but my belief is Dan's contact rate and utterly unreal best in baseball XBH stabilize at some point to historical rates, and he will turn into an average 2B, which makes buying him out over spending. And I hate over spending. I know the organization shares this belief so I'm not that worried we end up with a Carlos Pena contract on the books. I just see a lot of "sign Uggla. He is good" type comments, and this issue is a bit more complicated than that. I'm going to attempt to break it down very simple.

 

Uggla can be a "better" player than Coghlan over the next 5 years, but playing Coghlan in a year or two, getting at least two excellent prospects for Dan, and using the limited money we wouldn't have to pay him could contribute to retaining more players on other parts of the team (that we would lose because we only have X to spend the next few years), is probably a "better" idea for the team. Just think about it. We're better without Cabrera. This looks like another one of those situations.

 

We're better without Cabrera because we have Uggla. Uggla has been playing better than last season thus far.

Right now Uggla is playing like an MVP candidate

Right now Uggla is playing like an MVP candidate

And he's very capable of hitting like Mariano Mendoza next month. He's a streaky hitter, I wouldn't open up and checkbooks based on any of his latest torrid streaks.

Right now Uggla is playing like an MVP candidate

And he's very capable of hitting like Mariano Mendoza next month. He's a streaky hitter, I wouldn't open up and checkbooks based on any of his latest torrid streaks.

 

No he isn't and no he won't. I'm not talking about the insane steak he's on but he's finally learned what he has to do at the plate to be successful (from a technical POV) and that's not changing.

 

And Lou, come to your senses (or maybe not because you have always been a contra-indicator when it comes to player evaluation) a) Uggla is worth 5yrs/$50 into today's world (because if for no other reason three years from now the way salaries are escalating it will be chump change) and there are plenty of productive, superproductive players playing in the low to mid-thirties, b) since Uggla isn't injury prone (like Hermida) ought to be able to continue for years to come and c) I guess I should be happy to see you're up to trading for two whole prospects for Uggla so a guy who probably won't provide the HR production Uggla does in one year throughout his entire career can take his place, which is a step up from the bag of baseballs or the "get anything you can" (mentality) you were willing to take earlier in the season. Your nice AA 2nd base "prospect" is just that, a giant maybe, like maybe he won't be able to hit major league pitching, or maybe he's nothing more than the next fifth infielder in waiting. You know the guy you call on when you're just looking to get a single and a man on base so a Dan Uggla can drive him home. And please don't even attempt to tell me that's not true because you don't "know". No one knows. Me included. What we do know is Dan Uggla did what I told you all spring he would do because he started last fall, and that was change his mechanics and become a better hitter because of it. The change looks remarkable but he's very defensive at the plate now, every other thing out of his mouth is "make the pitcher pitch to you, don't chase balls out of the zone...", this is the one extra hit a week (or in this case, two) working to a T. You realize it's May 21st and he's (almost) half way to his homerun total from last season. Even if he cools down to .290-.300 he's on a track to a homerun total I wouldn't dare post here.

 

We agreed earlier by your own admission you should keep rooting against Uggla, because it seems to be working. Keep it up. We Uggla fans would personally like to thank you for your contrbution to this year's success !!!

 

(NOTE: For those who think I'm being nasty to Lou he knows the context for this is some back room chatter we've had going on for some time on the subject of Uggla and his value to the team so I'm more pulling his leg than anything else.)

 

If anyone's tradebait let's put Coghlan out there and see who bites? History suggests that's where Beinfest will go if he retools this summer for a playoff run, to the minor leagues to trade prospects for real major league ballplayers.

 

So Lou keep doing your thing, it's working but do me and the team a favor and sneak off one day and give Dan your two dozen All-Star Game votes. I promise not to tell anyone you did it.

now i like both uggla and hermida and think it would be best for the team if they both got some form of multi year contract

 

however i reckon danny boy deserves to be offered his 1st as he provides unbeliavable power for the 2B position

 

and another thing - last 2 seasons uggla has provided over 600 at bats, whereas jeremy has only had 307 and 429