Jump to content


Why Do We Do It?


-Miami Fan-
 Share

Recommended Posts

Why do we do it? At times, it really seems like this front office has no intentions of building a winning franchise. I realize that payroll is reportedly supposed to increase up to about $40 million. I also realize that we signed Hanley to a fairly large contract. (Highest payed player in franchise history.) It just seems like with trades like these that they don't want to win. I realize that they did want to free up some space on the payroll to allow for more spending, but this is just ridiculous. I know that Bonifacio has gold glove potential and we got several decent low-level prospects, but I really think we could have gotten better value for Willingham and Olsen. Olsen had a career year with a terrible past. How will he fare? Willingham had a good year and is good defensively, but has major back issues. How will he fare? I really hope these questions work out with the benefit for us, but this is really disappointing and annoying. I really wish that I could say with 100% honesty that the Florida Marlins front office wants to build a successful franchise. Unfortunately, I can't.

 

So I beg of you this one question: Why do we do it? This team obviously doesn't care about us. So why should we care about them? I know the new ballpark is "coming," but things are just ridiculous. Our team was very good last year and if we made no moves, I think we would do pretty well in 2009. We might even make the playoffs. Who knows? I know we need to free-up some room on the payroll, because the front office wanted to improve the defense, but I really don't think the moves that the front office made were positive for the team or even worked to achieve their goal. Again, why do we do it?

 

There are plenty of teams who make it their number one priority to win, guaranteed. They care about their fans and their fans care about them. They fill the seats and they fill the win column. So once more, why do we put ourselves through this debacle every 3 or 4 years? It's idiotic, it's gross, and it make me sick. I am die-hard. However, at times like this, I can't help but think of what if...what if our front office actually attempted to win?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


All this because we traded Scott Olsen and Josh Willingham

 

This rant is not due only to Monday night's trade. It has been in the making since the first fire-sale after the '97 World Series. I am, however, grateful for the 2 World Series titles that we posses, but if we're not winning a World Series title, we're either making poor front office moves and/or not winning at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this because we traded Scott Olsen and Josh Willingham

 

This rant is not due only to Monday night's trade. It has been in the making since the first fire-sale after the '97 World Series. I am, however, grateful for the 2 World Series titles that we posses, but if we're not winning a World Series title, we're either making poor front office moves and/or not winning at all.

 

 

I don't know about you, but I've been satisfied with every move the team has made with the exception of a few (Jorge Julio). I do not like this move. It's not about getting rid of Olsen and Willingham because the team doesn't need them. But I don't see how the return can possibly help the team. There's been reports that the team will keep Uggla and sign Amezaga so I guess one of those is false. I just don't understand. They traded Jake away (which I agreed with) to free up the log jam at first and third (Cantu, Jacobs, Helms, Dallas, Gaby), but then create another one at second (Uggla, Alfredo, Andino, Coughlan, Bonaficio).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know about you guys but I would rather win a world series every 6 years and lose in between then have a team that consistently wins the division and craps out in the playoffs AKA the Braves. I think that every front office in the history of the game has made some bad moves but in the Marlins case, Those guys are genius's. In Beinfest I trust. I will not comment on the Fla-Dc trade until after the offseason is over. There is something else in the pike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the offseason is not done. let's see what happens from here until opening day. dont forget that we pretty much knew these guys were getting traded. they have yet to surprise us in terms of who from the team gets traded. the next person to go will be kevin gregg. maybe we will flip one or two of these guys and kevin gregg for someone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't know how all of you can agree with what the front office is doing. I thought payroll was supposed to increase? Trading two good players and getting 3 "decent" prospects makes sense only from the standpoint of reducing payroll. I just don't know. I want to get to know and get to like the players on this team, but the front office makes that damn near impossible. I know we had a bunch of players going into arbitration, but I bet we could afford to pay most of them. This team had better make some good deals this winter. I just don't know how you guys can support the front office with this move.

 

And winning 2 World Series titles is GREAT, but how often is that going to happen? I know that anything can happen, but winning that many World Series titles in short a short time span is hard to replicate. I want a team that will WIN. I want a team year after year that will COMPETE. I might be the only person that thinks this way, but I would take 10 years of winning or close to winning seasons over 1 World Series title in 10 years with the other 9 at the cellar of the NL East. Maybe that's just me. And if it is, I'm sorry for my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a Florida Panthers fan.

I, unlike you, thank God that I'm a Marlins fan.

 

This team should be competitive in 2009. This isn't a huge trade...it's a minor trade for us, in which we didn't get good value in.

 

Beinfest has made more good trades than bad.

 

You talk as if being a Marlins fan is the worst thing in the world. 2 World Series titles in 15 years is something most organizations would love to have. Just ask a Cubs fan...they're still "doing it" after one whole century.

 

Ask the Pirates or Royals fans how they "do it."

 

A fan is a fan through the high's and the low's. I don't even know why I'm saying this either b/c I still fully believe this team can contend for a playoff spot next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that you're not just talking about this trade, but you really shouldn't give up hope. I agree with those that said we knew they were going to be trading both of these players, and yeah, they could've gotten some better people for it, but I still maintain that the FO knows what they're doing....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't know how all of you can agree with what the front office is doing. I thought payroll was supposed to increase? Trading two good players and getting 3 "decent" prospects makes sense only from the standpoint of reducing payroll. I just don't know. I want to get to know and get to like the players on this team, but the front office makes that damn near impossible. I know we had a bunch of players going into arbitration, but I bet we could afford to pay most of them. This team had better make some good deals this winter. I just don't know how you guys can support the front office with this move.

 

And winning 2 World Series titles is GREAT, but how often is that going to happen? I know that anything can happen, but winning that many World Series titles in short a short time span is hard to replicate. I want a team that will WIN. I want a team year after year that will COMPETE. I might be the only person that thinks this way, but I would take 10 years of winning or close to winning seasons over 1 World Series title in 10 years with the other 9 at the cellar of the NL East. Maybe that's just me. And if it is, I'm sorry for my opinion.

We didn't trade "two good players". We traded a #5 pitcher who was on the bubble for even making our rotation and an average LFer with a bad back.

 

What today's trade did wasn't hurt the team. Both Olsen and Hammer are easily replaced by Miller and Ross respectively. The problem with the trade is that it didn't help the team in any way nor did it get proper return for the two players we let go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't always agree with it but it does make it interesting. It's the team we choose to follow. Plenty of people have quit following the Marlins for just this reason but even more have complained about it and yet are still fans.

 

Our team can't (or won't) spend money for payroll. We are like the kids who cry when they don't get candy. I'm ok with it. If you want a team that never has to make decisions based on budget root for the Yankees or RedSox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't always agree with it but it does make it interesting. It's the team we choose to follow. Plenty of people have quit following the Marlins for just this reason but even more have complained about it and yet are still fans.

 

 

And yet...those same people comeback and pretend to be "fans" when the team wins a World Series, don't they? Those are just bandwagon fans...for those of you who want to do that, go right ahead. I'll stick to being a fan, regardless of the situation. This team has given me plenty of good times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't know how all of you can agree with what the front office is doing. I thought payroll was supposed to increase? Trading two good players and getting 3 "decent" prospects makes sense only from the standpoint of reducing payroll. I just don't know. I want to get to know and get to like the players on this team, but the front office makes that damn near impossible. I know we had a bunch of players going into arbitration, but I bet we could afford to pay most of them. This team had better make some good deals this winter. I just don't know how you guys can support the front office with this move.

 

And winning 2 World Series titles is GREAT, but how often is that going to happen? I know that anything can happen, but winning that many World Series titles in short a short time span is hard to replicate. I want a team that will WIN. I want a team year after year that will COMPETE. I might be the only person that thinks this way, but I would take 10 years of winning or close to winning seasons over 1 World Series title in 10 years with the other 9 at the cellar of the NL East. Maybe that's just me. And if it is, I'm sorry for my opinion.

We didn't trade "two good players". We traded a #5 pitcher who was on the bubble for even making our rotation and an average LFer with a bad back.

 

What today's trade did wasn't hurt the team. Both Olsen and Hammer are easily replaced by Miller and Ross respectively. The problem with the trade is that it didn't help the team in any way nor did it get proper return for the two players we let go.

 

Olsen is just a #5 now? And Willingham is just an average player?

 

Yikes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Olsen is just a #5 now? And Willingham is just an average player?

 

Yikes.

 

 

A 4.63 ERA / 1.45 WHIP is probably right along the lines of a #5.

Especially when you consider that Olsen's stuff now is worse than when he entered the league, leading to declining K rates, every year.

 

A pitcher who doesn't K many batters, and pitches to contact, allowing plenty of fly balls is not a good combo.

 

Olsen also has a 5.35 career ERA away from Dolphin Stadium.

 

Not sure what you'd call that, but I'm sure it can't be more than a #4 (to be nice).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the bottom line. People aren't upset because of the people we got rid of. People are upset because of the FO intentions of making this trade. It wasn't done to help our team, it was done to save every possible penny possible. That has been this teams motto for years. It's sad we can't maintain a $40 million payroll.

 

If we kept Scott Olsen, that would've allowed us to move a guy like Anibal to the bullpen and be an insurance pitcher and safety spot just in case a guy like Olsen did bad, Miller wasn't ready to be a starter or one of the top three got injured. Now that Olsen is gone, I feel that we are on thin ice when it comes to starting pitching. We do not have an insurance pitcher in case one of our guys flop or gets injured, we would be stuck putting in a Ryan Tucker or a Rick Vanden Hurk into the rotation. If we were going to trade Olsen, we would've liked it to be for a catcher, because like it or not, that is a position of need for us. I'm surprised we needed to add Willingham to get this deal done. I would've thought Olsen could've comanded those three players easily.

 

All I am trying to say here is that we dug ourselves into a potential whole here, and we may look back at this trade later on next season and say this is what cost us a shot at the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the bottom line. People aren't upset because of the people we got rid of. People are upset because of the FO intentions of making this trade. It wasn't done to help our team, it was done to save every possible penny possible. That has been this teams motto for years. It's sad we can't maintain a $40 million payroll.

 

If we kept Scott Olsen, that would've allowed us to move a guy like Anibal to the bullpen and be an insurance pitcher and safety spot just in case a guy like Olsen did bad, Miller wasn't ready to be a starter or one of the top three got injured. Now that Olsen is gone, I feel that we are on thin ice when it comes to starting pitching. We do not have an insurance pitcher in case one of our guys flop or gets injured, we would be stuck putting in a Ryan Tucker or a Rick Vanden Hurk into the rotation. If we were going to trade Olsen, we would've liked it to be for a catcher, because like it or not, that is a position of need for us. I'm surprised we needed to add Willingham to get this deal done. I would've thought Olsen could've comanded those three players easily.

 

All I am trying to say here is that we dug ourselves into a potential whole here, and we may look back at this trade later on next season and say this is what cost us a shot at the playoffs.

 

 

An insurance pitcher can be signed, in free agency. Those aren't difficult to find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Olsen is just a #5 now? And Willingham is just an average player?

 

Yikes.

 

 

A 4.63 ERA / 1.45 WHIP is probably right along the lines of a #5.

Especially when you consider that Olsen's stuff now is worse than when he entered the league, leading to declining K rates, every year.

 

A pitcher who doesn't K many batters, and pitches to contact, allowing plenty of fly balls is not a good combo.

 

Olsen also has a 5.35 career ERA away from Dolphin Stadium.

 

Not sure what you'd call that, but I'm sure it can't be more than a #4 (to be nice).

 

Does a guy coming off a season where he showed in the first half of the season that he is capable of being a 2 or 3 ERA kind of guy and a hitter who was batting .341 with 7 home runs in the first month of the season before getting injured only command the trade value of a utility infielder, and 2 Single A players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the bottom line. People aren't upset because of the people we got rid of. People are upset because of the FO intentions of making this trade. It wasn't done to help our team, it was done to save every possible penny possible. That has been this teams motto for years. It's sad we can't maintain a $40 million payroll.

 

If we kept Scott Olsen, that would've allowed us to move a guy like Anibal to the bullpen and be an insurance pitcher and safety spot just in case a guy like Olsen did bad, Miller wasn't ready to be a starter or one of the top three got injured. Now that Olsen is gone, I feel that we are on thin ice when it comes to starting pitching. We do not have an insurance pitcher in case one of our guys flop or gets injured, we would be stuck putting in a Ryan Tucker or a Rick Vanden Hurk into the rotation. If we were going to trade Olsen, we would've liked it to be for a catcher, because like it or not, that is a position of need for us. I'm surprised we needed to add Willingham to get this deal done. I would've thought Olsen could've comanded those three players easily.

 

All I am trying to say here is that we dug ourselves into a potential whole here, and we may look back at this trade later on next season and say this is what cost us a shot at the playoffs.

 

 

An insurance pitcher can be signed, in free agency. Those aren't difficult to find.

 

But we traded Olsen away to relieve some salary cap space. Why would we then go out and spend money on an insurance pitcher for about the same price if we already had a guy who has shown he can be a reliable starter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does a guy coming off a season where he showed in the first half of the season that he is capable of being a 2 or 3 ERA kind of guy and a hitter who was batting .341 with 7 home runs in the first month of the season before getting injured only command the trade value of a utility infielder, and 2 Single A players?

 

 

No, I've been calling it a bad trade.

That doesn't mean that Olsen is a good pitcher, or that Willingham doesn't have a bad back, however.

 

It's not as if we just traded Hanley Ramirez...or even Dan Uggla...to be creating a thread like this.

 

We traded a #4 / #5 and an OF'er who can be good...but has back problems.

 

Did this trade make the team better? No, it didn't.

Can we replace Olsen and Willingham, easily? Yes, we can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a Florida Panthers fan.

I, unlike you, thank God that I'm a Marlins fan.

 

This team should be competitive in 2009. This isn't a huge trade...it's a minor trade for us, in which we didn't get good value in.

 

Beinfest has made more good trades than bad.

 

You talk as if being a Marlins fan is the worst thing in the world. 2 World Series titles in 15 years is something most organizations would love to have. Just ask a Cubs fan...they're still "doing it" after one whole century.

 

Ask the Pirates or Royals fans how they "do it."

 

A fan is a fan through the high's and the low's. I don't even know why I'm saying this either b/c I still fully believe this team can contend for a playoff spot next year.

 

Erick, I'm a Florida Panters and a New York Jets fan..........so I have you beat :confused .

But seriously, you're right on target.

 

One thing I will say, though, is that while the 2 WC's in 15 years were amazing and some of the most fun times I had growing up, it was still better to be lucky than good.

Obviously those teams were talented, but play out the same things leading up to 1997 and [especially] 2003 in a bunch of parallel universes, and this team certainly isn't winning every time. Of course, when something does happen, the probability is 100%, and I get that. But I'm just saying that the reputation of our FO might be a little inflated because we are playing the results.

Again, I know that World Series titles are the most important thing, but it's a little like judging a pitcher based on his W-L record as somewhat of a bottom line. That's not an accurate way to look at things.

 

But, really Marlins fans can't complain about the championship-level success.

 

The most frustrating part about this offseason was the rumors of the $40mil+ payroll and the ability to keep any of the arby's we wanted - I know management has to try and portray an image to get max value in return for trades, but letting that get public (and, oh yeah, talking about the possibilities it created endlessly on here) makes it sting a whole lot worse when you find out that it is not true and salary dumps will continue to be the norm.

 

Remember that line about the FO having permission to not trade any arby-eligible guys unless it makes the team better?

Um, yeah......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the bottom line. People aren't upset because of the people we got rid of. People are upset because of the FO intentions of making this trade. It wasn't done to help our team, it was done to save every possible penny possible. That has been this teams motto for years. It's sad we can't maintain a $40 million payroll.

 

If we kept Scott Olsen, that would've allowed us to move a guy like Anibal to the bullpen and be an insurance pitcher and safety spot just in case a guy like Olsen did bad, Miller wasn't ready to be a starter or one of the top three got injured. Now that Olsen is gone, I feel that we are on thin ice when it comes to starting pitching. We do not have an insurance pitcher in case one of our guys flop or gets injured, we would be stuck putting in a Ryan Tucker or a Rick Vanden Hurk into the rotation. If we were going to trade Olsen, we would've liked it to be for a catcher, because like it or not, that is a position of need for us. I'm surprised we needed to add Willingham to get this deal done. I would've thought Olsen could've comanded those three players easily.

 

All I am trying to say here is that we dug ourselves into a potential whole here, and we may look back at this trade later on next season and say this is what cost us a shot at the playoffs.

 

 

An insurance pitcher can be signed, in free agency. Those aren't difficult to find.

 

Re: Dan Meyer, Rick VandenHurk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But we traded Olsen away to relieve some salary cap space. Why would we then go out and spend money on an insurance pitcher for about the same price if we already had a guy who has shown he can be a reliable starter?

 

 

We traded away Olsen b/c the Marlins weren't going to pay him arbritration, considering he's shown he's not worthy of the type of money he wants to receive. A 4.63 ERA / 1.45 WHIP says that. A 5.35 ERA (6+ ERA this past year) away from Dolphin Stadium says that.

 

Insurance pitchers aren't supposed to cost a team millions per year.

 

The Marlins are fine with Nolasco & JJ (whom they still have to pay arby to), Volstad, Miller, and Sanchez / insurance pitcher (a guy like Pavano who will probably produce the same type of #'s as Olsen, if healthy...at a cheaper price).

 

It's not a big deal.

 

I'm just upset with what we received, when you consider the rumors were for Max Ramirez, not so long ago. Olsen and Willingham leaving? I wish them the best of luck, but I won't miss their production. I'm confident Andrew Miller can, at least, produce a mid-4 ERA (which IS Scott Olsen), as I am confident that Cody Ross can produce equally / better than Willingham offensively...while providing more, defensively. Not worried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...