Salary Dump

[Marlins2003]

People are certainly entitled to subjectively criticize their front office, that's one of the inalienable rights bestowed upon fans, but this won/loss thing seems to me incalculable. There are so many components to a trade, so many little and big things that have to be considered, simply proscribing a thumbs down is really meaningless.

 

The same can be said for the drafts, both amateur and Rule 5. Not too long ago we appeared to be awash in pitchers, now position players seem to be overwhelming our system. Volstad has made it to the bigs, others appear on the cusp of making it to the bigs and guys like Stanton and Morrison look to be the future of the franchise. But for every hit there is ten misses, it's the same everywhere, hence the 20+ rounds (I forget the exact number) of draft selections each year by each team, most falling by the wayside as their move from one level to another. it's the nature of the business.

 

Does anyone here really think they are going to change someone else's mind on the quality of the FO or a player selection just based on repeating the same dispiriting comments over and over? Really, to what end? After about the 20th time the same person has let everyone else know they don't think much of the FO or a Bonifacio and done so declaratively is it really necessay to say it again?

 

We get it.

[MarlinsLou]

This X over Y stuff in the draft is a bit much. You can always draft somebody better in basically every spot. Let's look at the results

 

2008 - Skip, Hand, Olmos, Brewer, Pertusati, Galloway < - Early reports are encouraging with Skip, Hand, and Galloway all killing it and the others good chances

2007 - Dominguez, Stanton, Petersen < - Top heavy, but awesome on Stanton in round 2

2006 - Coghlan, Cousins, Raynor, Sinkbiel, G. Taylor, Correa < - No stars, but likely contributers. This is solid

2005 - Volstad, Morrison, West, Thompson, Tucker, G. Sanchez, Marceaux, Winters, Leroux < - Potentially 7+ guys on 25 man roster 2011. Epic

2004 - Mobley, Tank, Vargas, Burns, Carroll, Burns < - Bad. Relievers and fringe outfielders

2003 - Kensing, Allison < - All sorts of bad

2002 - Hermida, Johnson, Olsen, Andino < - 3 starters and a bench guy

 

So if we're counting at home

 

Great drafts - 2002, 2005, 2007, probably 2008 if Skip and Galloway develop.

Solid Drafts - 2006

Bad Drafts - 2003, 2004

 

That's a really good track record. You know how hard it is to have a great draft? Very. If we routinely draft and develop 3 MLB per draft, we are in insane good shape. Through the 2007 draft (6 drafts), I count 20 players that are or very likely MLB players. That's damn good. Quite a few of those have above average (Hermida, Johnson, Volstad, Morrison, West, Dominguez, Stanton) potential as well. I have no problems with his draft mistakes, or we should have taken Hamels. whatever.

 

And think of the big trades. We didn't outright lose any of these, and we probably won all or most of them.

 

Cabrera/Willis - Maybin, Miller, Cruz

Beckett/Lowell - Hanley, Anibal

Delgado - Jacobs, Petit, Salary Relief

Pierre - Nolasco, Pinto, Mitre

Clement/Alfonseca - Dontrelle

The whole Preston/CJ/Hampton thing that worked huge for salary dumping

 

Yea, the Penny trade was horrible. That was bad the second it happened. So Bowyer blows out his arm and the Castillo trade is a bust. We also got Gaby Hernandez for free, who was a great prospect for 2 years and turned into Arthur Rhodes to help for a push. We got Lindstrom and Owens for free for Jason Vargas. Spooney was going to be good until Mckeon blew out his arm. So what Mike Neu doesn't pan out for Redman. Big deal.

 

He also routinely plucks guys from obscurity - Pavano, Benitez, T. Jones, Amezaga, Ross, Uggla, Moehler, Easley, Helms, Boone, L. Gonzalez, Seanez, Waecther, J. Miller, etc that work out and are fantastic lower cost options. Sure, he misses big time on Abercrombie, Borchard, Linden, Leiter (the last time), and other guys, and he does stupid things like not claim Barton in the Rule V draft who would probably have been very useful and worth a flier, but this is still more GOOD than more BAD.

 

Saying Beinfest is average or bad is insane. He is well above average. While the FO may not be perfect or elite (buyout star players after a year of service time, don't see glaring needs (like CF 2006-2007) and ignore it, don't hit waivers as hard as they should, etc), they do a really damn good job. I don't like the Olsen deal either, but I'm not going to crucify the guy just because this deal looks bad on paper right now and looks like a clear dump. He still knows whats up and we're going to be fine. I'm completely satisfied with a more good than bad front office.

[Hotcorner]

I don't see much of a reason why Ross would be any better than Willingham in 2009 (unless Willingham's bat back is shot, and even then it's arguable. If it's not shot, I don't see Ross' OPS touching Willingham's)

 

 

Fixed, and that's a big issue for the Marlins IMO. Plus Ross is better in the field.

 

If he's healthy Hammer's giving you a better OPS than Ross, I'd agree.

[Hotcorner]

Good summary Lou, and let's keep in mind that Beinfest is constrained by the parameters Loria gives him to work within.

 

He does a heck of a lot given the salary available for this team.

[rferry]

I'm all for salary dumps. Teams (although, apparently not, fans) must weigh the the value added vs. salary expense. It's the talent dumps, like 1997/8, that I hate.

(I'm conflicted over the boom/bust strategy of the present era. At its core, it is intended to benefit the team and focus on talent, but sometimes it unneccessarily forces to make rash, time-critical decisions when the unexpected happens (WS victory increases demand for raises, Delgado, etc. flop, stadium deal lays dormant for years))

 

The difference between the two? The former is guided by a plan to recoup similar talent at an appropriate salary, the other focuses on reducing the salary bill by making wide cuts.

 

You see it all the time in business. The former utilizes wage renegotiations, consolidating similar departments, redeveloping processes. The latter is more harsh, you see hiring freezes and retraction of benefits without much focus on reforming the organization.

 

Being fiscally conservative in preparing a budget is not a bad thing. And Loria, Samson, Beinfest and company shouldn't be vilified for it. The Marlins are forced to operate this way due to poor support and limited revenue sources.

[industrialescampeon]

And if we had kept them, where would they have played? They both were making more money than our more talented replacements.

 

I'd say it was simply convenient that we had better players, who are cheap, to replace decent players who are expensive.

 

Not a salary dump.

 

When you shed payroll and by all accounts not get anything worthwhile in return, that's a salary dump.

 

We got a major-league quality infielder, who posesses the skillset we're looking for, and two low single-A prospects who are to be determined in value (but this franchise has too many ML-ready guys, and needs to continue to build in the lower levels).

 

We're replacing these two players with BETTER in-house options.

 

That is not a salary dump. Sorry.

 

Where's the major league quality infielder? Bonifacio has not shown much with the bat in the minors and I don't think he's the great defensive whiz some are making him out to be.

 

Irregardless of who the team is replacing Willingham and Olsen with, it's a salary dump.

 

And one could argue that Miller has the talent and potential to be better than Olsen, you'll get no argument from me. But where is the better in-house option over Willingham?

 

Bonifacio has been mentioned as a potential gold-glove player. He has 50+ stolen base speed. That is exactly what this team wanted, and it's exactly what it got.

 

And you're going to tell me you wanted Willingham over Ross going into 2009? I would certainly respect that opinion, you wouldn't be alone, but you would be the minority.

 

I hear about the 50+ stolen bases, but if you are not gonna start him regularly, what is the point of having the guy? I mean, I'm pretty sure that they are not gonna start him, or are they? If he's anything more than a role player, we might as well keep Amezaga, bring Carrol up and Andino, and there's our speed off the bench right there.

[fanofthefish]

Its not a salary dump its a market adjustment that very closely resembles a fire sale :blink: Unfortunaetly until the new stadium comes this will continue to happen to the Marlins

[MarlinsLou]

I'm all for salary dumps. Teams (although, apparently not, fans) must weigh the the value added vs. salary expense. It's the talent dumps, like 1997/8, that I hate.

(I'm conflicted over the boom/bust strategy of the present era. At its core, it is intended to benefit the team and focus on talent, but sometimes it unneccessarily forces to make rash, time-critical decisions when the unexpected happens (WS victory increases demand for raises, Delgado, etc. flop, stadium deal lays dormant for years))

 

The difference between the two? The former is guided by a plan to recoup similar talent at an appropriate salary, the other focuses on reducing the salary bill by making wide cuts.

 

You see it all the time in business. The former utilizes wage renegotiations, consolidating similar departments, redeveloping processes. The latter is more harsh, you see hiring freezes and retraction of benefits without much focus on reforming the organization.

 

Being fiscally conservative in preparing a budget is not a bad thing. And Loria, Samson, Beinfest and company shouldn't be vilified for it. The Marlins are forced to operate this way due to poor support and limited revenue sources.

You're right. Dumping salary is fine, and losing these players isn't a big deal. But you're missing something huge.

 

The DUMP trade is always available. Someone will always take a 25 year old lefty starter who can throw 200 and an .825+ bat, combined making (in baseball terms) a modest $4-5 in 2009 for a bunch of moderate at best non-MLB level prospects. I'm sure you'd argue that is an assumption from my part, but I think it is highly realistic as these are good players at a low financial liability.

 

The Marlins could get the value they got out of this trade at any time. This wasn't a make trade now or have to DFA them situation. There are no outrageous additional costs to the Marlins. An additional 2 arbitration cases? Easily fixed by hiring (and by that I mean interning for free) Miami and FIU law students (which they do) every year to help prepare the arbitration cases. Olsen and Willingham don't lose value post arbitration. Team's know what they would be trading for in salary liability in the first place. There was nothing to lose holding on to them until after free agency (we also have plenty of 40 man space), where post free agency team's expectations could be down for failures to address issues. Why not wait and see the Peavy, CC, Sheets, Lowe, Looper, Dempster, Penny, etc, market settle, and see who didn't get that 4th or 5th starter on their team and might be willing to give us something more than an utility infield prospect? We could DUMP them in February if that fails for marginal prospects and call it a day, instead of in a seemingly rash trade to just get numbers off the book. I'd feel much better about this if this was in February, Beinfest comes out and says this was the best deal. I'd believe him. November? I call shenanigans.

 

This is of course ignoring the possibility Beinfest thinks Bonifacio is going to be this awesome .300/.360/.425-crazy defense and steals player, and Smolinksi turns into a better version of Coghlan. I'm scared that THAT might be the reason why they traded them, but if they are arguing money. PPPPFFFFF. They got ancy and did this way to quickly. They didn't need to do this. This makes me mad.

 

We'll see what they do with Gregg, and one of Cantu/Uggla. I expect much bigger returns for those properties.

[Rambo McDonald]

I don't see much of a reason why Ross would be any better than Willingham in 2009 (unless Willingham's bat back is shot, and even then it's arguable. If it's not shot, I don't see Ross' OPS touching Willingham's)

 

 

Fixed, and that's a big issue for the Marlins IMO. Plus Ross is better in the field.

 

If he's healthy Hammer's giving you a better OPS than Ross, I'd agree.

 

Yea well by bat I meant back :mischief

 

As for drafts, I'd give more credit to Dan Jennings on the drafts than Admin Beinfest (same for many other GMs in the league, the lower level execs do much of the research)

[The_Godfather]

I don't see much of a reason why Ross would be any better than Willingham in 2009 (unless Willingham's bat back is shot, and even then it's arguable. If it's not shot, I don't see Ross' OPS touching Willingham's)

 

 

Fixed, and that's a big issue for the Marlins IMO. Plus Ross is better in the field.

 

If he's healthy Hammer's giving you a better OPS than Ross, I'd agree.

 

 

As for drafts, I'd give more credit to Dan Jennings on the drafts than Admin Beinfest (same for many other GMs in the league, the lower level execs do much of the research)

 

This. I've never gotten the impression that Admin Beinfest is the 'man' when it comes to our drafts. Maybe the 1st round pick, but that's it and maybe credit should be given because Beinfest relies so heavily (and trusts) his scouts so much. Lou is right though, it is extremely hard to have a good draft in MLB and we have done a great job.

[Fish4Life]

More a bad trade than a salary dump.

 

well said

[The_Godfather]

I'm all for salary dumps. Teams (although, apparently not, fans) must weigh the the value added vs. salary expense. It's the talent dumps, like 1997/8, that I hate.

(I'm conflicted over the boom/bust strategy of the present era. At its core, it is intended to benefit the team and focus on talent, but sometimes it unneccessarily forces to make rash, time-critical decisions when the unexpected happens (WS victory increases demand for raises, Delgado, etc. flop, stadium deal lays dormant for years))

 

The difference between the two? The former is guided by a plan to recoup similar talent at an appropriate salary, the other focuses on reducing the salary bill by making wide cuts.

 

You see it all the time in business. The former utilizes wage renegotiations, consolidating similar departments, redeveloping processes. The latter is more harsh, you see hiring freezes and retraction of benefits without much focus on reforming the organization.

 

Being fiscally conservative in preparing a budget is not a bad thing. And Loria, Samson, Beinfest and company shouldn't be vilified for it. The Marlins are forced to operate this way due to poor support and limited revenue sources.

You're right. Dumping salary is fine, and losing these players isn't a big deal. But you're missing something huge.

 

The DUMP trade is always available. Someone will always take a 25 year old lefty starter who can throw 200 and an .825+ bat, combined making (in baseball terms) a modest $4-5 in 2009 for a bunch of moderate at best non-MLB level prospects. I'm sure you'd argue that is an assumption from my part, but I think it is highly realistic as these are good players at a low financial liability.

 

The Marlins could get the value they got out of this trade at any time. This wasn't a make trade now or have to DFA them situation. There are no outrageous additional costs to the Marlins. An additional 2 arbitration cases? Easily fixed by hiring (and by that I mean interning for free) Miami and FIU law students (which they do) every year to help prepare the arbitration cases. Olsen and Willingham don't lose value post arbitration. Team's know what they would be trading for in salary liability in the first place. There was nothing to lose holding on to them until after free agency (we also have plenty of 40 man space), where post free agency team's expectations could be down for failures to address issues. Why not wait and see the Peavy, CC, Sheets, Lowe, Looper, Dempster, Penny, etc, market settle, and see who didn't get that 4th or 5th starter on their team and might be willing to give us something more than an utility infield prospect? We could DUMP them in February if that fails for marginal prospects and call it a day, instead of in a seemingly rash trade to just get numbers off the book. I'd feel much better about this if this was in February, Beinfest comes out and says this was the best deal. I'd believe him. November? I call shenanigans.

 

This is of course ignoring the possibility Beinfest thinks Bonifacio is going to be this awesome .300/.360/.425-crazy defense and steals player, and Smolinksi turns into a better version of Coghlan. I'm scared that THAT might be the reason why they traded them, but if they are arguing money. PPPPFFFFF. They got ancy and did this way to quickly. They didn't need to do this. This makes me mad.

 

We'll see what they do with Gregg, and one of Cantu/Uggla. I expect much bigger returns for those properties.

 

You touch on it in the end and I know you know this of course (I hope I'm not sounding condescending) but isn't it possible that our scouts/FO had high grades on a P.J. Dean and he is the young starting RHP that we've been wanting? Maybe he has been a guy they have really liked for a long time and he does seem to fit into the Beinfest mold pitcher - I.e. tall, lanky, young, good control, projectable arm...who knows? maybe also they've been targeting Smolinski since the 2007 draft and badly wanted to nab him in the third round and when the Nats offered him up, even with the injuries they loved the bat so much they wanted him in the system enough to pull the trigger on the deal?

 

Again, I know you know this but maybe this is a situation where our scouts had different grades on a couple of prospects than the BA, Sickels, BP's of the world???

[MarlinsLou]

You touch on it in the end and I know you know this of course (I hope I'm not sounding condescending) but isn't it possible that our scouts/FO had high grades on a P.J. Dean and he is the young starting RHP that we've been wanting? Maybe he has been a guy they have really liked for a long time and he does seem to fit into the Beinfest mold pitcher - I.e. tall, lanky, young, good control, projectable arm...who knows? maybe also they've been targeting Smolinski since the 2007 draft and badly wanted to nab him in the third round and when the Nats offered him up, even with the injuries they loved the bat so much they wanted him in the system enough to pull the trigger on the deal?

 

Again, I know you know this but maybe this is a situation where our scouts had different grades on a couple of prospects than the BA, Sickels, BP's of the world???

Absolutely. But it's not like Beinfest and 30% of scouting, news, 'expert,' and other sites are on the same side. It's everyone in the world thinking Beinfest is crazy on a player spectrum, versus Beinfest pumping up these guys in the media. It's highly unlikely everyone is wrong and Beinfest is right. Where there is smoke, there is fire.

[Rambo McDonald]

And only you can prevent forest fires.

[MarlinsLou]

And only you can prevent forest fires.

Someone should have told that to Joel Zumaya.

 

::prays someone gets that::

[The_Godfather]

You touch on it in the end and I know you know this of course (I hope I'm not sounding condescending) but isn't it possible that our scouts/FO had high grades on a P.J. Dean and he is the young starting RHP that we've been wanting? Maybe he has been a guy they have really liked for a long time and he does seem to fit into the Beinfest mold pitcher - I.e. tall, lanky, young, good control, projectable arm...who knows? maybe also they've been targeting Smolinski since the 2007 draft and badly wanted to nab him in the third round and when the Nats offered him up, even with the injuries they loved the bat so much they wanted him in the system enough to pull the trigger on the deal?

 

Again, I know you know this but maybe this is a situation where our scouts had different grades on a couple of prospects than the BA, Sickels, BP's of the world???

Absolutely. But it's not like Beinfest and 30% of scouting, news, 'expert,' and other sites are on the same side. It's everyone in the world thinking Beinfest is crazy on a player spectrum, versus Beinfest pumping up these guys in the media. It's highly unlikely everyone is wrong and Beinfest is right. Where there is smoke, there is fire.

 

I think it's a little hyperbolic to say everyone thinks Beinfest is crazy on the player spectrum, mainly because I think people around the league did not give much value to Olsen or Willingham. If neither player had much value as I believe, how can anyone expect us to get back anything more than what we got? I agree that maybe we could have waited for something better that may have come, but again...maybe our scouts just really, really like something in P.J. Dean or Smolinski and we had them targeted for whatever reason? I don't think that is that far fetched even if the majority of the media is against the deal, which makes sense seeing as how neither guy is considered a top 10 prospect, which is what the media (even the good ones usually lump their lists the same way) will generally base things like this off of.

 

This might be a poor gauge, but usually when most of are agreeing (and we do at least agree on this, right) that we probably wont miss the guys we traded; that means usually the return won't be that great.

[mystikol87]

You touch on it in the end and I know you know this of course (I hope I'm not sounding condescending) but isn't it possible that our scouts/FO had high grades on a P.J. Dean and he is the young starting RHP that we've been wanting? Maybe he has been a guy they have really liked for a long time and he does seem to fit into the Beinfest mold pitcher - I.e. tall, lanky, young, good control, projectable arm...who knows? maybe also they've been targeting Smolinski since the 2007 draft and badly wanted to nab him in the third round and when the Nats offered him up, even with the injuries they loved the bat so much they wanted him in the system enough to pull the trigger on the deal?

 

Again, I know you know this but maybe this is a situation where our scouts had different grades on a couple of prospects than the BA, Sickels, BP's of the world???

Absolutely. But it's not like Beinfest and 30% of scouting, news, 'expert,' and other sites are on the same side. It's everyone in the world thinking Beinfest is crazy on a player spectrum, versus Beinfest pumping up these guys in the media. It's highly unlikely everyone is wrong and Beinfest is right. Where there is smoke, there is fire.

 

I think it's a little hyperbolic to say everyone thinks Beinfest is crazy on the player spectrum, mainly because I think people around the league did not give much value to Olsen or Willingham. If neither player had much value as I believe, how can anyone expect us to get back anything more than what we got? I agree that maybe we could have waited for something better that may have come, but again...maybe our scouts just really, really like something in P.J. Dean or Smolinski and we had them targeted for whatever reason? I don't think that is that far fetched even if the majority of the media is against the deal, which makes sense seeing as how neither guy is considered a top 10 prospect, which is what the media (even the good ones usually lump their lists the same way) will generally base things like this off of.

 

This might be a poor gauge, but usually when most of are agreeing (and we do at least agree on this, right) that we probably wont miss the guys we traded; that means usually the return won't be that great.

 

It's interesting circular reasoning, but I can't fault it. If any GMs thought they were worth more than what we got, then they would have offered more. And if they would have offered more, Beinfest would have taken it. Hey, I'm learning this stuff in my symbolic class: Beinfest didn't take another deal, therefore no one offered more. And, no one offered more, therefore GMs did not think they were worth more than we got.

This is all very neo-classical-economics-like..........but it makes sense.

 

Potential holes in this line of reasoning? 2, as I see it.

1) The market for Olsen-type and Willingham-type players was already saturated, lowering both demand and price (I doubt this; 200 IP young lefties and good-to-high-OBP 1B/OF under team control for 3 more years aren't extremely common)

2) The value of our commodities could fluctuate in the short-run, AKA after the free-agency period begins, and we should have held and sold later. There may have been potential buyers who didn't know they'd be buyers until after they lost out on the FA's they wanted.

[The_Godfather]

Potential holes in this line of reasoning? 2, as I see it.

1) The market for Olsen-type and Willingham-type players was already saturated, lowering both demand and price (I doubt this; 200 IP young lefties and good-to-high-OBP 1B/OF under team control for 3 more years aren't extremely common)

2) The value of our commodities could fluctuate in the short-run, AKA after the free-agency period begins, and we should have held and sold later. There may have been potential buyers who didn't know they'd be buyers until after they lost out on the FA's they wanted.

 

 

And here are my two potential holes to your reasoning on potential holes :shifty -

 

1. Scott Olsen has a history of getting into trouble in the off season, what if he did something else, say a DUI or got into a fight? Small chance, but possible and then his value is virtually nil.

2. In my theory, Beinfest/our scouts/FO whoever... really, really like one of the two younger prospects we got back and sought them out. So maybe in their minds this is a great return already. I could see it too, especially with Dean as he fits the profile of what our FO seems to like in pitchers - young, tall, lanky, projectable, could add a couple ticks to his fastball, good control at a young age, etc etc.

 

If next year he puts up good numbers in Greensboro while throwing 93-94...we will see this trade differently and maybe we'll understand where Beinfest was coming from...

[MarlinsMS_35]

Bonifacio has some impressive minor league numbers. http://mlb.mlb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=...&pid=466988

 

Can he do it in the bigs? We'll see.

[Hotcorner]

And only you can prevent forest fires.

Someone should have told that to Joel Zumaya.

 

::prays someone gets that::

 

zing!

[SixYearItch]

Potential holes in this line of reasoning? 2, as I see it.

1) The market for Olsen-type and Willingham-type players was already saturated, lowering both demand and price (I doubt this; 200 IP young lefties and good-to-high-OBP 1B/OF under team control for 3 more years aren't extremely common)

2) The value of our commodities could fluctuate in the short-run, AKA after the free-agency period begins, and we should have held and sold later. There may have been potential buyers who didn't know they'd be buyers until after they lost out on the FA's they wanted.

 

 

And here are my two potential holes to your reasoning on potential holes :shifty -

 

1. Scott Olsen has a history of getting into trouble in the off season, what if he did something else, say a DUI or got into a fight? Small chance, but possible and then his value is virtually nil.

2. In my theory, Beinfest/our scouts/FO whoever... really, really like one of the two younger prospects we got back and sought them out. So maybe in their minds this is a great return already. I could see it too, especially with Dean as he fits the profile of what our FO seems to like in pitchers - young, tall, lanky, projectable, could add a couple ticks to his fastball, good control at a young age, etc etc.

 

If next year he puts up good numbers in Greensboro while throwing 93-94...we will see this trade differently and maybe we'll understand where Beinfest was coming from...

 

Nah! I think we need to come to terms with what's obvious. Beinfest/our scouts/FO whatever have placed a very high (and excessive) valuation on Bonifacio. Beinfest has been harping on speed and defense for months on end, and sees those qualities in abundance in EB. My belief is that he does see EB as a potential Castillo, notwithstanding present low BA, OBP, high strike out peripherals and believes EB can evolve into a player far better than what, off limited MLB totals, he presently is. It doen't appear that he's got many BB talent evaluators feeling that way, ergo the reviews we've all had the pleasure of reading so far. He's willing to bet the loss of Olsen and Willingham on the chance he may be right (not a significant price to pay).

 

EB is truly Beinfest's baby, and he will overindulge him. Expect to see him starting at 2nd in 2110. Pisses me off because Coughlin is clearly the superior up and comer. The two Single A dudes really don't matter all that much.

[MarlinsLou]

EB is truly Beinfest's baby, and he will overindulge him. Expect to see him starting at 2nd in 2110. Pisses me off because Coughlin is clearly the superior up and comer. The two Single A dudes really don't matter all that much.

If EB is starting for this team in 100 years, I'm going to say he is the greatest MLB player of all time, and possibly the most impressive human being of all time. Trade is a HUGE win if this happens.

 

But seriously, I see him as a maybe at 2B to give Coghlan real competition, and most likely settles into Amezaga's role 09-11.

[Rambo McDonald]

Bonifacio has some impressive minor league numbers. http://mlb.mlb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=...&pid=466988

 

Can he do it in the bigs? We'll see.

 

eh a .735 OPS is abysmal

[Marlins2003]

lolololol :banghead

[jerus9703]

anyone who thinks Admin Beinfest is an average GM should lose their right to ever speak again