Jump to content

Hermida


Marlins Phenom
 Share

Recommended Posts

Question? When was D.Lee due for his pay-day?

B/c we let him go after '03...yet, he signed his 5 year deal with the Cubs in April of '06. That's a 2+ year difference. What was Lee's exact contract situation after '03, and where can I find it? Thanks in advance.

He entered arbitration in 02-04. 02 he had $2.7, 03 $4.25. He was bought out in 04 as part of a 3/$22 deal, and then given a 5/$65 deal in 2006.

 

Frick Lou... :confused

 

Give someone else a chance :lol

Sorry man. The cube was a good idea to check salaries though, but I find this much more reliable for future discussions on salary. http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com

 

That's to you too Erick. http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com. It's easy. It has everything. Bookmark it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not in defense of Choi but anyone who was there Opening Day 2004 and beyond saw the raw skill the guy had. I never, never saw a ball leave Dolphin Stadium faster than off Choi's bat. That he ultimately proved to not be the player a great number of people and pundits thought he would be was unfortunate for the Fish, and for him, but when the man hit a baseball, it was a thing of beauty.

 

As for moving D Lee two things have to be considered. From the day that Loria and company arrived in 2002 he took an anti-ownership stance. When Dempster and Floyd were traded he went ballastic and he continued to be unhappy to be here throughout the rest of his tenure. After the World Series Lee made it known under no circumstances would re-sign here when his contract was up at the end of 2004. Perhaps some remember his "tour" of Baltimore, Chicago - the White Sox first then eventually the Cubs. (If I remember his father was involved at some point and in some way in all this but I'm a bit hazy on it.)

 

The Marlins were faced with getting little in return for the $6 million he'd earn if they kept him, so they allowed him to go out and make "his best deal". Lee chose the Cubs and that's how the deal got done with Choi coming back. Because they were being accommodating to a member of of WS champs it weakened their bargaining position and the deal had to be done before the arbitration deadline. It also allowed the Marlins the ability to offer AJ Burnett another year's contract (we all know how well that worked out but who knew?)

 

I also thought the Lee experience was a watershed moment in Beinfest's development and a lesson learned that you saw manifest itself in trading Cabrera sooner rather than later. With Cabrera's price destined to continue escalating and his trade value diminishing because his time to free agency was shrinking and his waistline expanding, this time the Fish didn't wait to be put in that box again. Clearly an $8 million Cabrera with two season under team control was going to worth more than a $12 or more million Cabrera with one. Had the Marlins not have been in the thick of a playoff spot in 2003 you might have seen Lee traded at mid-season rather than post WS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not in defense of Choi but anyone who was there Opening Day 2004 and beyond saw the raw skill the guy had. I never, never saw a ball leave Dolphin Stadium faster than off Choi's bat. That he ultimately proved to not be the player a great number of people and pundits thought he would be was unfortunate for the Fish, and for him, but when the man hit a baseball, it was a thing of beauty.

 

As for moving D Lee two things have to be considered. From the day that Loria and company arrived in 2002 he took an anti-ownership stance. When Dempster and Floyd were traded he went ballastic and he continued to be unhappy to be here throughout the rest of his tenure. After the World Series Lee made it known under no circumstances would re-sign here when his contract was up at the end of 2004. Perhaps some remember his "tour" of Baltimore, Chicago - the White Sox first then eventually the Cubs. (If I remember his father was involved at some point and in some way in all this but I'm a bit hazy on it.)

 

The Marlins were faced with getting little in return for the $6 million he'd earn if they kept him, so they allowed him to go out and make "his best deal". Lee chose the Cubs and that's how the deal got done with Choi coming back. Because they were being accommodating to a member of of WS champs it weakened their bargaining position and the deal had to be done before the arbitration deadline. It also allowed the Marlins the ability to offer AJ Burnett another year's contract (we all know how well that worked out but who knew?)

 

I also thought the Lee experience was a watershed moment in Beinfest's development and a lesson learned that you saw manifest itself in trading Cabrera sooner rather than later. With Cabrera's price destined to continue escalating and his trade value diminishing because his time to free agency was shrinking and his waistline expanding, this time the Fish didn't wait to be put in that box again. Clearly an $8 million Cabrera with two season under team control was going to worth more than a $12 or more million Cabrera with one. Had the Marlins not have been in the thick of a playoff spot in 2003 you might have seen Lee traded at mid-season rather than post WS.

 

I believe we also had Lowell and Castillo that were due big contracts at that time. We were told in no uncertain terms that we could only afford two of the three. Mikey was a fan fav with a GG. Castillo a record breaker with a couple GGs. The choice was obvious. Lee and his attitude had to be the one to be traded.

 

You are right about Choi tho. Pretty swing and decent glove. Too bad he never panned out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. No

2. The only way I'll accept such a move is if we get a solid prospect in the deal...and then sign Barry Bonds, as his (Hermida's) replacement in 2009.

 

1. It's not up to you, it's up to the Marlins front office.

2. Why would you even consider Barry Bonds? Out of baseball for a year, lousy defense, and his bat is not even for certain anymore, pitchers are going to have a field day striking him out, Barry - steroids= done.

Are you serious? I know Barry Bonds is unpopular, but seriously, the guy had a 480 OBP in 07. I'm not even gonna get into the guy's slugging cause you know how that is. Unless those steroids have been doing damage to his eyes in the past year, I'm pretty sure he'd be fine to play 100-120 games in a year. Yes, his defense would suck, but that isn't exactly a feature that distinguishes him from Jeremy Hermida. Like Manny Ramirez, Barry Bonds has some of the best eyes in baseball and the OBP numbers year after year to prove it. Unlike Manny Ramirez, he also hold the records for all time HRs and single season HRs. Oh yeah, and he could conceivably come a lot cheaper. It might even be worth it to him if he believes he'll have a shot a ring here.

 

As to the general subject of trading Hermida, all I can say is - finally. If we're serious about contending next year then we need to move the guys who've been too fragile and unreliable and hopefully make way for people we can have more confidence in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trading Hermida may be a great idea. Every year he doesn't live up to potential he loses some value. He's still young and we may be able to get some value for him if we trade him now. It's like trading D-Train. If a good deal comes along we should definitely trade him.

 

We gave away Hammer for free, which granted he had back problems, but when healthy I would have taken him as a hitter any day over Hermida.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trading Hermida may be a great idea. Every year he doesn't live up to potential he loses some value. He's still young and we may be able to get some value for him if we trade him now. It's like trading D-Train. If a good deal comes along we should definitely trade him.

 

We gave away Hammer for free, which granted he had back problems, but when healthy I would have taken him as a hitter any day over Hermida.

And replace him in the outfield with who? We currently have 3 MLB outfielders in our organization (Ross, Maybin, Hermida), a couple of 5th outfielders (Amezaga, potentially Bonifacio or Andino), and then a flurry of AAA prospects (Raynor, De Aza, Carroll) and AA prospects (Morrison, Cousins, Petersen) who are not ready yet. We also are still the Marlins, and don't commit money to free agents. Who are we going to get on a 1 year deal to replace this production? That is left handed. And won't cost us draft picks. (I just ruled out everyone). We also totally need to commit money to a corner outfielder based on the aforementioned players too. That would be awesome roadblocking one of the deepest areas, if not the deepest, of our farm system. Getting rid of him is idiotic right now based on depth, let alone anything else.

 

However there is more! It's also idiotic based on potential. You people are ridiculous. Last year he had a .870 OPS, which is insane. This year his road OPS was .851, he just somehow hit an abysmal .584 at home. He's also 24 frigging years old. I swear to god you people don't have a clue about player development. Hermida is younger than Gaby Sanchez. It doesn't matter that Hermida struggled as a 22 year old as a rookie, or that he hit pathetic at home at 24 years old. This is still a good young baseball player that is 2-3 years away from his prime and could overnight turn the light on and start hitting to his immediate .280/.360/.475+ potential. You people have to have more than a 'what have you done for me lately' attitude. This isn't a marginal prospect that showed something then stopped hitting. This is a top of the line prospect who showed something, and then had a setback. This happens all the time. It's ok, it's called player development. The last thing we need is for us to trade him and for him to go Carlos Quentin, Brandon Phillips, or Jeremy Guthrie on our asses.

 

It's absolutely in our best interest to see what happens in 2009 then make a decision based on 2 full seasons after his breakout 2007. At this point we will have a flurry of potential OF to internally replace him. If he doesn't hit again, no problem. He was worth the risk based on his upside and all we have invested in him. If he hits? Fantastic, now we see if it's worth keeping him compared to how awesome Raynor, Cousins, Petersen, and to a lesser extent Morrison, did in 2009. I can't wait for these posts to stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trading Hermida may be a great idea. Every year he doesn't live up to potential he loses some value. He's still young and we may be able to get some value for him if we trade him now. It's like trading D-Train. If a good deal comes along we should definitely trade him.

 

We gave away Hammer for free, which granted he had back problems, but when healthy I would have taken him as a hitter any day over Hermida.

And replace him in the outfield with who? We currently have 3 MLB outfielders in our organization (Ross, Maybin, Hermida), a couple of 5th outfielders (Amezaga, potentially Bonifacio or Andino), and then a flurry of AAA prospects (Raynor, De Aza, Carroll) and AA prospects (Morrison, Cousins, Petersen) who are not ready yet. We also are still the Marlins, and don't commit money to free agents. Who are we going to get on a 1 year deal to replace this production? That is left handed. And won't cost us draft picks. (I just ruled out everyone). We also totally need to commit money to a corner outfielder based on the aforementioned players too. That would be awesome roadblocking one of the deepest areas, if not the deepest, of our farm system. Getting rid of him is idiotic right now based on depth, let alone anything else.

 

However there is more! It's also idiotic based on potential. You people are ridiculous. Last year he had a .870 OPS, which is insane. This year his road OPS was .851, he just somehow hit an abysmal .584 at home. He's also 24 frigging years old. I swear to god you people don't have a clue about player development. Hermida is younger than Gaby Sanchez. It doesn't matter that Hermida struggled as a 22 year old as a rookie, or that he hit pathetic at home at 24 years old. This is still a good young baseball player that is 2-3 years away from his prime and could overnight turn the light on and start hitting to his immediate .280/.360/.475+ potential. You people have to have more than a 'what have you done for me lately' attitude. This isn't a marginal prospect that showed something then stopped hitting. This is a top of the line prospect who showed something, and then had a setback. This happens all the time. It's ok, it's called player development. The last thing we need is for us to trade him and for him to go Carlos Quentin, Brandon Phillips, or Jeremy Guthrie on our asses.

 

It's absolutely in our best interest to see what happens in 2009 then make a decision based on 2 full seasons after his breakout 2007. At this point we will have a flurry of potential OF to internally replace him. If he doesn't hit again, no problem. He was worth the risk based on his upside and all we have invested in him. If he hits? Fantastic, now we see if it's worth keeping him compared to how awesome Raynor, Cousins, Petersen, and to a lesser extent Morrison, did in 2009. I can't wait for these posts to stop.

 

Well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trading Hermida may be a great idea. Every year he doesn't live up to potential he loses some value. He's still young and we may be able to get some value for him if we trade him now. It's like trading D-Train. If a good deal comes along we should definitely trade him.

 

We gave away Hammer for free, which granted he had back problems, but when healthy I would have taken him as a hitter any day over Hermida.

And replace him in the outfield with who? We currently have 3 MLB outfielders in our organization (Ross, Maybin, Hermida), a couple of 5th outfielders (Amezaga, potentially Bonifacio or Andino), and then a flurry of AAA prospects (Raynor, De Aza, Carroll) and AA prospects (Morrison, Cousins, Petersen) who are not ready yet. We also are still the Marlins, and don't commit money to free agents. Who are we going to get on a 1 year deal to replace this production? That is left handed. And won't cost us draft picks. (I just ruled out everyone). We also totally need to commit money to a corner outfielder based on the aforementioned players too. That would be awesome roadblocking one of the deepest areas, if not the deepest, of our farm system. Getting rid of him is idiotic right now based on depth, let alone anything else.

 

However there is more! It's also idiotic based on potential. You people are ridiculous. Last year he had a .870 OPS, which is insane. This year his road OPS was .851, he just somehow hit an abysmal .584 at home. He's also 24 frigging years old. I swear to god you people don't have a clue about player development. Hermida is younger than Gaby Sanchez. It doesn't matter that Hermida struggled as a 22 year old as a rookie, or that he hit pathetic at home at 24 years old. This is still a good young baseball player that is 2-3 years away from his prime and could overnight turn the light on and start hitting to his immediate .280/.360/.475+ potential. You people have to have more than a 'what have you done for me lately' attitude. This isn't a marginal prospect that showed something then stopped hitting. This is a top of the line prospect who showed something, and then had a setback. This happens all the time. It's ok, it's called player development. The last thing we need is for us to trade him and for him to go Carlos Quentin, Brandon Phillips, or Jeremy Guthrie on our asses.

 

It's absolutely in our best interest to see what happens in 2009 then make a decision based on 2 full seasons after his breakout 2007. At this point we will have a flurry of potential OF to internally replace him. If he doesn't hit again, no problem. He was worth the risk based on his upside and all we have invested in him. If he hits? Fantastic, now we see if it's worth keeping him compared to how awesome Raynor, Cousins, Petersen, and to a lesser extent Morrison, did in 2009. I can't wait for these posts to stop.

 

 

:notworthy

 

That was an awesome post, although to answer your question up top...

...There is one guy...his name is Barry Bonds.

 

There really is no reason to trade Jeremy Hermida, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trading Hermida may be a great idea. Every year he doesn't live up to potential he loses some value. He's still young and we may be able to get some value for him if we trade him now. It's like trading D-Train. If a good deal comes along we should definitely trade him.

 

We gave away Hammer for free, which granted he had back problems, but when healthy I would have taken him as a hitter any day over Hermida.

And replace him in the outfield with who? We currently have 3 MLB outfielders in our organization (Ross, Maybin, Hermida), a couple of 5th outfielders (Amezaga, potentially Bonifacio or Andino), and then a flurry of AAA prospects (Raynor, De Aza, Carroll) and AA prospects (Morrison, Cousins, Petersen) who are not ready yet. We also are still the Marlins, and don't commit money to free agents. Who are we going to get on a 1 year deal to replace this production? That is left handed. And won't cost us draft picks. (I just ruled out everyone). We also totally need to commit money to a corner outfielder based on the aforementioned players too. That would be awesome roadblocking one of the deepest areas, if not the deepest, of our farm system. Getting rid of him is idiotic right now based on depth, let alone anything else.

 

However there is more! It's also idiotic based on potential. You people are ridiculous. Last year he had a .870 OPS, which is insane. This year his road OPS was .851, he just somehow hit an abysmal .584 at home. He's also 24 frigging years old. I swear to god you people don't have a clue about player development. Hermida is younger than Gaby Sanchez. It doesn't matter that Hermida struggled as a 22 year old as a rookie, or that he hit pathetic at home at 24 years old. This is still a good young baseball player that is 2-3 years away from his prime and could overnight turn the light on and start hitting to his immediate .280/.360/.475+ potential. You people have to have more than a 'what have you done for me lately' attitude. This isn't a marginal prospect that showed something then stopped hitting. This is a top of the line prospect who showed something, and then had a setback. This happens all the time. It's ok, it's called player development. The last thing we need is for us to trade him and for him to go Carlos Quentin, Brandon Phillips, or Jeremy Guthrie on our asses.

 

It's absolutely in our best interest to see what happens in 2009 then make a decision based on 2 full seasons after his breakout 2007. At this point we will have a flurry of potential OF to internally replace him. If he doesn't hit again, no problem. He was worth the risk based on his upside and all we have invested in him. If he hits? Fantastic, now we see if it's worth keeping him compared to how awesome Raynor, Cousins, Petersen, and to a lesser extent Morrison, did in 2009. I can't wait for these posts to stop.

 

Word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trading Hermida may be a great idea. Every year he doesn't live up to potential he loses some value. He's still young and we may be able to get some value for him if we trade him now. It's like trading D-Train. If a good deal comes along we should definitely trade him.

 

We gave away Hammer for free, which granted he had back problems, but when healthy I would have taken him as a hitter any day over Hermida.

And replace him in the outfield with who? We currently have 3 MLB outfielders in our organization (Ross, Maybin, Hermida), a couple of 5th outfielders (Amezaga, potentially Bonifacio or Andino), and then a flurry of AAA prospects (Raynor, De Aza, Carroll) and AA prospects (Morrison, Cousins, Petersen) who are not ready yet. We also are still the Marlins, and don't commit money to free agents. Who are we going to get on a 1 year deal to replace this production? That is left handed. And won't cost us draft picks. (I just ruled out everyone). We also totally need to commit money to a corner outfielder based on the aforementioned players too. That would be awesome roadblocking one of the deepest areas, if not the deepest, of our farm system. Getting rid of him is idiotic right now based on depth, let alone anything else.

 

However there is more! It's also idiotic based on potential. You people are ridiculous. Last year he had a .870 OPS, which is insane. This year his road OPS was .851, he just somehow hit an abysmal .584 at home. He's also 24 frigging years old. I swear to god you people don't have a clue about player development. Hermida is younger than Gaby Sanchez. It doesn't matter that Hermida struggled as a 22 year old as a rookie, or that he hit pathetic at home at 24 years old. This is still a good young baseball player that is 2-3 years away from his prime and could overnight turn the light on and start hitting to his immediate .280/.360/.475+ potential. You people have to have more than a 'what have you done for me lately' attitude. This isn't a marginal prospect that showed something then stopped hitting. This is a top of the line prospect who showed something, and then had a setback. This happens all the time. It's ok, it's called player development. The last thing we need is for us to trade him and for him to go Carlos Quentin, Brandon Phillips, or Jeremy Guthrie on our asses.

 

It's absolutely in our best interest to see what happens in 2009 then make a decision based on 2 full seasons after his breakout 2007. At this point we will have a flurry of potential OF to internally replace him. If he doesn't hit again, no problem. He was worth the risk based on his upside and all we have invested in him. If he hits? Fantastic, now we see if it's worth keeping him compared to how awesome Raynor, Cousins, Petersen, and to a lesser extent Morrison, did in 2009. I can't wait for these posts to stop.

Why is this irrelevant? He plays half of all his games at home and has never had a consistent season in the majors. We can argue back and forth about potential all day but it really doesn't matter. We've wasted these 3 years in which he should've been in the minors and now its time to make a decision: is he worth arbitration money and the team's confidence in a year in which we are supposed to contend? Yes, he could certainly turn into some great hitter, I odn't think teams generally call up talents they think are hopeless for long spans of time. But he could also just do what he did last year and OPS below 750. The real question is do you have confidence and faith in him, adn want him at the plate when the game is on the line? I don't. I would rather try someone untested than pay more for someone with a history of dissapointing who tops it off with lazy defense.

 

And I really could care less if he turns into Manny Ramirez while playing for someone else 3 years from now. We are trying to contend in 2009, and Hermida isn't ready for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this irrelevant? He plays half of all his games at home and has never had a consistent season in the majors. We can argue back and forth about potential all day but it really doesn't matter. We've wasted these 3 years in which he should've been in the minors and now its time to make a decision: is he worth arbitration money and the team's confidence in a year in which we are supposed to contend? Yes, he could certainly turn into some great hitter, I odn't think teams generally call up talents they think are hopeless for long spans of time. But he could also just do what he did last year and OPS below 750. The real question is do you have confidence and faith in him, adn want him at the plate when the game is on the line? I don't. I would rather try someone untested than pay more for someone with a history of dissapointing who tops it off with lazy defense.

 

And I really could care less if he turns into Manny Ramirez while playing for someone else 3 years from now. We are trying to contend in 2009, and Hermida isn't ready for it.

Because players at this age struggle, and past bumps in the road don't completely negate future potential. We haven't wasted 3 years. He hasn't been hopeless. You are clueless to player development if you truly believe that. No one is making excuses for him, but at the same time he's shown plenty of potential to be a plus hitter in this league and it's foolish to cut these players loose. Especially when they are cheap, and a 1st year arbitration Hermida is very cheap in baseball terms. Any FA that could get close to his hitting potential for 2009 would cost just as much, or more. This isn't a near 30 year old like Willingham and Jacobs who "are who they are." Hermida can absolutely be a corner OF on a contending team and he's not making or breaking our contending situation regardless. Our SP will take us as far as they want too. Your last sentence is frightening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this irrelevant? He plays half of all his games at home and has never had a consistent season in the majors. We can argue back and forth about potential all day but it really doesn't matter. We've wasted these 3 years in which he should've been in the minors and now its time to make a decision: is he worth arbitration money and the team's confidence in a year in which we are supposed to contend? Yes, he could certainly turn into some great hitter, I odn't think teams generally call up talents they think are hopeless for long spans of time. But he could also just do what he did last year and OPS below 750. The real question is do you have confidence and faith in him, adn want him at the plate when the game is on the line? I don't. I would rather try someone untested than pay more for someone with a history of dissapointing who tops it off with lazy defense.

 

And I really could care less if he turns into Manny Ramirez while playing for someone else 3 years from now. We are trying to contend in 2009, and Hermida isn't ready for it.

 

I agree with Lou's comments below.

And, Tee Ball, of course we want to contend in 2009, and I understand why that worries you; however, it's not like we're only going to contend in 2009. We're not an old team with a bunch of guys who are going to be 40-yr-old free agents next year or something. Our starting rotation is all 25 or younger, I believe, and our excellent core of players are all under 30 (even younger if you don't count Uggla/Cantu in the "core"). So we're going to be around for a while. 2009 can't be viewed in a vacuum - this team figures to be competitive for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this irrelevant? He plays half of all his games at home and has never had a consistent season in the majors. We can argue back and forth about potential all day but it really doesn't matter. We've wasted these 3 years in which he should've been in the minors and now its time to make a decision: is he worth arbitration money and the team's confidence in a year in which we are supposed to contend? Yes, he could certainly turn into some great hitter, I odn't think teams generally call up talents they think are hopeless for long spans of time. But he could also just do what he did last year and OPS below 750. The real question is do you have confidence and faith in him, adn want him at the plate when the game is on the line? I don't. I would rather try someone untested than pay more for someone with a history of dissapointing who tops it off with lazy defense.

 

And I really could care less if he turns into Manny Ramirez while playing for someone else 3 years from now. We are trying to contend in 2009, and Hermida isn't ready for it.

Because players at this age struggle, and past bumps in the road don't completely negate future potential. We haven't wasted 3 years. He hasn't been hopeless. You are clueless to player development if you truly believe that. No one is making excuses for him, but at the same time he's shown plenty of potential to be a plus hitter in this league and it's foolish to cut these players loose. Especially when they are cheap, and a 1st year arbitration Hermida is very cheap in baseball terms. Any FA that could get close to his hitting potential for 2009 would cost just as much, or more. This isn't a near 30 year old like Willingham and Jacobs who "are who they are." Hermida can absolutely be a corner OF on a contending team and he's not making or breaking our contending situation regardless. Our SP will take us as far as they want too. Your last sentence is frightening.

 

Yes, Hermida's potential will hit a game winning homerun in game 7 of the world series. The opposite is also true, if he doesn't pan out keeping him one more year dimishes his trade value. Right now if we can get a nice package of young players for him, theres no reason to be stubborn and hold on to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this irrelevant? He plays half of all his games at home and has never had a consistent season in the majors. We can argue back and forth about potential all day but it really doesn't matter. We've wasted these 3 years in which he should've been in the minors and now its time to make a decision: is he worth arbitration money and the team's confidence in a year in which we are supposed to contend? Yes, he could certainly turn into some great hitter, I odn't think teams generally call up talents they think are hopeless for long spans of time. But he could also just do what he did last year and OPS below 750. The real question is do you have confidence and faith in him, adn want him at the plate when the game is on the line? I don't. I would rather try someone untested than pay more for someone with a history of dissapointing who tops it off with lazy defense.

 

And I really could care less if he turns into Manny Ramirez while playing for someone else 3 years from now. We are trying to contend in 2009, and Hermida isn't ready for it.

Because players at this age struggle, and past bumps in the road don't completely negate future potential. We haven't wasted 3 years. He hasn't been hopeless. You are clueless to player development if you truly believe that. No one is making excuses for him, but at the same time he's shown plenty of potential to be a plus hitter in this league and it's foolish to cut these players loose. Especially when they are cheap, and a 1st year arbitration Hermida is very cheap in baseball terms. Any FA that could get close to his hitting potential for 2009 would cost just as much, or more. This isn't a near 30 year old like Willingham and Jacobs who "are who they are." Hermida can absolutely be a corner OF on a contending team and he's not making or breaking our contending situation regardless. Our SP will take us as far as they want too. Your last sentence is frightening.

 

Yes, Hermida's potential will hit a game winning homerun in game 7 of the world series. The opposite is also true, if he doesn't pan out keeping him one more year dimishes his trade value. Right now if we can get a nice package of young players for him, theres no reason to be stubborn and hold on to him.

 

 

By trading him now, you are risking a huge loss (if he gets good) for a small gain. If he sucks again, his value drops a bit, but not nearly as much as his "value" would rise if he were to start playing up toward his potential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this irrelevant? He plays half of all his games at home and has never had a consistent season in the majors. We can argue back and forth about potential all day but it really doesn't matter. We've wasted these 3 years in which he should've been in the minors and now its time to make a decision: is he worth arbitration money and the team's confidence in a year in which we are supposed to contend? Yes, he could certainly turn into some great hitter, I odn't think teams generally call up talents they think are hopeless for long spans of time. But he could also just do what he did last year and OPS below 750. The real question is do you have confidence and faith in him, adn want him at the plate when the game is on the line? I don't. I would rather try someone untested than pay more for someone with a history of dissapointing who tops it off with lazy defense.

 

And I really could care less if he turns into Manny Ramirez while playing for someone else 3 years from now. We are trying to contend in 2009, and Hermida isn't ready for it.

Because players at this age struggle, and past bumps in the road don't completely negate future potential. We haven't wasted 3 years. He hasn't been hopeless. You are clueless to player development if you truly believe that. No one is making excuses for him, but at the same time he's shown plenty of potential to be a plus hitter in this league and it's foolish to cut these players loose. Especially when they are cheap, and a 1st year arbitration Hermida is very cheap in baseball terms. Any FA that could get close to his hitting potential for 2009 would cost just as much, or more. This isn't a near 30 year old like Willingham and Jacobs who "are who they are." Hermida can absolutely be a corner OF on a contending team and he's not making or breaking our contending situation regardless. Our SP will take us as far as they want too. Your last sentence is frightening.

 

Yes, Hermida's potential will hit a game winning homerun in game 7 of the world series. The opposite is also true, if he doesn't pan out keeping him one more year dimishes his trade value. Right now if we can get a nice package of young players for him, theres no reason to be stubborn and hold on to him.

 

 

By trading him now, you are risking a huge loss (if he gets good) for a small gain. If he sucks again, his value drops a bit, but not nearly as much as his "value" would rise if he were to start playing up toward his potential.

 

 

Why are you assuming all we're getting back is a small gain? Its all about ifs. If Hermida is good his value rises and its a huge loss. However if he doesnt pan put, then we're risking passing up on being able to trade him for top prospects. For example, look what happened with Willingham. I'm not saying we should have, but had he been traded him earlier the rturn would have been better.

 

It's a gamble either way whether to keep him or not, but if we get a good offer, it would be foolish to not take it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you assuming all we're getting back is a small gain? Its all about ifs. If Hermida is good his value rises and its a huge loss. However if he doesnt pan put, then we're risking passing up on being able to trade him for top prospects. For example, look what happened with Willingham. I'm not saying we should have, but had he been traded him earlier the rturn would have been better.

 

It's a gamble either way whether to keep him or not, but if we get a good offer, it would be foolish to not take it.

If we had traded Hammer earlier we would have had a giant hole in the outfield. And if we trade Hermida now, we will have one since Hammer is gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you assuming all we're getting back is a small gain? Its all about ifs. If Hermida is good his value rises and its a huge loss. However if he doesnt pan put, then we're risking passing up on being able to trade him for top prospects. For example, look what happened with Willingham. I'm not saying we should have, but had he been traded him earlier the rturn would have been better.

 

It's a gamble either way whether to keep him or not, but if we get a good offer, it would be foolish to not take it.

If we had traded Hammer earlier we would have had a giant hole in the outfield. And if we trade Hermida now, we will have one since Hammer is gone.

 

Depends how much earlier youre talking about. Because I'm tlaking about when people still thought Hammer would be a C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hammer has been damaged goods for three years and each year decreased his value as each new back problem occurred. There was no "good" time to trade him except maybe at some point in mid to late 2006, and as his salary rose, and now jumps five or six fold, his value plummets - not because he can't play, not because he doesn't have a good OBP because he does, but because he's an "iffy" player who a team can lose for a week or a month or half a season or more just like that.

 

And unless he plays this season without a back problem to re-establish his value, he'll either be out of baseball or a bench player, cut and signed somewhere for much less money because the next step up the salary chain is another 600k to a million. I hope the guy does well, but I understand why his value evaporated after missing 50 games and underperforming in the next 30+ and arbitration looming.

 

edit

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...