Posted February 5, 200916 yr Juan C. Rodriguez of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel has a chat transcript from Dan Uggla's Wednesday afternoon appearance on ESPN Radio 760 in West Palm Beach. During the interview Uggla hinted that he'd like the Marlins to offer him a long-term deal, even if it's "crappy." "People would argue that I deserve a long term deal, along with some other guys on our team that probably deserve a long term deal. But by no means are we saying, 'Oh we are worth just as much as Hanley [Ramirez],' or anything like that. It would be nice to have them [the Marlins] -- to even throw out even a crappy deal just to show us they are interested in keeping some of us around." Uggla, 28, hit .260/.360/.514 last season with 32 home runs and 92 RBI. He also stole five bases. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I think dans smart enough to know that its a buisness.
February 5, 200916 yr Dan's right. He's put up stats as a second basemen that actually warrants a long term contract. He knows what team he's dealing with, and in normal circumstances he would have a long term contract by now, but he's gotta remember this is the marlins. We all know that Uggla will be gone very soon, the marlins are just hinting that way. We got him another year, lets hope that his poor mindset doesn't effect him as much as i believe it will on the field.
February 5, 200916 yr What I think is that Dan doesn't really want to go anywhere else. I think he would like to stay in Florida for as long as he can.
February 5, 200916 yr Dan's right. He's put up stats as a second basemen that actually warrants a long term contract. He knows what team he's dealing with, and in normal circumstances he would have a long term contract by now, but he's gotta remember this is the marlins. We all know that Uggla will be gone very soon, the marlins are just hinting that way. We got him another year, lets hope that his poor mindset doesn't effect him as much as i believe it will on the field. I disagree completely. Uggla is the textbook kind of guy you go year to year with. Older and not approaching his prime years, has easily identifiable flaws, a skill set that could drop instantly, and can't play defense. Adding this all up doesn't scream "let's pay him excellent money when he is 32." He's a good player, but he is not buyout or longterm contract worthy. Year-Year is the right approach. Hanley is literally the only one they needed to do for obvious reasons. They should have done Willis post 2004 and Cabrera post 2005. Those are the only two recent screw ups. (Sure, Dontrelle would have probably backfired, but organizationally it was still the smart thing to do). Johnson post 2006, or Hermida post 2007, also would not have been horrible strategic deals. Maybe if you want to give Uggla a 3 year deal after 2007, but that's it for him. Everything else they are doing has been the right play. Right now, no one should get a contract. Post 2009 they should consider the starting rotation, Maybin, and maybe Hermida or Baker if they really do something special. Payroll is looking great longterm as soon as 6-7 of Uggla, Ross, Cantu, Hermida, Amezaga, Johnson, Nolasco, McPherson, and Lindstrom, come off the books. Not very concerned here with what's coming up.
February 5, 200916 yr Those comments made by Samson were so stupid and detrimental. He has really put the players on guard, as evidenced by Uggla's comments. The Wet Rat must go
February 5, 200916 yr Whatever happened to the Uggla for Cain rumors? I was really excited about that...
February 5, 200916 yr Whatever happened to the Uggla for Cain rumors? I was really excited about that... Personally I wouldn't make that trade. Unless we trade Cain for another offensive player.
February 5, 200916 yr Whatever happened to the Uggla for Cain rumors? I was really excited about that... Personally I wouldn't make that trade. Unless we trade Cain for another offensive player. It's a good thing I'm not the GM then...b/c you'd be mad at me. If the Giants called me up and said..."we need a hitter and we'd like Dan Uggla...in return, we'd give you Matt Cain..." I wouldn't even hesitate. The answer would be "yes." Nolasco, JJ, Cain, Volstad, Miller. Put Anibal in the pen...or trade Anibal for a young catcher, who can split time with Baker. Oh yeah...I wish.
February 5, 200916 yr Whatever happened to the Uggla for Cain rumors? I was really excited about that... Personally I wouldn't make that trade. Unless we trade Cain for another offensive player. It's a good thing I'm not the GM then...b/c you'd be mad at me. If the Giants called me up and said..."we need a hitter and we'd like Dan Uggla...in return, we'd give you Matt Cain..." I wouldn't even hesitate. The answer would be "yes." Nolasco, JJ, Cain, Volstad, Miller. Put Anibal in the pen...or trade Anibal for a young catcher, who can split time with Baker. Oh yeah...I wish. Losing Hammer, Jacobs and now Uggla. The pitching would need to be nearly perfect to make up for all the loss of runs.
February 5, 200916 yr Losing Hammer, Jacobs and now Uggla. The pitching would need to be nearly perfect to make up for all the loss of runs. Jacobs wasn't as big a contributor to the offense as some would think, we played most of the year without Hammer... so Uggla would be the major loss. But Cain in the rotation would make up for that.
February 5, 200916 yr On paper, Uggla for Cain is a no brainer, but how do we replace Dan's production?
February 5, 200916 yr On paper, Uggla for Cain is a no brainer, but how do we replace Dan's production? You don't "replace" Dan Uggla... you play whoever's most ready of Coghlan/Bonerface and take the OBP gain from Chris or defensive gain from Bonerface and laugh at how good your pitching is
February 5, 200916 yr Losing Hammer, Jacobs and now Uggla. The pitching would need to be nearly perfect to make up for all the loss of runs. Jacobs wasn't as big a contributor to the offense as some would think, we played most of the year without Hammer... so Uggla would be the major loss. But Cain in the rotation would make up for that. I'm very skeptical about having Hanley being the only proven offensive player in our lineup although some would argue Cody is proven. It would be great to provide Hanley with some protection.
February 5, 200916 yr On paper, Uggla for Cain is a no brainer, but how do we replace Dan's production? You don't "replace" Dan Uggla... you play whoever's most ready of Coghlan/Bonerface and take the OBP gain from Chris or defensive gain from Bonerface and laugh at how good your pitching is The negatives outweigh the positives in that stuation IMO. I look at it this way; Our pitching is going to be good with or without Cain, but if our offense loses Uggla, it is down considerably. Coghlan/Bonifacio don't even come close to adding the value Uggla does
February 5, 200916 yr Losing Hammer, Jacobs and now Uggla. The pitching would need to be nearly perfect to make up for all the loss of runs. Jacobs wasn't as big a contributor to the offense as some would think, we played most of the year without Hammer... so Uggla would be the major loss. But Cain in the rotation would make up for that. I'm very skeptical about having Hanley being the only proven offensive player in our lineup although some would argue Cody is proven. It would be great to provide Hanley with some protection. The trick is having guys that provide translatable skills... the guys we have do that. That's even counting regression from the minors to majors transition.
February 5, 200916 yr Losing Hammer, Jacobs and now Uggla. The pitching would need to be nearly perfect to make up for all the loss of runs. No, not really. There would be a lot of potential left in the offense. And for all the question marks offensively...Hammer, Jacobs, and even Uggla are all question marks, as well. Jacobs is garbage. Willingham...all depends how his back will hold up. Uggla, as good as he's been, is an all or nothing type hitter, proned to long slumps. The lineup would actually be just fine. The Marlins offense survived last year, despite over half a season with really bad production from the catcher's slot (full season of Baker = upgrade), a 1B who hit for power, inconsistently, and never got on base (while Gaby most likely won't put up the same type of power #'s...his .OBP will be better and his defense will be an upgrade), no CF'er (Maybin=upgrade...the fact that Amezaga got 190 AB's as a CF'er last year, as much as we love him, is not a good thing. We won't have a bench player getting 190 AB's in CF, barring injury). Then you have the corner outfielders...basically, the key to the offense, Uggla or no Uggla. Hermida, imo, will improve. His home/road splits last year were just VERY rare. He struggled, but if you look at the #'s, he really only struggled at home. He hit the ball well on the road. He raked in the 2nd half of '07. The potential is there, no doubt. I highly doubt the splits will look the same in '09...the #'s will even out, and he'll be just fine. While some believe Cody Ross was a fluke...he wasn't really. He had a 109 OPS+ last year, which is very comparable to his career OPS+ of 111. I don't see why he shouldn't be fine. He was also an above average defensive CF'er...moving to a corner outfield spot now, with the much faster/natural CF'er Cameron Maybin coming to the big league team, full-time, this year. That makes the outfield defense much better. There's no reason to believe the offense would be any worse than average. Especially if you can make that trade for Cain...and trade Anibal for a right-handed hitting catcher to platoon with Baker. It would be nice. And bottom line is...you don't pass up on pitchers like Matt Cain. Young power arm.
February 5, 200916 yr On paper, Uggla for Cain is a no brainer, but how do we replace Dan's production? You don't "replace" Dan Uggla... you play whoever's most ready of Coghlan/Bonerface and take the OBP gain from Chris or defensive gain from Bonerface and laugh at how good your pitching is The negatives outweigh the positives in that stuation IMO. I look at it this way; Our pitching is good with or without Cain, but if our offense loses Uggla, it is down considerably. Coghlan/Bonifacio don't even come close to adding the value Uggla does Cain has pitched ~ 200 innings the past two years and 190 the year before that. Who on our staff has done that (or close to it) without throwing up red flags (Nolasco) or getting injured? The more Cain IP we have, the fewer Vanden Hurk/Badenhop IP we have... that's a VERY good thing. Coghlan would be a quite capable replacement... we'd lose the prototypical "slugger" in Uggla but he's not a veritable black hole either.
February 5, 200916 yr On paper, Uggla for Cain is a no brainer, but how do we replace Dan's production? You don't "replace" Dan Uggla... you play whoever's most ready of Coghlan/Bonerface and take the OBP gain from Chris or defensive gain from Bonerface and laugh at how good your pitching is The negatives outweigh the positives in that stuation IMO. I look at it this way; Our pitching is going to be good with or without Cain, but if our offense loses Uggla, it is down considerably. Coghlan/Bonifacio don't even come close to adding the value Uggla does That's not exactly true.
February 5, 200916 yr And bottom line is...you don't pass up on pitchers like Matt Cain. Young power arm. I wouldn't pass on Cain all I'm saying is if we trade away Uggla the FO SHOULD find a way to get that production value back in the offensive category.
February 5, 200916 yr And bottom line is...you don't pass up on pitchers like Matt Cain. Young power arm. I wouldn't pass on Cain all I'm saying is if we trade away Uggla the FO SHOULD find a way to get that production value back in the offensive category. You have to give something to get something.
February 5, 200916 yr Yeah I mean, we're talking about serious production at 2b that would be lost here. And banking on young guys with no major league experience to help fill that gap is not the safest bet. As much as I would love to see Cain in our staff, I'm afraid it's just not worth it for the short-term at least.
February 5, 200916 yr Yeah I mean, we're talking about serious production at 2b that would be lost here. And banking on young guys with no major league experience to help fill that gap is not the safest bet. As much as I would love to see Cain in our staff, I'm afraid it's just not worth it for the short-term at least. The same could be said about the Marlins pitching. We're counting on young guys / plenty of question marks, with minimal depth. It's a matter of preference. I'd rather have the pitching rotation solidified than to have a slugging 2B. As of right now, when I look at the starting rotation...I think our #3, while good, is not as good as some people think he will be (Volstad), a question mark at #4 (Miller), and I have no confidence in our #5 (Anibal). When you look at our "gap-fillers" in the minors, I don't think any of them are ready either. A guy like Vanden Hurk, unless he develops another pitch, is nothing more than a bullpen pitcher to me. Tucker has already made the transition to the pen, and De La Cruz will be coming out of the pen, as well. Badenhop is a guy I don't want to see in '09.
February 5, 200916 yr The same could be said about the Marlins pitching. We're counting on young guys / plenty of question marks, with minimal depth. It's a matter of preference. I'd rather have the pitching rotation solidified than to have a slugging 2B. As of right now, when I look at the starting rotation...I think our #3, while good, is not as good as some people think he will be (Volstad), a question mark at #4 (Miller), and I have no confidence in our #5 (Anibal). When you look at our "gap-fillers" in the minors, I don't think any of them are ready either. A guy like Vanden Hurk, unless he develops another pitch, is nothing more than a bullpen pitcher to me. Tucker has already made the transition to the pen, and De La Cruz will be coming out of the pen, as well. Badenhop is a guy I don't want to see in '09. Bingo
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.