I doubt you will find yourself with many who will side with you in this regard. I have had many debates with MarlinLou and even Rabb I don't think they ever felt offended by anything I said. I have been wrong a few times right others but the conversation has always been stimulating and enlightening and that is why we all come here

I doubt you will find yourself with many who will side with you in this regard. I have had many debates with MarlinLou and even Rabb I don't think they ever felt offended by anything I said. I have been wrong a few times right others but the conversation has always been stimulating and enlightening and that is why we all come here

 

 

Perhaps that's because you've never called them a bitch.

As for feeling offended...there are plenty of people here who I get along with...it's why I come here, as well.

I actually called you a little bitch...

I doubt you will find yourself with many who will side with you in this regard. I have had many debates with MarlinLou and even Rabb I don't think they ever felt offended by anything I said. I have been wrong a few times right others but the conversation has always been stimulating and enlightening and that is why we all come here

You and I disagree on tons and I've always felt you were very cordial.

I doubt you will find yourself with many who will side with you in this regard. I have had many debates with MarlinLou and even Rabb I don't think they ever felt offended by anything I said. I have been wrong a few times right others but the conversation has always been stimulating and enlightening and that is why we all come here

You and I disagree on tons and I've always felt you were very cordial.

Thanks Rabb, and i believe you fully understand my point

I basically agree with all of this, but I don't really think anybody views Uggla as trade bait prior to the season, and I think those kind of posts are said more tounge-in-cheek to lambast the front office than genuine predictions of Uggla being gone. If he was going to be traded, he would have been traded earlier. The Marlins knew he was in for a big pay-day, and if they didn't want him to cash in on them, he wouldn't have stuck around for arbitration.

 

That is, of course, under the assumption you're only talking about 2009. 2010, when he's due for a huge pay day (Utley is the easy comparable, and he made 1 mil more than Utley did in their first arb years. Going by that, Uggla is likely due in the 8-9m range if he continues to perform at a high level) and CC should be reading barring a set back, I think it's best to trade Uggla considering the financial limits the team has. But based off your talking of CC, I think you're in the same boat as that.

Don't get me wrong, I would much prefer to actully see the team keep Uggla and sign him for a couple of years rather than blow 2 million on someone like Hermida. But I can see the team's unwillingness to do so, and at least appreciate the situation that the team has a good 2B prospect waiting in the wings who isn't yet ready and an all-star 2B on ML club. They can at least afford to wait a year or two for Coghlan to be ready before entertaining any ideas about giving up Uggla.

I basically agree with all of this, but I don't really think anybody views Uggla as trade bait prior to the season, and I think those kind of posts are said more tounge-in-cheek to lambast the front office than genuine predictions of Uggla being gone. If he was going to be traded, he would have been traded earlier. The Marlins knew he was in for a big pay-day, and if they didn't want him to cash in on them, he wouldn't have stuck around for arbitration.

 

That is, of course, under the assumption you're only talking about 2009. 2010, when he's due for a huge pay day (Utley is the easy comparable, and he made 1 mil more than Utley did in their first arb years. Going by that, Uggla is likely due in the 8-9m range if he continues to perform at a high level) and CC should be reading barring a set back, I think it's best to trade Uggla considering the financial limits the team has. But based off your talking of CC, I think you're in the same boat as that.

Don't get me wrong, I would much prefer to actully see the team keep Uggla and sign him for a couple of years rather than blow 2 million on someone like Hermida. But I can see the team's unwillingness to do so, and at least appreciate the situation that the team has a good 2B prospect waiting in the wings who isn't yet ready and an all-star 2B on ML club. They can at least afford to wait a year or two for Coghlan to be ready before entertaining any ideas about giving up Uggla.

See, the thing with Uggla is, it's just going to bottom out. Probably not this year, probably not next year. But that contact rate is just going to bottom him out (.240/.325/.425 with no defense is what I think bottoming him out is. i.e., something EB or Coghlan can do in a worst case scenario), and it's what I've been fearful of the last 2 years. Now I mean, his BB rate is improving so maybe he is starting to get into "baby dunn" territory offensively where we can expect 70 BB/30 HR annually (which is awesome), but for me, Uggla is the classic example of a guy you get rid of 1 year to early versus keeping him till it crashes. I think signing him right now to say a 4-5 year deal (i.e. eating a free agency year) would horrifically backfire on us whenever the drop happens in the next 2-4 years. My answer would also be completely different if he was 25 years old right now. I'd like to see the club spend money, but if we're thinking longterm I want to see 2009 play out and whichever two starting pitchers, or Maybin, look the best, lock them up for 4-5 years each. Because two of them really cost what Dan would cost us by himself. Just a smarter use of cash to me. Especially with a shallow minors full of starters, and two legitimate 2B prospects.

 

Contractually, if they were going to buy out Uggla, it should have been last year (before his peak year) on a 3 year deal. That would have accounted for his skill set, and saved a little bit of cash. Just knock out 2 of the arb years, and save a nice $3-5 million over that span. Hindsight is always 20/20 though. That contract would have been a gamble, and even though it looks like a winning bet right now, you still have to make smart decisions and not potentially hurt yourself down the road by committing big money to a gamble. Yes, this is going to drive Dan off the team after this year, which I don't think is going to be that big of a deal because I like Coghlan/EB to turn into at least average 2B with some growth in slugging, but I'm just saying.

 

We look real good on paper for 2009 if those starters stay healthy, and we look amazing longterm once we trade off all the hitters (Cantu, Ross, Uggla, Hermida, Amezaga) for more long term pitching options. What more can we really ask for?

 

--

 

nny, didn't realize Roberts dropped that much in the D. It is closer than I thought.

I basically agree with all of this, but I don't really think anybody views Uggla as trade bait prior to the season, and I think those kind of posts are said more tounge-in-cheek to lambast the front office than genuine predictions of Uggla being gone. If he was going to be traded, he would have been traded earlier. The Marlins knew he was in for a big pay-day, and if they didn't want him to cash in on them, he wouldn't have stuck around for arbitration.

 

That is, of course, under the assumption you're only talking about 2009. 2010, when he's due for a huge pay day (Utley is the easy comparable, and he made 1 mil more than Utley did in their first arb years. Going by that, Uggla is likely due in the 8-9m range if he continues to perform at a high level) and CC should be reading barring a set back, I think it's best to trade Uggla considering the financial limits the team has. But based off your talking of CC, I think you're in the same boat as that.

Don't get me wrong, I would much prefer to actully see the team keep Uggla and sign him for a couple of years rather than blow 2 million on someone like Hermida. But I can see the team's unwillingness to do so, and at least appreciate the situation that the team has a good 2B prospect waiting in the wings who isn't yet ready and an all-star 2B on ML club. They can at least afford to wait a year or two for Coghlan to be ready before entertaining any ideas about giving up Uggla.

See, the thing with Uggla is, it's just going to bottom out. Probably not this year, probably not next year. But that contact rate is just going to bottom him out (.240/.325/.425 with no defense is what I think bottoming him out is. i.e., something EB or Coghlan can do in a worst case scenario), and it's what I've been fearful of the last 2 years. Now I mean, his BB rate is improving so maybe he is starting to get into "baby dunn" territory offensively where we can expect 70 BB/30 HR annually (which is awesome), but for me, Uggla is the classic example of a guy you get rid of 1 year to early versus keeping him till it crashes. I think signing him right now to say a 4-5 year deal (i.e. eating a free agency year) would horrifically backfire on us whenever the drop happens in the next 2-4 years. My answer would also be completely different if he was 25 years old right now. I'd like to see the club spend money, but if we're thinking longterm I want to see 2009 play out and whichever two starting pitchers, or Maybin, look the best, lock them up for 4-5 years each. Because two of them really cost what Dan would cost us by himself. Just a smarter use of cash to me. Especially with a shallow minors full of starters, and two legitimate 2B prospects.

 

Contractually, if they were going to buy out Uggla, it should have been last year (before his peak year) on a 3 year deal. That would have accounted for his skill set, and saved a little bit of cash. Just knock out 2 of the arb years, and save a nice $3-5 million over that span. Hindsight is always 20/20 though. That contract would have been a gamble, and even though it looks like a winning bet right now, you still have to make smart decisions and not potentially hurt yourself down the road by committing big money to a gamble. Yes, this is going to drive Dan off the team after this year, which I don't think is going to be that big of a deal because I like Coghlan/EB to turn into at least average 2B with some growth in slugging, but I'm just saying.

 

We look real good on paper for 2009 if those starters stay healthy, and we look amazing longterm once we trade off all the hitters (Cantu, Ross, Uggla, Hermida, Amezaga) for more long term pitching options. What more can we really ask for?

 

--

 

nny, didn't realize Roberts dropped that much in the D. It is closer than I thought.

 

I fine with letting uggla go after this year but signing maybin to a 4 or 5 year deal after one good year seems a little crazy to me. Id rather let him prove he can do it 2 years in a row and show hes durable then sign him to find out his a one year wonder. But hen agiang maybe 2 pitchers will do great this year.

I fine with letting uggla go after this year but signing maybin to a 4 or 5 year deal after one good year seems a little crazy to me. Id rather let him prove he can do it 2 years in a row and show hes durable then sign him to find out his a one year wonder. But hen agiang maybe 2 pitchers will do great this year.

It was purely speculative, but that is fine too. You can't help but look at these contracts though. If Maybin shows up as advertised, it's in our best interest to do one of these.

 

Grady Sizemore of

6 years/$23.45M (2006-11), plus 2012 club option

signed extension with Cleveland 3/06, replacing 1 year deal for 2006 signed 3/06

$1M signing bonus

06:$0.5M, 07:$0.75M, 08:$3M, 09:$4.6M, 10:$5.6M, 11:$7.5M, 12:$8.5M club option ($0.5M buyout)

 

Evan Longoria 3b

6 years/17.5M (2008-13), plus 2014-16 club options

signed extension with Tampa Bay 4/18/08

08:$0.5M, 09:$0.55M, 10:$0.95M, 11:$2M, 12:$4.5M, 13:$6M, 14:$7.5M club option ($3M buyout), 15:$11M club option, 16:$11.5M club option

That Longoria signing was so ballsy on TB's part. That was during like his 3rd week with the team, right?

I fine with letting uggla go after this year but signing maybin to a 4 or 5 year deal after one good year seems a little crazy to me. Id rather let him prove he can do it 2 years in a row and show hes durable then sign him to find out his a one year wonder. But hen agiang maybe 2 pitchers will do great this year.

It was purely speculative, but that is fine too. You can't help but look at these contracts though. If Maybin shows up as advertised, it's in our best interest to do one of these.

 

Grady Sizemore of

6 years/$23.45M (2006-11), plus 2012 club option

signed extension with Cleveland 3/06, replacing 1 year deal for 2006 signed 3/06

$1M signing bonus

06:$0.5M, 07:$0.75M, 08:$3M, 09:$4.6M, 10:$5.6M, 11:$7.5M, 12:$8.5M club option ($0.5M buyout)

 

Evan Longoria 3b

6 years/17.5M (2008-13), plus 2014-16 club options

signed extension with Tampa Bay 4/18/08

08:$0.5M, 09:$0.55M, 10:$0.95M, 11:$2M, 12:$4.5M, 13:$6M, 14:$7.5M club option ($3M buyout), 15:$11M club option, 16:$11.5M club option

 

I like both those contracts for the marlins if say maybin got a similar one.

The TB one was kinda crazy to me he spent like 3 weeks in the bigs and they sign him.

See, the thing with Uggla is, it's just going to bottom out. Probably not this year, probably not next year. But that contact rate is just going to bottom him out (.240/.325/.425 with no defense is what I think bottoming him out is. i.e., something EB or Coghlan can do in a worst case scenario), and it's what I've been fearful of the last 2 years. Now I mean, his BB rate is improving so maybe he is starting to get into "baby dunn" territory offensively where we can expect 70 BB/30 HR annually (which is awesome), but for me, Uggla is the classic example of a guy you get rid of 1 year to early versus keeping him till it crashes. I think signing him right now to say a 4-5 year deal (i.e. eating a free agency year) would horrifically backfire on us whenever the drop happens in the next 2-4 years. My answer would also be completely different if he was 25 years old right now. I'd like to see the club spend money, but if we're thinking longterm I want to see 2009 play out and whichever two starting pitchers, or Maybin, look the best, lock them up for 4-5 years each. Because two of them really cost what Dan would cost us by himself. Just a smarter use of cash to me. Especially with a shallow minors full of starters, and two legitimate 2B prospects.

 

Contractually, if they were going to buy out Uggla, it should have been last year (before his peak year) on a 3 year deal. That would have accounted for his skill set, and saved a little bit of cash. Just knock out 2 of the arb years, and save a nice $3-5 million over that span. Hindsight is always 20/20 though. That contract would have been a gamble, and even though it looks like a winning bet right now, you still have to make smart decisions and not potentially hurt yourself down the road by committing big money to a gamble. Yes, this is going to drive Dan off the team after this year, which I don't think is going to be that big of a deal because I like Coghlan/EB to turn into at least average 2B with some growth in slugging, but I'm just saying.

 

We look real good on paper for 2009 if those starters stay healthy, and we look amazing longterm once we trade off all the hitters (Cantu, Ross, Uggla, Hermida, Amezaga) for more long term pitching options. What more can we really ask for?

The problem I have with this way of thinking is that people have been expecting Uggla to crash and fall off for the last two years already. After 2006 people said the league had "figured him out" and that he wouldn't repeat his success, and so far, he has. So at least on that level, people on this board have been screaming "sell high" on Uggla ever since his first All-Star selection, and I'm glad the team hasn't listened. And while I was more thinking something in the vein of 3 years, the fact is that I think it's silly to describe any regression Uggla would have while under contract in such epic terms - he wouldn't cost us Alfonso Soriano type of money, especially at this point. I also take issue calling last year his peak, considering that this season hasn't started yet, let alone ended. There's no reason in the world why he cannot improve further this year.

 

I don't really see how you can qualify him as having "no defense" either, especially given this environment. I mean if you can name a better defensive Marlin IF of the last 3 years, I'd love to see who it is - cause even with his range Hanley blows tons of plays, and lets not even talk about the defensive prowess of Mike Jacobs, Miguel Cabrera, and Jorge Cantu. Nevermind the fact that Coghlan also doesn't exactly have a reputation for being a defensive wiz either.

 

I'm not gonna sit here and argue the merits of signing pitchers long term vs position players, beyond noting that throughout a span where most of our best pitchers have been on and off the DL, Dan Uggla hasn't played in fewer than 146 games in any of the last 3 seasons. That, along with the fact that he has consistently produced for us is why I have trouble imagining that this team will sign anyone else (besides Hanley) long term if they refuse to do so with Uggla.

Because Uggla is older than all of our other 4th year players.

Because Uggla is older than all of our other 4th year players.

He's also more durable than most of those guys. I would think that was valid criticism if he wasn't one of the two guys on the team who take the fewest days off, if he was one of those guys who is constantly on the DL. Nevermind even that the #1 2B in MLB is 2 years older than Uggla to boot. A 3 year deal would have been a good deal.

Because Uggla is older than all of our other 4th year players.

He's also more durable than most of those guys. I would think that was valid criticism if he wasn't one of the two guys on the team who take the fewest days off, if he was one of those guys who is constantly on the DL. Nevermind even that the #1 2B in MLB is 2 years older than Uggla to boot. A 3 year deal would have been a good deal.

 

Id love to keep him too but it seems the organization has no interest what so ever in keeping him and ive just kinda accepted it.

Because Uggla is older than all of our other 4th year players.

He's also more durable than most of those guys. I would think that was valid criticism if he wasn't one of the two guys on the team who take the fewest days off, if he was one of those guys who is constantly on the DL. Nevermind even that the #1 2B in MLB is 2 years older than Uggla to boot. A 3 year deal would have been a good deal.

 

Id love to keep him too but it seems the organization has no interest what so ever in keeping him and ive just kinda accepted it.

I realize it too, but I think they can and will wait until Coghlan is ready rather than rush Uggla out the door to have Bonifacio or anyone else start at 2B.

Because Uggla is older than all of our other 4th year players.

He's also more durable than most of those guys. I would think that was valid criticism if he wasn't one of the two guys on the team who take the fewest days off, if he was one of those guys who is constantly on the DL. Nevermind even that the #1 2B in MLB is 2 years older than Uggla to boot. A 3 year deal would have been a good deal.

 

Id love to keep him too but it seems the organization has no interest what so ever in keeping him and ive just kinda accepted it.

I realize it too, but I think they can and will wait until Coghlan is ready rather than rush Uggla out the door to have Bonifacio or anyone else start at 2B.

 

 

i guess maybe if he really tears it up this year they may consider signing him. But even then i have my doubts as beinfest seems to love bonerface and will use him if Coghlan isnt ready.