We all know what happened the last two times the Florida Marlins put together teams like this.

 

The 1997 World Series champs were calling the moving vans about a half-hour after they'd finished sweeping up the confetti.

 

The 2003 champs at least were given a shot to do it again, but the entire roster, except for Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis, was gone by Opening Day 2006.

 

And now here the Fish are again, rising up from the rubble to burst to the largest lead -- 5 games, by April 19 -- in the history of the franchise.

 

Maybe it will lead them to another trip to October. Maybe it won't. But either way, this time it's different.

 

This time it's all leading somewhere, and by that we don't mean to another everything-must-go sale just over the horizon.

 

"That," said Marlins president David Samson, "is not something we'll ever have to do again."

 

This time the future of the franchise is essentially secure, thanks to the 37,000-seat retractable-dome ballpark that has finally, really, no kidding, for sure, been approved for a 2012 opening.

 

This time it appears legitimately safe to look at a Marlins team and envision the core group growing and playing together for the next five years, as opposed to the next five minutes.

 

This time what the Marlins are building is something lasting, something stable, something that's actually, well, normal.

 

They remember all too well what they've had to do in the past. But "I don't see that happening again," Samson pledged. "We've put ourselves in a position, with salaries and the performance we're getting from players at a young age, that we don't have to do that anymore."

 

At the moment, they still have the best record in baseball (11-4), even after getting swept in Pittsburgh. Amazingly, they also have the lowest payroll in baseball, at just $36.8 million, if you don't count the deferred money they're still paying guys like Carlos Delgado, Al Leiter and even Paul Lo Duca.

 

The men who run this club are not afraid to admit that, with their new ballpark still three seasons away, they won't be able to keep every member of this juggernaut in teal pinstripes until they get there. Nevertheless, this is a team that's now in a place unlike any place it's ever been before.

 

"We don't sit here now and say we're building a team to win in 2012," Samson said. "We're built to win in 2009, and we're built to win in 2010. We think we've built a pipeline now where we can keep winning every year."

 

Nobody wins every year, of course. But thanks to the good-as-it-gets management team assembled by their astute president of baseball operations, Admin Beinfest, the Marlins have such insane depth of young talent that it isn't out of the question.

 

Their centerpiece player, Hanley Ramirez, is 25. Their best starter, Josh Johnson, is also 25. Their entire starting rotation is 26 and younger. They have no starting position players in their 30s.

 

And behind that group is the No. 2-ranked farm system in baseball, a system that has developed six of the top 100 prospects in the sport (and three of the top 18), according to Baseball America.

 

So what that means is that the Marlins have the freedom now to make decisions that are about dollars and baseball. Not so long ago, it was only one of the above. So if, down the road, they trade away, say, a Jeremy Hermida to make room for a rising middle-of-the-order thumper like Michael Stanton, it will be because their system allows them to do that, not just because their financial handcuffs compel them to do it.

 

"We don't want to put ourselves in a position where we're forced to keep the same names," Samson said, "and watch the payroll of the club climb by $20-30 million for no better performance [than they'd get by infusing young players]."

 

Three years ago, though, they didn't have that freedom. No one seems to recall now that in 2004 and 2005 the Marlins actually pushed the payroll above $60 million two years in a row, in an attempt to give the 2003 nucleus a shot to win again. But when that didn't happen and their ballpark plans kept blowing up, they did what they felt they had to do:

 

They unloaded.

 

They jettisoned Josh Beckett, Mike Lowell, Carlos Delgado, Juan Pierre, Luis Castillo and just about every veteran player still leaning against a palm tree. They pushed their payroll to below $15 million. Then they went back to work, putting in place the stadium pieces and roster pieces that would lead them toward this day.

 

"We did three years early what the country is doing now," Samson said. "We borrowed against our future, hoping it would never catch up with us, and then it did. So instead of slowly slipping off the Band-Aid, we tore it off, and it was very painful. But it was the right move for us."

 

What will be fascinating to watch now, as they point toward that new park, is which of these players they decide to export and which ones they look to sign for the long haul, or at least the semi-long haul.

 

They've already locked up Ramirez through 2014. Next, they figure to hone in on the rotation, where their top two starters, Johnson and Ricky Nolasco, will both be arbitration-eligible next winter.

 

Center fielder Cameron Maybin and closer Matt Lindstrom also look like keepers. But with big-time prospects like Stanton, first baseman Logan Morrison and third baseman Matt Dominguez just over the horizon, this team will have tough decisions to make about whether to hang onto (and pay) guys like Hermida and Dan Uggla.

 

Are there dollar signs complicating all those decisions? Of course. But at least now, their decisions aren't just about dollar signs.

 

"We want to keep winning," Samson said. "We'll never say we're rebuilding. Our owner [Jeffrey Loria] doesn't want us to rebuild. He wants to win every year. So that leaves us in a position to have to make unpopular decisions that we can hopefully turn into popular decisions if we win."

 

The Marlins have work to do on other fronts, too, obviously. They're 24th in the big leagues in attendance. They drew the fewest fans in the sport just last year. And their season-ticket base (about 5,000 full-season equivalents) is one of the lowest in baseball.

 

But when that new park opens -- with a charismatic young team inside and a roof overhead that ensures a game every day without mid-game monsoons and 188 percent humidity -- Samson couldn't be more confident that attendance won't be an issue anymore.

 

"We will draw 2 million [in the new park]," he said, flatly. "I'm positive of it."

 

The Marlins are already scheduled to host the WBC finals in 2013. And there are rumors about an All-Star Game some time after that. So this is a team that's suddenly embarking on a journey to the center of the baseball universe.

 

That's not a journey the Marlins are familiar with. But if they've programmed their GPS correctly, it's a journey they've never been more ready to make.

 

And if that means you won't find half their roster available next year at overstock.com, that's not just good news in South Florida. That's good news for the entire sport.

 

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/stor...rumblings090423

The first great article I have ever read by Jayson Stark.

I never took anything in Loria's ownership as a fire sale. I always knew that there we some players that were rising while on our team that we couldn't afford to pay, so we needed to get something for them before they fled. Some teams might try to hold onto those types of players, only to see them sign somewhere else and be left holding that bag. So that or that there was some alternative waiting in the wings that we could get a better per dollar value out of, hence, no need to overpay for the current player. The fact that Loria kept the 2003 championship team pretty much intact for 2 seasons, but attendance didn't improve that dramatically (it did rise though) and they didn't make the playoffs meant a change would be coming. I think you would see the same from any other team that had high expectations two years running that may have not been in a market that could support those expectations indefinitely (i.e. Mets, Yankees, Red Sox).

 

With Huizenga though, well, we all knew about that, even before the series was over. That was a pure cost cutting, let's get whoever is marginally good, situation.

 

Unfortunately, with that in our past, we will have this stigmata of moves being purely "cost cutting" when they involved a big named player for us.

I agree with him in it locking up JJ and Maybin is a MUST, and depending on how he does this year, Nolasco could be another I want to hang about for a while.

 

But I was a little suprised when he suggested Lindstrom was a keeper. I like Lindy but I don't think its the Marlins way of doing business to lock up a closer to a multi year deal. We seem to always piece together our pen and year in year out slot guys in the closers role who on the most part, deliver positive results.

I disagree with this. This article is simply premature. There is going to be one more wave of trades between November 2009-2010, and then it's over. After that, the discussion will probably turn to buying out Maybin, Volstad, and other potential stars through their arbitration and early FA years. Not using the words fire sale, but they are still going to trim payroll next year despite the fact of "system depth." I like a two headed 2B monster of Coghlan/Bonifacio to be at least league average production wise at 2B, but that is not going to replace Uggla when he is shipped out for payroll. Likewise, RF is going to be given to a combination of Cousins/Raynor/Petersen next year, and it'll be hard for rookies to match Ross typical .800 OPS/Outstanding defense performance when Ross is out the door because of payroll. I don't think replacing Amezaga will be that hard, but he's still a nice player to have around and just obtaining a guy like that will take some time. This also goes to the bullpen where Calero, Kensing, Pinto, Proctor, and Tank will not be retained for FA/Arbitration reasons, and despite the fact we all love Tucker, Ceda, and some of the other minor league arms, it's a lot to ask to immediately replace veteran production. And that is just this next offseason, and then after 2010 we will have to make a serious decision about Hermida (where Stanton and company could influence, but if Hermida goes Markakis on us that brings up whole new issues), Cantu will be a FA agent and gone, they will have to replace at least one of Lindstrom/Nunez for rising salary issues, and most importantly trade away one of current 5 starting pitchers and cross their fingers West, Thompson, or anyone they acquire in a trade is ready to go. And that's if those guys aren't already in the rotation due to injury to anything we already have.

I doubt they will ever be over with this ownership. Sorry, I just dont believe it.

There has only been one fire sale in franchise history and that was before the current ownership.

There has only been one fire sale in franchise history and that was before the current ownership.

 

 

I hate how after the 2005 season it was called a "market correction", both were fire sales. Homerism clouds your train of thought. They called up the entire minor league roster in 2006, and in 1998 they did the same thing, trading all the stars for more and more and more prospects.

 

 

I say what Spike says, with the current ownership, Fire Sales will never end. Its a never ending cycle of trading away players once they ask for the big money. I see us saving some players in the future and handing them big contracts, but this team will never become that team that has the same roster for 5+ years (meaning a core of players).

There has only been one fire sale in franchise history and that was before the current ownership.

 

 

I hate how after the 2005 season it was called a "market correction", both were fire sales. Homerism clouds your train of thought. They called up the entire minor league roster in 2006, and in 1998 they did the same thing, trading all the stars for more and more and more prospects.

 

 

I say what Spike says, with the current ownership, Fire Sales will never end. Its a never ending cycle of trading away players once they ask for the big money. I see us saving some players in the future and handing them big contracts, but this team will never become that team that has the same roster for 5+ years (meaning a core of players).

 

Your short-sightedness clouds your train of thought... the 2004-2005 rosters were just not working... we were arguably as competitive in 2006 as we were in either 04-05. We got rid of a bunch of players that just couldn't contribute well for us when we could get much greater value for them than if we had waited.

 

Want to know the biggest difference that makes 97 a firesale and 2005 NOT a firesale?

 

We traded CJ, Sheffield, Bonilla (and Eisenreich and Barrios) after 97 and only netted only Preston Wilson (as a major league contributor) in return...

 

THE WORST move we made for the 2005 edition was trading Castillo for two high upside bullpen arms.

 

1997 was all about clearing salary, 2005 was about getting talent in exchange for pieces that just weren't working for us... I really do dare you to say that the 97 guys we traded hadn't worked out for us...

 

Ugh, looking back, what we got for the 97 guys was an absolute joke... we netted a grand total of Looper, Lee, Burnett and what? Almanza...

I doubt they will ever be over with this ownership. Sorry, I just dont believe it.

 

I would have to undoubtedly agree

There has only been one fire sale in franchise history and that was before the current ownership.

 

 

I hate how after the 2005 season it was called a "market correction", both were fire sales. Homerism clouds your train of thought. They called up the entire minor league roster in 2006, and in 1998 they did the same thing, trading all the stars for more and more and more prospects.

 

 

I say what Spike says, with the current ownership, Fire Sales will never end. Its a never ending cycle of trading away players once they ask for the big money. I see us saving some players in the future and handing them big contracts, but this team will never become that team that has the same roster for 5+ years (meaning a core of players).

Yes, I'M the one clouded by homerism.

 

 

How many more times did the 04-05 team have to choke before they were given enough chances? Would another 2 years of September disappointment been OK? Maybe another 4 years of collapses before we're allowed to make a change?

 

Please, if you are going to argue "market correction" vs "fire sale", how about you learn what a fire sale is?

I doubt they will ever be over with this ownership. Sorry, I just dont believe it.

This, mostly because Loria just doesn't have the deep pockets the typical MLB owner has.

There has only been one fire sale in franchise history and that was before the current ownership.

 

 

I hate how after the 2005 season it was called a "market correction", both were fire sales. Homerism clouds your train of thought. They called up the entire minor league roster in 2006, and in 1998 they did the same thing, trading all the stars for more and more and more prospects.

 

 

I say what Spike says, with the current ownership, Fire Sales will never end. Its a never ending cycle of trading away players once they ask for the big money. I see us saving some players in the future and handing them big contracts, but this team will never become that team that has the same roster for 5+ years (meaning a core of players).

Yes, I'M the one clouded by homerism.

 

 

How many more times did the 04-05 team have to choke before they were given enough chances? Would another 2 years of September disappointment been OK? Maybe another 4 years of collapses before we're allowed to make a change?

 

Please, if you are going to argue "market correction" vs "fire sale", how about you learn what a fire sale is?

 

LOL U, when you trade everybody on the team other than 2 players, yeah that's a fire sale.

A fire sale is selling things for pennies on the dollar. A fire sale is not getting things for equal value. Just because most inventory is moved does not make it a fire sale.

LOL U, when you trade everybody on the team other than 2 players, yeah that's a fire sale.

 

Nny's explanation really blows your definition out of the water...

 

The point of a "Fire sale" is to get rid of players for the sake of getting rid of them, with little-to-no regard for what you get in return. It's like clear-cutting a forest, quick and dirty...

 

A market correction, a la 2005 is like cutting down a part of a forest, but cultivating the land and getting younger, sturdier more cost-effective trees planted in their place, which makes you think "Wow, this sucks" in the short term... but a little while down the road you're saying "Wow, this is pretty nice"

There has only been one fire sale in franchise history and that was before the current ownership.

 

 

I hate how after the 2005 season it was called a "market correction", both were fire sales. Homerism clouds your train of thought. They called up the entire minor league roster in 2006, and in 1998 they did the same thing, trading all the stars for more and more and more prospects.

 

 

I say what Spike says, with the current ownership, Fire Sales will never end. Its a never ending cycle of trading away players once they ask for the big money. I see us saving some players in the future and handing them big contracts, but this team will never become that team that has the same roster for 5+ years (meaning a core of players).

Yes, I'M the one clouded by homerism.

 

 

How many more times did the 04-05 team have to choke before they were given enough chances? Would another 2 years of September disappointment been OK? Maybe another 4 years of collapses before we're allowed to make a change?

 

Please, if you are going to argue "market correction" vs "fire sale", how about you learn what a fire sale is?

 

LOL U, when you trade everybody on the team other than 2 players, yeah that's a fire sale.

See, basic misunderstanding. That is indeed not what a fire sale is.

There has only been one fire sale in franchise history and that was before the current ownership.

 

 

I hate how after the 2005 season it was called a "market correction", both were fire sales. Homerism clouds your train of thought. They called up the entire minor league roster in 2006, and in 1998 they did the same thing, trading all the stars for more and more and more prospects.

 

 

I say what Spike says, with the current ownership, Fire Sales will never end. Its a never ending cycle of trading away players once they ask for the big money. I see us saving some players in the future and handing them big contracts, but this team will never become that team that has the same roster for 5+ years (meaning a core of players).

Yes, I'M the one clouded by homerism.

 

 

How many more times did the 04-05 team have to choke before they were given enough chances? Would another 2 years of September disappointment been OK? Maybe another 4 years of collapses before we're allowed to make a change?

 

Please, if you are going to argue "market correction" vs "fire sale", how about you learn what a fire sale is?

 

And weren't we already paying large salaries for most of the players we traded, and who weren't exactly living up to that expectation? Lowell is a good example, unfortunately. It wasn't like these guys were suddenly about to make good money, we were already paying them a fair amount, but the team wasn't performing. If ownership had made those moves in two consecutive off-seasons, I doubt people would call it a firesale. Unfortunately, the stars aligned and the front office decided that the best players were available then and the team needed a drastic shakeup. The team was performing below expectations. It is no surprise that McKeon was soon shown the door after, too.

Here's an idea...how about we just call it 'Clearing House' instead of arguing over the definition of 'Fire Sale'. Whether it's called 'Fire Sale' or not is completely irrelevant. We have 'Cleared House' twice in the history of the organization, and the article is saying that we may never have to 'Clear House' again.

 

/end discussion

I don't really care about payroll. The front office seems to have been forced into making SMARTER decisions. And quite frankly, it doesn't make sense to hold onto aging stars when you can trade them for younger, cheaper guys and get the same results.

Whatever the hell you wanna call it, I just hope it doesn't happen again.

Here's an idea...how about we just call it 'Clearing House' instead of arguing over the definition of 'Fire Sale'. Whether it's called 'Fire Sale' or not is completely irrelevant. We have 'Cleared House' twice in the history of the organization, and the article is saying that we may never have to 'Clear House' again.

 

/end discussion

 

 

That's not the end of the discussion, because a Fire Sale and "Market Correction" are two completely different things. The fire sale was a completely negative thing, the "market correction" made the team better.

 

I hope that we don't ever eliminate that possibility, if the team ever gets stale and needs something like this... it should be done... but to shed players for no other reason than to just clear the books with no regard for bringing talent back, then yes, we all know where we all stand on that

Here's an idea...how about we just call it 'Clearing House' instead of arguing over the definition of 'Fire Sale'. Whether it's called 'Fire Sale' or not is completely irrelevant. We have 'Cleared House' twice in the history of the organization, and the article is saying that we may never have to 'Clear House' again.

 

/end discussion

 

 

That's not the end of the discussion, because a Fire Sale and "Market Correction" are two completely different things. The fire sale was a completely negative thing, the "market correction" made the team better.

 

I hope that we don't ever eliminate that possibility, if the team ever gets stale and needs something like this... it should be done... but to shed players for no other reason than to just clear the books with no regard for bringing talent back, then yes, we all know where we all stand on that

 

That is so hindsight biased though. It could just be that the Marlins tried to get talent back after clearing house in 1997, but didn't do a very good job of it. What if some of the players acquired in 2006 hadn't panned out? Would you then call it a firesale? After all, it would then be a 'negative thing'.

Here's an idea...how about we just call it 'Clearing House' instead of arguing over the definition of 'Fire Sale'. Whether it's called 'Fire Sale' or not is completely irrelevant. We have 'Cleared House' twice in the history of the organization, and the article is saying that we may never have to 'Clear House' again.

 

/end discussion

Like PWG said, it's not the end of discussion. They are too extremely different things.

 

After Huizenga's fire sale, it took us 6 seasons to have another winning season.

 

After Loria's market correction, it only took us 3 seasons to have a winning season, and that season was better than the two before the correction.

That is so hindsight biased though. It could just be that the Marlins tried to get talent back after clearing house in 1997, but didn't do a very good job of it. What if some of the players acquired in 2006 hadn't panned out? Would you then call it a firesale? After all, it would then be a 'negative thing'.

 

Ok, you go look at that Bonilla, Sheffield, CJ, Eisenreich and whoever else trade (they were ALL sent to the Dodgers in the same trade), and tell me in good faith that they made a good effort based on the talent we got, AFTER we trade Piazza, arguably the single most valuable offensive force in MLB at the time (Based on position scarcity)...

Here's an idea...how about we just call it 'Clearing House' instead of arguing over the definition of 'Fire Sale'. Whether it's called 'Fire Sale' or not is completely irrelevant. We have 'Cleared House' twice in the history of the organization, and the article is saying that we may never have to 'Clear House' again.

 

/end discussion

Like PWG said, it's not the end of discussion. They are too extremely different things.

 

After Huizenga's fire sale, it took us 6 seasons to have another winning season.

 

After Loria's market correction, it only took us 3 seasons to have a winning season, and that season was better than the two before the correction.

 

Again, hindsight is 20/20. It could just be that Admin Beinfest did a better job in bringing back talent than Dave Dombrowski.