The other thing Hanley said about Boston was he knew "when" was going to play there...he was penciled in for the 2015 starting lineup...meaning he would have rotted in the minors waiting for them to called him up.

 

BTW, I'm not quoting him exactly, I can go look the quote up but it's close enough. He was referencing the Red Sox penchant at the time to sign "stars" and using their minor leagues as tradebait.

I think it is just growing pains. He is young and he is who the reporters immediately look to for a quote. What he said yesterday was stupid, if he really had an issue, take it up in private, but maybe he just kept on getting pressed on it and replied without a filter on (he did answer in Spanish, so maybe he thought he was just mumbling to himself).

 

I don't like yesterday's incident or the incident with the hair policy, but I don't think Hanley wants out. As much as Hanley is a beast and considered a superstar, maybe he is considered a superstar because he was our only one over the past few years (now JJ is emerging). We all know the cases were a small market superstar, even one with as much talent as Hanley, goes to a larger market, and flounders, or at least, gets lost in the shuffle.

 

Big fish, small pond versus small fish, big pond. He has a chance to lead here, to be the premiere player.

This "argument", which I've now heard twice, makes me want to smash my own skull in with a brick.

 

 

It's not so much an argument as it is something to watch. Two completely unnecessary, childish incidents in a span of 4 months. All I'm saying is that it may be something to keep an eye on. Nobody knows for sure what goes on in Hanley's mind, but "file it away", as Tommy Hutton would say. Either way, its not something that anyone wants to hear from the face of the franchise.

My first reaction to this was that HR handled this badly & should have kept it inside. But on second look it does seem that he let his guard down and, in Spanish, confided his true feelings. HR was trying to express something that has got to be an issue among the players, not just HR. Bet there is no recording of him saying it. I'm sure he felt it was off the record, which is why Fredi blew up at the reporters, asking to hear the tape. Im sure there's a feeling among a few that they're not being protected by Fredi. Also sure we'll never know as its best for all to get beyond it. Curious to see what the 3 beat writers come out with, 'cause we're not hearing it, maybe never will. You can also be sure that other teams have taken notice, wait till we visit the Rays, see if they go after Coughlan knowing there wont be a response.

This sort of 3rd-grade mentality is one of the few things that bothers me about baseball. There are at least 3 problems, which usually feed on each other.

 

1) The very idea that intentionally throwing (at 90 mph+) at anyone is ever appropriate or will result in anything good.

 

2) The idea that "retaliation" for childish behavior is ever appropriate or will result in anything good.

 

3) The whining that inevitably occurs when an actual adult has interposed himself and prevented retaliation and the almost inevitable escalation.

 

Back in the pre-helmet days (like the '60s, which I remember well) "protecting" players might have been at least somewhat appropriate. Ray Chapman was hit in the head in 1920 and died. Conigliaro was very seriously injured (cheekbone/eye) in 1967. Post-helmet, Puckett had his jaw broken in '95. Piazza suffered a concussion in '05. Funny thing is, I don't know of any evidence that any of those instances was the result of an INTENTIONAL HBP.

 

Today, it's not just helmets, but pads all over the place. Nobody has been SERIOUSLY injured in over 40 years.

 

Guys HAVE been SERIOUSLY injured (Encarnacion on-deck) or KILLED (Coolbaugh as a 1B coach) by foul balls, but not by being intentionally thrown at. These are not wars between nation-states where retaliation is not only a good idea but a necessity, baseball is an athletic contest.

 

When are these guys going to figure out that they are ADULTS (jocks, but adults nonetheless) playing a kid's game (and being paid extremely large amounts of money to do so even at entry-level roster spots) and that it would behoove them to act like adults and not 3rd-graders?

 

Meanwhile, Hanley should stop running his mouth in both English and Spanish.

 

I'm not gonna hold my breath.

At home games I almost expect him to be brushed back or knocked down at least once every game. There are going to be some pitchers that take exception to that walk up song of his. Hanley has copped an attitude, and he needs to lose it.

I can't imagine pitchers are really that upset by him choosing an extremely popular song as his walkup song.

I can't imagine pitchers are really that upset by him choosing an extremely popular song as his walkup song.

 

This is my sentiment exactly. I'd also bet he's not even the only person using it these days. Hell, a little research found me someone else who uses the same song.

 

Ever hear of some guy named Miguel Cabrera? He actually has 1 less HBP at this point in the season than he did last year.

This is my sentiment exactly. I'd also bet he's not even the only person using it these days. Hell, a little research found me someone else who uses the same song.

 

Ever hear of some guy named Miguel Cabrera? He actually has 1 less HBP at this point in the season than he did last year.

 

 

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, Rab. I find it to be arrogant, in bad taste, and just asking for trouble. I could care in the least how popular it is at this time. And I didn't even mention HBP (you do know they don't play the opposing players' walk up songs on the road). I talked brush backs and knock downs. In other words, pitchers sending a message. But using Miggy as the second person using that song??? How soon we forget.

I for one find it refreshing how bronco revels in being a stereotype. I like to imagine that everytime hanley comes to the plate he shakes a fist and yells 'turn that damn hippity hop off' and tells the outfielders to get off his lawn. I also hope he eats individually wrapped hard, sugar free candies at the game.

 

Do you think pitchers tried extra hard to throw strikes when he had 'walk It out' as his walk up song? You know, just to spite him?

I'm sure most of you saw HRs interview with Craig yesterday on the pre-game.

 

WOW - was he in a bad mood. Not one smile from a guy living the MLB life. Craig "saved" the interview by commenting afterwards that HR lightened up later (off camera of course).

 

Yes, the language thing factors in, but the body language tells a tale of it's own.

 

I think we've really got to watch his attitude - we cannot afford another Cabrera-type on this team. Fredi is not strong enough to deal with it.

I'm sure most of you saw HRs interview with Craig yesterday on the pre-game.

 

WOW - was he in a bad mood. Not one smile from a guy living the MLB life. Craig "saved" the interview by commenting afterwards that HR lightened up later (off camera of course).

 

Yes, the language thing factors in, but the body language tells a tale of it's own.

 

I think we've really got to watch his attitude - we cannot afford another Cabrera-type on this team. Fredi is not strong enough to deal with it.

 

 

So why not get some one who is?

I'm sure most of you saw HRs interview with Craig yesterday on the pre-game.

 

WOW - was he in a bad mood. Not one smile from a guy living the MLB life. Craig "saved" the interview by commenting afterwards that HR lightened up later (off camera of course).

 

Yes, the language thing factors in, but the body language tells a tale of it's own.

 

I think we've really got to watch his attitude - we cannot afford another Cabrera-type on this team. Fredi is not strong enough to deal with it.

 

 

So why not get some one who is?

 

Because for some reason Loria likes a manager that will kiss his ass (example - Fredi) who is not an overpowering figure of authority and not really a strong character as opposed to a fiery manager that likes to deal with matters himself (example - Girardi).

I'm sure most of you saw HRs interview with Craig yesterday on the pre-game.

 

WOW - was he in a bad mood. Not one smile from a guy living the MLB life. Craig "saved" the interview by commenting afterwards that HR lightened up later (off camera of course).

 

Yes, the language thing factors in, but the body language tells a tale of it's own.

 

I think we've really got to watch his attitude - we cannot afford another Cabrera-type on this team. Fredi is not strong enough to deal with it.

 

It's good to know you know what goes on behind closed doors and seem to know for a fact that Fredi can't deal with Hanley's attitude. By the sounds of it, Fredi did a good job of taking care of things the other day in regards to talking with all parties involved about Hanley's comments after Sunday's game.

I'm sure most of you saw HRs interview with Craig yesterday on the pre-game.

 

WOW - was he in a bad mood. Not one smile from a guy living the MLB life. Craig "saved" the interview by commenting afterwards that HR lightened up later (off camera of course).

 

Yes, the language thing factors in, but the body language tells a tale of it's own.

 

I think we've really got to watch his attitude - we cannot afford another Cabrera-type on this team. Fredi is not strong enough to deal with it.

 

It's good to know you know what goes on behind closed doors and seem to know for a fact that Fredi can't deal with Hanley's attitude. By the sounds of it, Fredi did a good job of taking care of things the other day in regards to talking with all parties involved about Hanley's comments after Sunday's game.

 

The fact is Fredi is not a firey manager. Just recently it seems that he's been taking more charge, but I think that has more to do with him feeling obligated to back up his team. His first couple of years here he seemed really reserved. I don't think Fredi is fit to handle Hanley's attitude, but we'll see.

 

The good thing is I don't think Hanley is going to purposely perform bad on the field just to get traded. He'll still give 100% on the field, but will continue to be a pest in the locker room. I think it's something we should all just keep our eye on and hope he'll get over his arrogance and be a team player again.

I'm sure most of you saw HRs interview with Craig yesterday on the pre-game.

 

WOW - was he in a bad mood. Not one smile from a guy living the MLB life. Craig "saved" the interview by commenting afterwards that HR lightened up later (off camera of course).

 

Yes, the language thing factors in, but the body language tells a tale of it's own.

 

I think we've really got to watch his attitude - we cannot afford another Cabrera-type on this team. Fredi is not strong enough to deal with it.

 

It's good to know you know what goes on behind closed doors and seem to know for a fact that Fredi can't deal with Hanley's attitude. By the sounds of it, Fredi did a good job of taking care of things the other day in regards to talking with all parties involved about Hanley's comments after Sunday's game.

 

The fact is Fredi is not a firey manager. Just recently it seems that he's been taking more charge, but I think that has more to do with him feeling obligated to back up his team. His first couple of years here he seemed really reserved. I don't think Fredi is fit to handle Hanley's attitude, but we'll see.

And I would say that he may not be fiery in front of the reporters or cameras, but he may be more than able to handle himself with his team privately, which to me, matters more. I can't remember when the article came out, but I do remember either in the Herald or the Sun-Sentinel, players on the team disputing the fact that Fredi couldn't get in-your-face when the opportunity presented itself or when the time was appropriate. Just because we as fans don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

This has no impact on the team, whatsoever.

It happened...it's done with.

 

I'd like to see Hanley mature, but really...it's irrelevant.

Wins & losses are relevant & this is really not significant to that.

I for one find it refreshing how bronco revels in being a stereotype. I like to imagine that everytime hanley comes to the plate he shakes a fist and yells 'turn that damn hippity hop off' and tells the outfielders to get off his lawn. I also hope he eats individually wrapped hard, sugar free candies at the game.

 

Do you think pitchers tried extra hard to throw strikes when he had 'walk It out' as his walk up song? You know, just to spite him?

 

 

Wow. Great way of turning that one around. Nice job. Keep up the good comedy routine.

I was hoping you'd find it funny. In these tough economic times, it's good to retain your sense of humor.

At home games I almost expect him to be brushed back or knocked down at least once every game. There are going to be some pitchers that take exception to that walk up song of his. Hanley has copped an attitude, and he needs to lose it.

 

 

I concur! Hurlers should teach that haughty rascal a lesson, POST-HASTE!

At home games I almost expect him to be brushed back or knocked down at least once every game. There are going to be some pitchers that take exception to that walk up song of his. Hanley has copped an attitude, and he needs to lose it.

 

 

I concur! Hurlers should teach that haughty rascal a lesson, POST-HASTE!

 

Ah. Sarcasm. You are missing the point entirely.

That it doesn't matter?

After yesterday's incident with him complaining about the Marlins not retaliating after getting hit and the few previous incidents like the hair policy incident, it's starting to become apparent that Hanley doesn't want to be here anymore.

 

Hanley is starting to realize how good he really is, and you're starting to see that cocky arrogant side that most superstars possess. It seems like he wants to be in the spotlight and he wants more media attention, and since he can't get it from his everyday play b/c he plays for a small market team that hardly draws any fans, he's finding other ways to grab the spotlight.

 

And lets all be honest here, you, me, Hanley, and every single person in the baseball world knows the Marlins completely ass raped Hanley in that 6 years $70 million contract. If he didn't sign, he would have got a significant pay raise through arbitration and then would have signed with the Yankees for $200 million. But hey, back then, Hanley was "young, naive, and stupid." (sound familiar) It seems like now he's starting to realize his true value and is now trying to do whatever he can to piss the Marlins off so they trade him.

 

I hope I'm wrong, but I've been getting this bad vibe from Hanley all season.

 

 

 

OK, I understand that the response to this argument is that Hanley would have to wait until 2011 for free agency and instead he received security last year and for the next six by having the money guaranteed.

 

But Hanley's problem was that he was dealing with the Marlins front office, of course, as we all know, led by utterly brilliant luminaries and supported by the best scouting department in the universe, who will most of the time make out better than him and any other person with whom they make a deal, especially when they're dealing with known commodities and don't have to just be guessing. Beinfest and friends are usually ahead of the curve and don't make decisions until they've explored every possibility and potential problem.

 

Does anyone really think that if the Marlins offered and completed that 6 year $70 million deal with him that it wasn't the best thing possible under the circumstances for the franchise, and likely not the best thing for Hanley? That's why it was so surprising when the deal happened. Hanley basically said you got me and gave into the system. There will always be a tradeoff between getting the money and security earlier and getting it for less. Hanley got a very good deal but when you are THE most versatile and talented baseball player in the world you should. And with all that backloaded money not hitting his bank account until 2012, I'm sure he's regretting it now as he still would have gotten more than enough from arbitration to support his whole family and he would have kept open the possibility of getting something like 10 years $200 million.

 

Right now Hanley probably just feels like most baseball operations heads who have done a deal with the Marlins. But he gets a reminder of his deal every day when he wakes up and goes to the ballpark. It probably gets to his ego now and then. So he writes empty trade demands on his chest and complains about being hit. Meanwhile he's hitting around .330 with an ops around .900.

I'm sure he's regretting it now as he still would have gotten more than enough from arbitration to support his whole family and he would have kept open the possibility of getting something like 10 years $200 million.

 

I doubt very much that he regrets it at all. He made an execellent deal and will still potentially be able to do a later contract for even bigger bucks.

 

The actual deal versus estimated arbitration followed by 10 years @20 million/yr:

 

'09 5.50 6

'10 7.00 8

'11 11.0 12

'12 15.0 20

'13 15.5 20

'14 16.0 20

 

Of course, a dollar tomorrow isn't worth a dollar today and the out-year dollars have to be discounted at a reasonable rate, say 5% per year.

 

Then, there's the matter of guaranteed dollars versus the risk of future disability. While baseball players can't buy insurance against the loss of future potential earnings, baseball teams can buy coverage against actual contractual obligations, and what they pay for it is a good indication of what the "self-insurance" factor is in trying to evaluate signing now versus signing later for more.

 

In 2002, an article in the NYT said:

 

The cost of insuring 70 percent of an individual contract can be more than $1 million a year. The Texas Rangers are paying $9 million in premiums for coverage of the first five years of Alex Rodriguez's 10-year, $252 million contract.

 

http://www.nytimes.c...ear-offers.html

 

Cot's says the amounts due under Rodriguez's 2001 contract (not to be confused with his latest 2007 contract) were $21 million for '01-'04 and $25 million for '05, a total of $109 million for the five years.

 

http://mlbcontracts....8678860040.html

 

The Rangers agreed to pay $9 million to cover $76.3 million of salary (70%) in the event of disability, or 12 cents per salary dollar.

 

Applying a time value of money discount of 5% per year to all amounts and a one-time disability "self-insurance" factor of 12% to the arbitration/future contract scenario results in:

 

'09 5.5 5.3

'10 6.7 6.7

'11 9.9 9.5

'12 12.9 15.1

'13 12.6 14.3

'14 12.4 13.6

 

Total net present value of signed deal: $60 million

Total net present value of possible future deal: $64.5 million

 

A tiny difference, particularly when considering that the $60 mill is totally guaranteed and it's not possible to do anything other than self-insure the risk of disability which could mean that virtually all of the $64.5 million would never even be contracted for, never mind paid, not a risk that most people would be comfortable running.

 

This example also ignores the fact that any $20 million dollar contract would probably be back-loaded, further reducing the value between '09 and '14 and that premium rates for disability loss are probably higher than the rates available in 2001.

 

Were I an agent, I would recommend signing the deal Hanley signed 100 times out of 100. It was fair to both sides and he's now set for life no matter what happens.

wow.

 

but do you think hanley knows or understands that? from time to time he could still be unhappy about being locked in here.