Jump to content

Marlin's Notes From 1st Day of GM Meetings


sgleason02
 Share

Recommended Posts

Rosenthal has a live blog he's been updating all day:

 

 

Marlins' Uggla, Cantu available? -- 12:53 p.m.

 

 

The Marlins have received calls from three teams on second baseman Dan Uggla and two on first baseman Jorge Cantu. Club officials will meet at the general managers' meetings to determine whether trading either or both will be necessary to meet payroll.

 

The early signs are that the Marlins, after trading outfielder Jeremy Hermida, can afford both Uggla and Cantu. But the team still might want to move Uggla to clear second base for Chris Coghlan or Emilio Bonifacio. Hermida no longer fit with the Marlins, who are committing to Cody Ross in right field and Cameron Maybin in center. Left-hander Hunter Jones, the more advanced of the two pitchers the Marlins received from the Red Sox, is viewed by some scouts as a fringe major leaguer. The Marlins see him as a potential seventh-inning man

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we can get an Alderson-type, I'd almost rather trade Uggla and sign an free agent in LF with the money we save from moving him. Or, if the offers for Cantu are reasonable, I'd even rather move him and sign a free-agent 3B, because Cantu will definitely be overpaid next year.

$45 million would make me happy happy happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Publicly saying that we "can afford both" could just be a ploy to help sustain the amount of leverage that we have in trading Uggla. For example, letting the entire world know that we didn't want Hermida for next season left us with no leverage, and netted us two warm bodies. If teams think that we do have the finances to afford Uggla, maybe they're forced to sweeten their deals a bit more to pry him away from us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Publicly saying that we "can afford both" could just be a ploy to help sustain the amount of leverage that we have in trading Uggla. For example, letting the entire world know that we didn't want Hermida for next season left us with no leverage, and netted us two warm bodies. If teams think that we do have the finances to afford Uggla, maybe they're forced to sweeten their deals a bit more to pry him away from us.

 

 

Yeah let's not forget we said publicly going into the off season last year that we might keep all of our arbitration-eligible players

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel Beinfest is not just gonna give these Guys away like he did with Hermida and Hammer

 

I don't think Beinfest gives anyone away. Do trades not work out? Sure. But there is thought behind them. Even if it's just, take what you can get versus DFAville.

 

Hammer had severe injury problems and Olsen had crazy peripherals to suggest he wasn't very good. Bonifacio is a disappointment, but he can still be useful and Smolinski is still a good piece in the minors. Coupled with not paying them $6 million, it's just bad because Hammer went crazy. But again, injury risk. We can't devote any money to that and take risks like other franchises. I don't feel that pissed at this. I wish they would have gotten a better RP prospect (or one that would play), but what can you do.

 

And Hermida was no doubt shopped to everyone. Is is disappointing? Yes. But if your choice is Hunter Jones or DFA, you take what you can get. I wasn't expecting anything much for him. Would you give up a Ryan Tucker or Jose Ceda for him? Hell no. You'd give up secondary arms, which is what happened.

 

Uggla will net something very nice. Cantu hopefully another Leo Nunez. And that's about it.

 

 

--

 

Also, Kiko is a Type B. So we have two compensatory 2nd round picks (N. Johnson the other). That'll help the lower depth a little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel Beinfest is not just gonna give these Guys away like he did with Hermida and Hammer

 

I don't think Beinfest gives anyone away. Do trades not work out? Sure. But there is thought behind them. Even if it's just, take what you can get versus DFAville.

 

Hammer had severe injury problems and Olsen had crazy peripherals to suggest he wasn't very good. Bonifacio is a disappointment, but he can still be useful and Smolinski is still a good piece in the minors. Coupled with not paying them $6 million, it's just bad because Hammer went crazy. But again, injury risk. We can't devote any money to that and take risks like other franchises. I don't feel that pissed at this. I wish they would have gotten a better RP prospect (or one that would play), but what can you do.

 

And Hermida was no doubt shopped to everyone. Is is disappointing? Yes. But if your choice is Hunter Jones or DFA, you take what you can get. I wasn't expecting anything much for him. Would you give up a Ryan Tucker or Jose Ceda for him? Hell no. You'd give up secondary arms, which is what happened.

 

Uggla will net something very nice. Cantu hopefully another Leo Nunez. And that's about it.

 

 

--

 

Also, Kiko is a Type B. So we have two compensatory 2nd round picks (N. Johnson the other). That'll help the lower depth a little.

Lol Cantu for another Leo Nunez.That's not very good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel Beinfest is not just gonna give these Guys away like he did with Hermida and Hammer

 

I don't think Beinfest gives anyone away. Do trades not work out? Sure. But there is thought behind them. Even if it's just, take what you can get versus DFAville.

 

Hammer had severe injury problems and Olsen had crazy peripherals to suggest he wasn't very good. Bonifacio is a disappointment, but he can still be useful and Smolinski is still a good piece in the minors. Coupled with not paying them $6 million, it's just bad because Hammer went crazy. But again, injury risk. We can't devote any money to that and take risks like other franchises. I don't feel that pissed at this. I wish they would have gotten a better RP prospect (or one that would play), but what can you do.

 

And Hermida was no doubt shopped to everyone. Is is disappointing? Yes. But if your choice is Hunter Jones or DFA, you take what you can get. I wasn't expecting anything much for him. Would you give up a Ryan Tucker or Jose Ceda for him? Hell no. You'd give up secondary arms, which is what happened.

 

Uggla will net something very nice. Cantu hopefully another Leo Nunez. And that's about it.

 

 

--

 

Also, Kiko is a Type B. So we have two compensatory 2nd round picks (N. Johnson the other). That'll help the lower depth a little.

Lol Cantu for another Leo Nunez.That's not very good.

Actually I agree with Lou on this one, that would seem to be the type of prospect We would get for Cantu...Doubtful any team would give up an uber prospect for him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol Cantu for another Leo Nunez.That's not very good.

 

I'd be surprised if they get much more than that if they move him.

 

Cantu isn't very good. He's solid/average.

 

I actually have to agree with this, even though I would find it hard to swallow trading him straight up for a reliever. Career stat line of Cantu compared to the career stat line of a certain Colorado 3B who's about to be non-tendered.

 

.278/.323/.456/.780

.289/.354/.457/.811

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Jacobs was below average and worse than Cantu; however, I do think they got a little more than expected for Jacobs, so I kinda have to agree as well, although maybe they could land someone who, while being similar to Nunez in upside and talent, has an extra year of club-control and is either not yet arbitration-eligible or maybe just heading to his first year or arbi after 2010.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm wondering if the "can afford Uggla and Cantu" thing is just Gm speak to gain leverage. It's certainly the smart thing to imply, as we've all discussed the Marlins failure to leverage players because of the fact that teams usually know the Marlins can't afford certain players.

 

I'd certainly be plenty satisfied with keeping both Cantu and Uggla. But I'm not going to convince myself that this is going to be a reality until it actually happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Publicly saying that we "can afford both" could just be a ploy to help sustain the amount of leverage that we have in trading Uggla. For example, letting the entire world know that we didn't want Hermida for next season left us with no leverage, and netted us two warm bodies. If teams think that we do have the finances to afford Uggla, maybe they're forced to sweeten their deals a bit more to pry him away from us.

 

 

I understand where you are coming from, but I disagree. We have been trying to trade Jeremy for quite some time. The problem was that teams wanted us to toss in players we didn't want to give away. Deal breakers. We finally got a team that was willing to give us a couple of pitcher prospects, something we are always high on, and we jumped at it. Maybe jumped too soon because if guys in the fall and winter leagues work out we maybe (just maybe) we could have coupled him with one or two others for a far sweeter package in return. But when you have been shopping a guy as long as we have been shopping Jeremy, then maybe this was the best way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Danny is one of my favorite players but I think it would be in our best interest to trade him now because, while we might be able to afford him now, we won't be able to next year. We're not going to keep him longterm so we might as well let him go now.

 

 

 

IMO, a rather poor way of looking at it. Look at the bigger picture.

 

The wise thing to do would be to listen to what teams have to say and if something jumps out as impossible to turn down, jump at it. If not, then wait to see what happens to some of the guys in fall and winter ball. If they are ready for the jump, then shop a bit more agressively before ST starts up. He's still a power hitter that is getting far better in pitch selection and will undoubtedly garner some interest the closer to March we get. It would be a mistake if we copied last year's formula....Before the meetings even fire up to put all our eggs in one basket on any player being the one that can just take over at a position. That blew up in our faces last year. If we are patient it puts us in the driver's seat. What's the worst that can happen doing it this way? We are "stuck" with a 30 YO guy that will hit 30 dingers for another year? And if season ticket sales continue to climb for the 2011 season (as they should with the new place opening up the following year) then who says he won't be around again? Or at least put us in an even better trading stance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol Cantu for another Leo Nunez.That's not very good.

 

I'd be surprised if they get much more than that if they move him.

 

Cantu isn't very good. He's solid/average.

 

I actually have to agree with this, even though I would find it hard to swallow trading him straight up for a reliever. Career stat line of Cantu compared to the career stat line of a certain Colorado 3B who's about to be non-tendered.

 

.278/.323/.456/.780

.289/.354/.457/.811

 

Yes, Atkins has the better career year, but not for this season. He struggled a lot at Coors. That really says something. I doubt LandShark will be the remedy he needs. I don't really know if he was injured and that was hurting his performance, but I don't think that the Fish would take a gamble on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Publicly saying that we "can afford both" could just be a ploy to help sustain the amount of leverage that we have in trading Uggla. For example, letting the entire world know that we didn't want Hermida for next season left us with no leverage, and netted us two warm bodies. If teams think that we do have the finances to afford Uggla, maybe they're forced to sweeten their deals a bit more to pry him away from us.

 

 

I understand where you are coming from, but I disagree. We have been trying to trade Jeremy for quite some time. The problem was that teams wanted us to toss in players we didn't want to give away. Deal breakers. We finally got a team that was willing to give us a couple of pitcher prospects, something we are always high on, and we jumped at it. Maybe jumped too soon because if guys in the fall and winter leagues work out we maybe (just maybe) we could have coupled him with one or two others for a far sweeter package in return. But when you have been shopping a guy as long as we have been shopping Jeremy, then maybe this was the best way to go.

I kinda disagree with you in the sense that Beinfest made the trade as quick as possible to just get it over and done with not because nothing else could be gotten but it just may have taken more time and been much more complicated of a negotiation. In actuality what Beinfest did was rip off the bandage as quick as possible and moved on. If anything comes of these 2 guys we got back so be it if not than oh well. That is why it is a trade based on addition by subtraction as I indicated in an earlier post. Once the season was over the Top of Beinfest To Do list was to dump Hermida's contract...DONE! The fact we got two lefty relievers back is just an additional bonus. Hermida could have been had for a couple of bats and a few dozen baseballs if it came to that. Hermida had not been dangled out there very long, Beinfest may have entertained trade possibilities but just now it became a need for Beinfest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol Cantu for another Leo Nunez.That's not very good.

 

I'd be surprised if they get much more than that if they move him.

 

Cantu isn't very good. He's solid/average.

 

I actually have to agree with this, even though I would find it hard to swallow trading him straight up for a reliever. Career stat line of Cantu compared to the career stat line of a certain Colorado 3B who's about to be non-tendered.

 

.278/.323/.456/.780

.289/.354/.457/.811

 

Yes, Atkins has the better career year, but not for this season. He struggled a lot at Coors. That really says something. I doubt LandShark will be the remedy he needs. I don't really know if he was injured and that was hurting his performance, but I don't think that the Fish would take a gamble on him.

 

I wasn't suggesting we go out and get Atkins. I was just referencing him as a comparable player to Cantu for the sake of determining his value. The one thing that could make Cantu a bit more valuable is the fact that he's still on the right side of 30, while Atkins is not. That being said, I would probably take Atkins at the hot corner. He put up 20+ homers each of the three seasons previous to this past season. Someone will buy low on him just like we did with Cantu a couple years ago. He may not reach 20 homers playing away from Coors, but Cantu didn't hit with that much power last year, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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...