November 14, 200322 yr Here's how it goes. Each side makes their opening argument. One side goes first. Once the other side goes, the first side may post again and defend his argument. You can only go again once the opposing side gets to speak. You've got 48 hours. ONLY the competitors of this specific debate, the judges and myself may post in this thread. At the end the judges will privately vote on a winner. This debate ends 8:00 PM Eastern on 11/15. Topic - Should the Marlins trade Encarnacion? Yes - Big Hugg No - Ramp Either side may begin.
November 14, 200322 yr No. The guy plays flawless defense(0 errors in 1 year+), is still relatively young(27), and just had a career year.... He should be relatively cheap for a good RF at about $5-6mil anyway, so why not keep him? he has shown signs of a breakout year ala Mike Lowell with the doubles... he can steal bases with the best of em ill stop there and wait for a response.... freakin pong
November 14, 200322 yr How can you possibly justify keeping Juan Encarnacion on this team? Our financial situation simply does not allow for us to spend 5-6 million dollars for a mediocre right fielder. And let's get that clear right now, Enc is medicore. He can run, he's got a good glove, but we're still talking about a guy who hit .270 with 19 home runs. There's no way to justify paying that much for that production? Yes, he had RBIs, but who WOULDN'T drive in runs like that in the spot he hit in. All you have to do is look at who wasn't in the lineup in half the post-season. The odds are starting to look like Lee and Lowell with both be back, so where would we put Enc? You can't justify playing Enc over Lee, Lowell, Cabrera, Pierre, or Niner. Hell, even if we LOSE Lee and move Niner to first, we could get Reggie Sanders for half the cost of Encarnacion. The Reggie Sanders who hit 12 more home runs and hit 15 points higher. still stole 15 bases. He's not as good defensively, but the difference in offense is greater than the difference in defense. And then there's Jose Guillen, who's career is pretty similar (except Guillen's career this year is much better) and he's almost guaranteed not to get any more than 4 million. Enc should be traded for bullpen help, as soon as possible. He's too expendable and he's just not worth the money. We could get Enc production for 2-3 million in this year's market. Enc's not a bad player, not by a long shot, but we're not in a situation where we can afford to pay that much for his type of production. He has to go.
November 14, 200322 yr Enc has steadily increased his run production every year over the past couple of seasons, he still had 19hr which really aint that bad he had his best strikeout total ever which means he is becoming more selective in each at bat.... or atleast swinging at better pitches... he is perfect for the ballpark because he hits alot of linedrives and can pull the ball... something our good friend dlee cannot do(or doesnt do alot) and if the money is right, he should be our starting RF...the guy is one of the best defensive OF in the game... hey stats dont lie.... you say Enc should be traded for bully help? why not trade DLee? he is arguably worth more to a team anyway right? and again, his numbers tell a story...a story of a breakout season ala Lowell(sorry for repeating).... sometimes you just go with your gut, and i think the Marlins really need to hold on to this guy
November 14, 200322 yr The main problem I have here is the claim that it's a career year for Enc. He hit more homeruns and had a better average last year. He only drove in 9 more runs in a better spot in the lineup. He scored 3 more runs. Now, sure, I will grant you the double thing. But, you know, he hit 30 in '99 and he didn't exactly bust loose. Let's look at the last 5 years Enc in 99-00-01-02-03 Avg: .255-.289-.242-.271-.270 HR: 19-14-12-24-19 RBI: 74-72-52-85-94 SB: 33-16-9-21-19 2B: 30-25-19-22-37 R: 62-75-52-77-80 SO: 113-90-93-113-82 BB: 14-29-25-46-37 I honestly don't see a guy that's getting SO much better there. I mean, 5 years is 5 years no matter how you slice it and while there's been aberrations, he's pretty much done the same thing again and again. You also point out that his strikeouts are down, but so are his walks. His OBP dropped from last year. 2003 wasn't a career year, it wasn't the sign of better things to come, it was just Juan Encarnacion being the Juan Encarnacion he's always going to be. A solid right fielder at best and he's just not worth the kind of money he'd get in arbitration. We only have so much money and we have to spend it on the guys who have proven they can do it, not some guy who has "potential" despite the fact that he's going into his 6th full season at the ML level and is basically playing at the same level he's played for the majority of that career.
November 14, 200322 yr Enc in 99-00-01-02-03 Avg: .255-.289-.242-.271-.270 HR: 19-14-12-24-19 RBI: 74-72-52-85-94 SB: 33-16-9-21-19 2B: 30-25-19-22-37 R: 62-75-52-77-80 SO: 113-90-93-113-82 BB: 14-29-25-46-37 well for the most part, he improved on every one of those categories from 2002.... no reason to think he cant keep on improving
November 17, 200322 yr Author Big Hugg wins this match. Good work guys. Anyone may now reply to this topic.
November 17, 200322 yr The all mighty Ramp loses in the first round, and Josh advances? Up is down, hell has frozen, and pigs must be flying.
November 17, 200322 yr yea, after reading Big Hugg's replies i knew i was f***ed.... its just no being reasonable to keep Enc no matter how many ways i tried to come up with good job though
November 17, 200322 yr The all mighty Ramp loses in the first round, and Josh advances? Up is down, hell has frozen, and pigs must be flying. i lost in the 1st round last year dude im not a good debater
November 17, 200322 yr The all mighty Ramp loses in the first round, and Josh advances? Up is down, hell has frozen, and pigs must be flying. i lost in the 1st round last year dude im not a good debater Maybe you should retire to judging...
November 17, 200322 yr i think anyone coulda won the debate that Wild Card was in. Juanky did a great job of defending Jack McKeon, but Jim Leyland is such an easy side to take. The stats point in his direction. I mean, I guess good job Wild Card...but I'm proud of people like Ramp and Juanky for takin the tougher side. It makes things interesting.
November 17, 200322 yr the most impressive thing is to take the tough side and make it sound easy. That hasn't happened yet.
November 17, 200322 yr i was going insane looking for reasons why we should keep Enc... i was f***ed... but im pleased it was a close vote
November 17, 200322 yr i was going insane looking for reasons why we should keep Enc... i was f***ed... but im pleased it was a close vote I was looking forward to this one. I figured you were THE best person on this board to debate on keeping Enc. Theres only so much that can be said though.
November 17, 200322 yr hey i want to debate too Too late, we're starting the second round tonight I believe
November 17, 200322 yr i was going insane looking for reasons why we should keep Enc... i was f***ed... but im pleased it was a close vote I was looking forward to this one. I figured you were THE best person on this board to debate on keeping Enc. Theres only so much that can be said though. lol, i would have agreed with you too.... half way down Big Hugg's argument I was like, "crap, im done"..... :lol oh well... i still think Enc will have a HUGE 2004
November 17, 200322 yr oh well... i still think Enc will have a HUGE 2004 As long as he's a fish, I hope your right
November 18, 200322 yr but I'm proud of people like Ramp and Juanky for takin the tougher side. It makes things interesting. They don't choose anything. Admin gives them a random choice. And for the record, I think I could have put together a better arguement with McKeon, not Leyland.
November 18, 200322 yr And for the record, I think I could have put together a better arguement with McKeon, not Leyland. are you kidding me?
November 18, 200322 yr And for the record, I think I could have put together a better arguement with McKeon, not Leyland. are you kidding me? Personally, I think my arguement was very lack-luster with Jim. Very full of statistics and nothing more. I would have been a lot more passionate arguing with McKeon. I could have used both statistics and logic to argue Jack. I would have been much more into it. I know stats pointed in favor of Jim, and it was the easier standpoint. I just believe I could have done better with Trader.
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.