Any word on our new payroll?

 

Does 50 MIL sound reasonable?

Am I the only one who realizes this agreement they made with mlb players union is what they have been saying since the stadium has been finalized?? There is no change at all.

 

 

Not true at all. They've been saying that they would spend league-average money when the ballpark opens, but until then "payroll would reflect revenues". NOW, it sounds like this situation is forcing the Marlins to open their wallet a little bit earlier than expected, as these articles state that the Marlins will now gradually INCREASE payroll until the stadium arrives. They never said before they would do this, only that payroll would reflect revenue.

I think some of you are overreacting to this.

 

A larger payroll coinciding with the expected revenue stream of the new stadium was inevitable, if not previously acknowledged. The 2010 payroll is likely to be the same as was decided by the front office weeks ago.

 

Some of you make it seem likely Loria has all of a sudden decided to open his wallet. This isn't the case.

I think some of you are overreacting to this.

 

A larger payroll coinciding with the expected revenue stream of the new stadium was inevitable, if not previously acknowledged. The 2010 payroll is likely to be the same as was decided by the front office weeks ago.

 

Some of you make it seem likely Loria has all of a sudden decided to open his wallet. This isn't the case.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking-news/story/1421416.html

 

 

check out what Creg Cote wrote:

 

 

I think besides keeping Uggla this season (maybe full season) and now there is better chance of giving JJ his four year thats all thats going to come from this

Wow. While that doesn't make us look good, I'm not unhappy to see it. What's the chance that they do spend more of the RS money on the club? And did MLB forget about Oakland and Pittsburgh? The Pirates are way cheaper than we are.

 

No they are not, they are a crappy organization but not cheaper than Loria's Marlins

Any word on our new payroll?

 

Does 50 MIL sound reasonable?

 

I doubt it will go much past 45 million, all depends on Uggla's status

I never realized it until after reading this article...

 

The Marlins highest FA signing in the past four years has been 2 Million dollars on Luis Gonzalez?!?!?! How depressing!!!

 

 

Were you surprised?

This sounds like it could only be a good thing... or it could be worse and we could just pay our current players more money.

hoenstly i wouldnt mind this leading to signing JJ, keeping Uggla, or maybe bringing Donnely or Calero back which makes no sense why we wont considering they wont be making much at all especially Donnelly. Calero will make about 2 million.

I wouldn't be shocked if part of this agreement prohibits the Marlins from dumping Uggla for at least this season. It wouldn't make sense for them to make this huge public statement, then turn around a month later and trade Uggla for some A-ballers.

I think besides keeping Uggla this season (maybe full season) and now there is better chance of giving JJ his four year thats all thats going to come from this

 

Which is enormous.

 

Getting Josh Johnson signed and having a projected payroll in the mid 40's instead of 38ish, that retains Uggla, Anibal, and Pinto instead of three club controlled what-ifs in their place, is such an enormous win it's not even funny.

Baseball needs to get a salary cap with a salary floor and get rid of revenue sharing completely.

 

 

You've just suggested things that will work completely against one another and will only serve to make things worse than they are. This is a terrible post.

 

Which isn't surprising, given the source.

The most significant thing to come from this? It greatly reduces the chance that Bonifacio will be a starter in 2010. Uggla seems more likely to remain with us at 2B and Coghlan in LF.

The most significant thing to come from this? It greatly reduces the chance that Bonifacio will be a starter in 2010. Uggla seems more likely to remain with us at 2B and Coghlan in LF.

 

 

:notworthy

It will be interesting to see if this has any effect on the Marlins keeping Dan Uggla or not. My guess is it might.

 

 

I agree. I'm sure they would have jumped at the chance to unload Danny, even if they didn't get the return for him they wanted, had they not been in negotiations w/ both MLB and the MLBPA. It wouldn't have helped the MArlins' case that they're not pocketing the RS funds and are reinvesting it into the team had they traded their second-highest paid player, nor will it now that an agreement has been reached. I think it's now far more likely we see Cantu traded for BP help.

 

So, basically, here are the people you are calling liars. The Marlins FO, all talking heads on the tube, all teams the Marlins have been in negotiations with, and all local media outlets. They are the ones saying the Marlins will trade Uggla, but only if they get what they want in return and not for a bag of new baseballs and a coke.

 

That about right?

Theres a difference between being reckless in the FA market and spending to keep players you have developed yourself.

 

There have been many instances in this regard. Not even attempting, as far as I know, to buy out Cabrera's arby and a few FA years. There was no excuse for that.

 

 

You mean besides the fact he was a club house cancer, couldn't play 3B worth a darn, and obviously wanted to go where the $$$ was?

I wouldn't be shocked if part of this agreement prohibits the Marlins from dumping Uggla for at least this season. It wouldn't make sense for them to make this huge public statement, then turn around a month later and trade Uggla for some A-ballers.

 

 

A statement that makes absolutely no sense. If this were the case Uggla would have been gone long ago. Or are you saying no team in baseball has yet to offer the Marlins some A-ballers for Uggla because he is so undervalued by all of MLB?

It will be interesting to see if this has any effect on the Marlins keeping Dan Uggla or not. My guess is it might.

 

 

I agree. I'm sure they would have jumped at the chance to unload Danny, even if they didn't get the return for him they wanted, had they not been in negotiations w/ both MLB and the MLBPA. It wouldn't have helped the MArlins' case that they're not pocketing the RS funds and are reinvesting it into the team had they traded their second-highest paid player, nor will it now that an agreement has been reached. I think it's now far more likely we see Cantu traded for BP help.

 

So, basically, here are the people you are calling liars. The Marlins FO, all talking heads on the tube, all teams the Marlins have been in negotiations with, and all local media outlets. They are the ones saying the Marlins will trade Uggla, but only if they get what they want in return and not for a bag of new baseballs and a coke.

 

That about right?

 

Dude, you need to calm down. I didn't call anyone a liar. The simple truth is Uggs didn't, and still doesn't, fit into their long-term plans at 2B. I don't think nayone will disagree with that statement, because if he had, he would have been locked up long-term like Hanley. If you have a player you don't want to keep longterm, and he's getting progressively more expensive each year through arbitration, his value to your team (and other teams) is generally going to decrease each year because of approaching Free Agency.

 

Who knows what we would have (or still might) receive in a trade for Danny, but it was clear other teams were not going to give us their top talent in return for him, and the market for Danny shrunk by about half when the Giants signed Uribe.

I believe the Uribe signing had no impact whatsoever on any supposed Marlins-Giants negotiations. It may have been a result of it. I The report is that most teams were actually expecting a release of Uggla and/or that he could be had at bargain-basement price. The assumption was that the Marlins were posturing when Beinfest actually expressed demand of face value for Uggla. The general view remains if teams wait long enough that would force Beinfest's hand . I am sure the Giants would love to get Uggla still but for now they wait sitting on their hands. These recent developments actually might entice Beinfest to keep Uggla at least for another season maybe actually transition him to 3rd base increasing Uggla's market value even more. At least that would be a most logical course of action

One great thing is that now we're not in that same position we always are, where the other teams just say "oh, we'll wait their demands out, they're not in a position to keep Player X" and we end up giving up too much. Now our FO can say "Well, we actually need to spend more money, so we don't need to get rid of Player X (in this case Uggla) if we don't really want to".

In reading Dave Hyde's article on the Sun-Sentinel website it seems like Bud Selig and several owners have been wanting to call the Marlins out on this for quite some time, but they didn't want to affect the chances of the Marlins getting the new stadium. I guess if MLB called out Loria for pocketing millions a year in revenue sharing funds before the stadium deal was signed we wouldn't have a stadium deal. I've seen it speculated that Loria was profiting $30 million plus a year, but I have no clue if that is accurate...

Reading past "by Dave Hyde" is almost always a mistake.

Dude, you need to calm down. I didn't call anyone a liar. The simple truth is Uggs didn't, and still doesn't, fit into their long-term plans at 2B. I don't think nayone will disagree with that statement, because if he had, he would have been locked up long-term like Hanley. If you have a player you don't want to keep longterm, and he's getting progressively more expensive each year through arbitration, his value to your team (and other teams) is generally going to decrease each year because of approaching Free Agency.

 

Who knows what we would have (or still might) receive in a trade for Danny, but it was clear other teams were not going to give us their top talent in return for him, and the market for Danny shrunk by about half when the Giants signed Uribe.

 

Don't even bother with that dude.

 

However, I think it's more of the combination of Uribe/DeRosa/Huff which makes them not an attractive trade candidate. And for Uggla's future value, I think next year he'll be very valuable for two reasons. FIrst, he will be a one and done so a team would not have to give him any longterm salary even if his price is $10-11 million just for 2011. Two, he will easily be a Type A free agent and get a contract so as long as the team offers arbitration, they would net two first round picks. The Marlins can use that leverage significantly and get a package pretty quickly with the receiving team knowing they can simply recoup their prospects in the next draft. Seattle did this with Cliff Lee this offseason. This goes even further if the Marlins would take at least one significant piece for Uggla that's in A ball making depth even less for an issue for the receiving team.

 

I mean, this is all good things with keeping him now. I'm pretty surprised the trade market fell the way it did with everyone going with 'maybe ok' alternatives (Huff, Kotchman, Atkins, etc), but who knows what the landscpae will look like in July, or next offseason.

Lou brings up a point not previously brought up...maybe they will finally start offering arby to players to get compensatory picks in the draft. It has been just shameful the last few years.