Posted October 29, 201014 yr From Joe Capozzi via MLBTR: Does Florida Marlins slugger Dan Uggla deserve a Hanley Ramirez contract? That’s the question apparently being debated by the Marlins and Uggla’s agent in their negotiations for a multi-year contract. In the latest development, there are indications the Marlins may be willing to increase their initial three-year offer by adding a fourth year. Both sides still remain far apart. Uggla reportedly wants a five-year contract worth at least $50 million. Florida’s initial three-year offer was for a total of $24 million. The Marlins are not commenting (per their policy). And Terry Bross, Uggla’s representative from Gaylord Sports Management, would say only that he has had discussions with the Marlins this week and there has been “movement� in the negotiations. Bross wouldn’t elaborate but said he was “hopeful� that Uggla would get the deal he wants from the Marlins. That “movement� could be a reference to the Marlins being open to adding a fourth year. But even that might not be enough. There’s no indication that Uggla will reduce his demand for a deal anything less than five years. The Marlins might be reluctant to offer that many years because Uggla will turn 31 on March 11. Alfonso Soriano was 31 in 2007 when the Cubs signed him to an eight-year extension worth $136 million. Uggla hasn’t performed like a player past his prime. He had his best offensive season in 2010, setting personal highs by hitting .287 with 33 home runs, 105 RBI, and 100 runs scored. He became the first second baseman in baseball history to post four straight 30-homer seasons. But he also made a career-high 18 errors, raising questions about whether he’ll ever be a solid defensive player. Uggla made $7.8 million in 2010 and he’s about to enter his last year of arbitration. If the Marlins don’t reach a deal in the next two weeks, they could listen to trade offers for Uggla at the general managers’ meetings in Orlando Nov. 16-17. That way, they Marlins could fully explore the trade market for him this winter rather than pay him a one-year contract of $10 million in 2011, his final year before free agency. If they really want to keep Uggla, it’s looking like the Marlins will ultimately have to decide if he’s worthy of a deal similar to the one they gave Ramirez in May 2008 — a six-year, $70 million extension. On Tuesday, Marlins president David Samson said: “We definitely are having discussions and it’s our hope that a deal gets done with Dan… We are being aggressive, in my opinion, in our approach and we’ll see what happens.’’ But if the Marlins don’t sign Uggla to a long-term deal, Samson would guarantee that the slugger would be in the opening day lineup in April. “We’ll cross that bridge when we get to it,’’ he said, “but right now we are still hopeful of completing negotiations.’
October 29, 201014 yr 5 years..50 mill? Goodbye Uggla...come on Danny boy..compromise! :crossfingers I'm hoping they came make a deal
October 29, 201014 yr I think Uggla will continue to ask for the 5 years because I don't believe he wants to sign with the Marlins. Cody Ross is a good buddy of his, and after watching the success Cody and the Giants have had this postseason, I think he'll want to go to SF. Obviously the Marlins don't have to trade him to SF if he doesn't want to commit long-term, but I believe the Marlins will be interested in such a deal. I just envision this continuing, and the Marlins trading him to SF for Dan Runzler + another prospect. Runzler is the legit left-handed bullpen arm this organization has been seeking for awhile (he was actually one of the names mentioned when Cantu was rumored to go to SF).
October 29, 201014 yr Yeah...I am in no way a fan of trading a guy who puts up 30 home runs and 90+ RBI's every season for a 30 inning a season reliever. Even if we can't get a deal done, unless I'm blown away by an offer (Hello Bumgarner), then I'm content with letting him walk away and receive the first round picks in compensation. Anyway, I think he'll compromise, just like all the others did. He'll take his 4 years, $43 million. Uggla will be happy, the Marlins will be happy, and we'll all live happily ever after.
October 29, 201014 yr Yeah...I am in no way a fan of trading a guy who puts up 30 home runs and 90+ RBI's every season for a 30 inning a season reliever. Even if we can't get a deal done, unless I'm blown away by an offer (Hello Bumgarner), then I'm content with letting him walk away and receive the first round picks in compensation. Anyway, I think he'll compromise, just like all the others did. He'll take his 4 years, $43 million. Uggla will be happy, the Marlins will be happy, and we'll all live happily ever after. 1. It's Dan Uggla; not Hanley Ramirez or Mike Stanton. We're not getting Bumgarner. 2. Runzler isn't a "30 inning a season reliever." He's not a lefty specialist; he's a power lefty with very good K rates/great GB rates, who can get both lefties and righties out, out of the bullpen. He's a Jonny Venters type lefty; not a Will Ohman type lefty. Runzler + another prospect is just fine for Uggla.
October 29, 201014 yr Uggla and his agent aren't dumb. They're coming out of Uggla's best season so far. No way he doesn't want to ink a deal right now. Being with his bff Cody isn't worth the risk of having a down year next year.
October 29, 201014 yr You might be happy, but myself and a lot of the fanbase would be pissed with a lefty reliever for one of the most consistent and productive contributors on the team the last 5 years. You trade guys like Rick VandenHurk, Gaby Hernandez, and if worst comes to worst a Gaby Sanchez for a reliever (that's a non closer), not a Dan Uggla. It's just that simple.
October 29, 201014 yr I think 4/42 will get it done personally. was thinking the exact same thing. give him 4 years and 40 million with a mutual or player option for a 5th year. A player option is exactly like an extra year. i also agreed with frisaro that if it was a 3 year deal, 36 million would work.
October 29, 201014 yr You might be happy, but myself and a lot of the fanbase would be pissed with a lefty reliever for one of the most consistent and productive contributors on the team the last 5 years. You trade guys like Rick VandenHurk, Gaby Hernandez, and if worst comes to worst a Gaby Sanchez for a reliever (that's a non closer), not a Dan Uggla. It's just that simple. First of all, the opinions of a bandwagon fanbase are completely irrelevant. The real fans will support the team regardless, and the bandwagon fans will come out as long as the team wins. In order to win, you make moves that believe help the ballclub, regardless of the player you are trading. Very few players in the big leagues reach irreplaceable status, and Dan Uggla is not one of them. I'm sure the fanbase was disheartened when the likes of Josh Beckett, Juan Pierre, etc. were traded, yet those worked out very well for the organization. The front office has to do what's best to put a winning product on the field, with the limited resources it has. Potential CHEAP, STUD RELIEVERS are ALWAYS VALUABLE. Especially when the organization is in need of such things. The Marlins bullpen sucks, and the pitching depth (specifically from the left side) pretty much sucks, throughout the organization. You're overrating Uggla's trade value, if you think it even comes close to getting Madison Bumgarner. As a matter of fact, one of the main reasons to get excited about him is the fact that his production comes from the 2B position. However, it's well-known that Uggla is a below average 2B defensively (has been his whole career), who will likely have to switch positions one day. Other teams know this fact, as well. At the end of the day, we're not getting a potential ace (like Bumgarner) for Dan Uggla.
October 30, 201014 yr By the way, Dan Uggla isn't worth 5 years. That's way too many years for a guy who's defense might end up being "Adam Dunn bad" by the time he reaches his mid-30's. (only worse, considering he doesn't put up Adam Dunn offensive #'s)
October 30, 201014 yr I never said Bumgarner was his value. I said that I'd only trade Uggla if I was blown away by an offer (or a team offering more than his value). Uggla's trade value is better than a middle reliever however. Given his consistent production, if we were hypothetically trading him, I would settle for nothing less than a proven #2 starter or an up and coming starter of the nature of Jeremy Hellickson. Since neither of those are going to happen, I'm giving saying we'll either keep him long term or take the draft picks.
October 30, 201014 yr I never said Bumgarner was his value. I said that I'd only trade Uggla if I was blown away by an offer (or a team offering more than his value). Uggla's trade value is better than a middle reliever however. Given his consistent production, if we were hypothetically trading him, I would settle for nothing less than a proven #2 starter or an up and coming starter of the nature of Jeremy Hellickson. Since neither of those are going to happen, I'm giving saying we'll either keep him long term or take the draft picks. Give me a 25 year old left-handed reliever who's ready to pitch at this level + another prospect over draft picks who are likely to become busts (judging by this organization's history with 1st round picks). If Uggla is stubborn about a 5 year deal, and the Marlins are reluctant to give him that, they must trade him. The MLB draft isn't like the NBA draft; it's a complete crapshoot.
October 30, 201014 yr I doubt that Uggla will do better next season than he did this year. Right now, his value is the highest it has ever been. He and his agent know that. The Marlins and the rest of the teams know that. Baring any trades, Gaby Sanchez is set at 1B and Morrison at LF. That makes Coghlan a prime second base candidate if Uggla does not sign. If the Marlins can't get Uggla to agree on a contract, we will certainly get a lot more for him this time than we would have gotten for him last off season. So basically, the Marlins are in a win-win situation. If we sign him we get a slugging second baseman and if we trade him we are sure to get good value in return. Uggla is also in a very good position. He will certainly get a very good contract wherever he plays. Soon we will find out if he wants to stay here where he apparently feels comfortable (although it will mean putting up with Hanley being Hanley) or be traded to the team that gives the Marlins the best deal, a team he may or may not like.
October 30, 201014 yr lmao @ Dan Runzler Seriously Erick, I am not trying to sound like a d*** here, you seem to be a really intelligent poster and very knowlegable about the game and the organization, but this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. I don't know what's worse....trading Dan Uggla for Dan Runzler or trading Mike Stanton for Ozzie Guillen. You don't trade a guy who puts up that kind of production for an unproven middle reliever. You just don't. He's way way waaay more valuable than that,,,
October 30, 201014 yr I doubt that Uggla will do better next season than he did this year. Right now, his value is the highest it has ever been. He and his agent know that. The Marlins and the rest of the teams know that. I've never hear that before. Except for every year.
October 30, 201014 yr I doubt that Uggla will do better next season than he did this year. Right now, his value is the highest it has ever been. He and his agent know that. The Marlins and the rest of the teams know that. I've never hear that before. Except for every year. Seriously. Every year the same thing was said. Yet every year he improves. Eventually, it will be correct.
October 30, 201014 yr I think four years should be a maximum. Uggla will be 31 this season and age 35 isn't a point where you want to be paying a premium at the tail end of a contract.
October 31, 201014 yr lmao @ Dan Runzler Seriously Erick, I am not trying to sound like a d*** here, you seem to be a really intelligent poster and very knowlegable about the game and the organization, but this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. I don't know what's worse....trading Dan Uggla for Dan Runzler or trading Mike Stanton for Ozzie Guillen. You don't trade a guy who puts up that kind of production for an unproven middle reliever. You just don't. He's way way waaay more valuable than that,,, Well, he's not "unproven." Here's an article on his impressive minor league track record: http://bleacherrepor...arm-dan-runzler He also threw 32.2 innings in the big leagues this year. If not for the fact that he dislocated his knee while hitting, Runzler would be on the Giants postseason roster, instead of Javier Lopez. Runzler's major league stats this year were right on with what he's proven in the minor leagues. He's good, and he's good against both lefties and righties (while being better against lefties, which is a plus). 2010 splits v. lefties: 10.22 K/9, 2.8 K/BB, 0.00 HR/9, 2.27 FIP, 3.26 xFIP v. righties: 10.18 K/9, 1.53 K/BB, 0.44 HR/9, 3.67 FIP, 3.90 xFIP He has the potential to be pretty dominant, and really has the potential to be a closer, if all goes well. He's not just some "filler middle reliever because we need a bullpen." He's a valuable asset who would fill an organizational need. I also never said Uggla STRAIGHT UP for Runzler. I said Uggla for Runzler + another prospect. It sounds a whole lot more realistic than a Bumgarner/Hellickson return (I guarantee that doesn't happen; if that's what everyone's hoping for, then everyone better hope Uggla lowers his demands and signs a 3-4 year deal here). I mean, if it's so laughable, I assume you can tell us what you believe Uggla is truly worth? I'm assuming people just don't know who Runzler is if you're comparing this to an Ozzie Guillen-Mike Stanton trade. (which btw, Stanton's value>>>Uggla's value)
October 31, 201014 yr I honestly don't know what the big deal is all about. I'm still stuck on defense, defense, defense. The FO wants defense and pitching. We don't really have much of that right now. Our pitching is so-so and the defense hasn't improved much. Yes, you can spit out the numbers and they might show something different but the FO wants pitching and defense. At some point the errors need to come down. The player improves or doesn't. I saw improvement in Hanley in 2009. Not so much in 2010. Was it the manager? Higher expectations and he was pressing to much? I don't know but I know they will give him another year. Uggla on the other hand, has maintained his offense but his defense is average. It's impressive to see that power but I have to wonder if now is the time to sell high on him. He's getting up there in age and we could move in CC at that position and not waste time having him learn 3rd base when he's a second baseman. I would maximize Uggla's value if the contract issue is at all a problem. Relievers or not, he will command at least one ready to play player.
October 31, 201014 yr I honestly don't know what the big deal is all about. I'm still stuck on defense, defense, defense. The FO wants defense and pitching. We don't really have much of that right now. Our pitching is so-so and the defense hasn't improved much. Yes, you can spit out the numbers and they might show something different but the FO wants pitching and defense. At some point the errors need to come down. The player improves or doesn't. I saw improvement in Hanley in 2009. Not so much in 2010. Was it the manager? Higher expectations and he was pressing to much? I don't know but I know they will give him another year. Uggla on the other hand, has maintained his offense but his defense is average. It's impressive to see that power but I have to wonder if now is the time to sell high on him. He's getting up there in age and we could move in CC at that position and not waste time having him learn 3rd base when he's a second baseman. I would maximize Uggla's value if the contract issue is at all a problem. Relievers or not, he will command at least one ready to play player. No to all questions. It was an increase in "throwing" errors. That is fixable.
October 31, 201014 yr After the last few trades do you really trust Beinfest's judgement in getting value for Uggla ? I know I don't, and we can't afford to get nothing in return like in the Cabrera trade. Missing on that trade probably cost us a playoff spot the last two years. We get even a 10 or 11 game winner out of Miller and we would have been right there last two years.
