heat84 Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 For the Posey incident? Or is it just a coincidence that the Marlins fell off a cliff after that happened? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordMagnus Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Coincidence mostly. Guys like Greg Dobbs have come back to Earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Love Me Some Fish Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 There is no God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeroFishOne Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 There is no God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyggyMarlin Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 For the Posey incident? Or is it just a coincidence that the Marlins fell off a cliff after that happened? The flaws in Loria/Beinfest's way of building a team became apparent... On a different note: Compare the 2003 team versus this year's team... 2003 - Young team but they each had MORE than 2 years of MLB experience (Lowell, Castillo, D. Lee, Sea Bass, Juan P., Encarnacion)... Brought up kids Dontrelle and Cabs to mix in with experienced players 2011 - Young team with LESS than 2 years of experience ( Stanton, Gaby, Logan, Cogz would just be over 2 years if he wasn't injured last year)...and they are expected to carry the load... Bringing up more kids like Matt D. would only add to more inexperience at the MLB level 2003 - Team went out and got a big name free agent, who could still contribute in Pudge, a master of throwing out baserunners and hitting behind the runner to right field 2011 - Team got an expensive washed-up pitcher (Vazquez) and a mediocre catcher living off of one ASG appearance (Buck) 2003 - The Bench: Redmond, Banks, Andy Fox, Mordecai, Hollandsworth, Lenny Harris 2011 - The Bench: Boner, The professional Wes Helms, Dobbs, Hayes (underused compared to so-so Buck), Cousins.... This is a weaker bench in comparison, yet we have to play a bunch of these guys every day... total lack of depth There are more comparisons I am sure... but it really brings out what everyone has been saying... lack of experienced players to help the kids and reclamation projects that don't work... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enterthemadness Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 There is a God, the Marlins will get hot again, rather it's too late or not in season, and The Heat will f***ing lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloridaMarlinsForever Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 For the Posey incident? Or is it just a coincidence that the Marlins fell off a cliff after that happened? Did You ever think, that maybe, just maybe, After the posey freaking incident that SOMEONE told the Marlins Not to do well or else!....hmmmm Does San Fran Have a Mafiia???? You what what im trying to get at.... :whistle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Love Me Some Fish Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I'm sure Mike Redman could still hit .280 off the bench. Bring him out of retirement! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanofthefish Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Personally I blame Rab and his "Two months down, Fish on pace for 95 wins" thread :thumbup Seriously though, the old saying is Every team wins fifty, every team loses fifty and its what they do with the rest, always helps me through a looong season, I doubt God has time to control a baseball teams fortunes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyggyMarlin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Personally I blame Rab and his "Two months down, Fish on pace for 95 wins" thread :thumbup Seriously though, the old saying is Every team wins fifty, every team loses fifty and its what they do with the rest, always helps me through a looong season, I doubt God has time to control a baseball teams fortunes. He would if it meant pissing me off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heat84 Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 I'm an atheist myself, so I use the term god loosely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbob1313 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 2003 - Team went out and got a big name free agent, who could still contribute in Pudge, a master of throwing out baserunners and hitting behind the runner to right field 2011 - Team got an expensive washed-up pitcher (Vazquez) and a mediocre catcher living off of one ASG appearance (Buck) Getting a catcher coming off 3 injury riddled seasons that nobody in the league wanted > Getting a pitcher coming off one bad season that was offered multiple two years contracts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAnomaly Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Looks like we can expect to see Hanley hitting leadoff right when he comes back. http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/06/12/2263498/ramirez-likely-to-hit-leadoff.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheU Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 We pissed SOMEBODY off... I just dont know who! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyggyMarlin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 2003 - Team went out and got a big name free agent, who could still contribute in Pudge, a master of throwing out baserunners and hitting behind the runner to right field 2011 - Team got an expensive washed-up pitcher (Vazquez) and a mediocre catcher living off of one ASG appearance (Buck) Getting a catcher coming off 3 injury riddled seasons that nobody in the league wanted > Getting a pitcher coming off one bad season that was offered multiple two years contracts? Pudge: 2001 - .308 avg 25 HRs, 2002 - .314 avg 19 HRs (they aren't among his best years of 1999 and 2000)...but not exactly hurting there with the productivity either... I doubt teams passed on him because of his skill, it was probably the $10M a year that was the sticking point for some teams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyWheelHouse Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 this team has just evened out and has become what they really are. no surprise. we started off with a bang but in the end we were overachieving. all things must even out in the end Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enterthemadness Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 this team has just evened out and has become what they really are. no surprise. we started off with a bang but in the end we were overachieving. all things must even out in the end BS, BS, followed by more BS. With a side of bs. Marlins are still in it, just need to win more and get Hanley back and then JJ. And maybe have Loria make a ''good'' move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyWheelHouse Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 this team has just evened out and has become what they really are. no surprise. we started off with a bang but in the end we were overachieving. all things must even out in the end BS, BS, followed by more BS. With a side of bs. Marlins are still in it, just need to win more and get Hanley back and then JJ. And maybe have Loria make a ''good'' move. i never said the marlins weren't in it or they can't be. I'm merely saying they aren't that great of a team they started out being. We're now seeing what time is doing to this team and we can see they can't hold up for an entire season playing they way they were. I will be happy when JJ returns. But hanley hasn't proved he can even help this team when things were going good. So i won't hold my breath waiting for him to return. he needs to prove he can still help this team Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbob1313 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Pudge: 2001 - .308 avg 25 HRs, 2002 - .314 avg 19 HRs (they aren't among his best years of 1999 and 2000)...but not exactly hurting there with the productivity either... I doubt teams passed on him because of his skill, it was probably the $10M a year that was the sticking point for some teams It was, 100%, based on the perception that he was no longer capable of being a full time starting catcher, and yet still wanted to be paid like a full time starting catcher. He played 103 games on average the three seasons prior. To portray that move, retroactively, as some sort of slam dunk, is to play the result, just like you are doing with Vazquez. There was a lot more interest in Vazquez this offseason than there was in Pudge that year, and a few teams were willing to make an even bigger mistake than the Marlins did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirspud Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Pudge: 2001 - .308 avg 25 HRs, 2002 - .314 avg 19 HRs (they aren't among his best years of 1999 and 2000)...but not exactly hurting there with the productivity either... I doubt teams passed on him because of his skill, it was probably the $10M a year that was the sticking point for some teams It was, 100%, based on the perception that he was no longer capable of being a full time starting catcher, and yet still wanted to be paid like a full time starting catcher. He played 103 games on average the three seasons prior. To portray that move, retroactively, as some sort of slam dunk, is to play the result, just like you are doing with Vazquez. There was a lot more interest in Vazquez this offseason than there was in Pudge that year, and a few teams were willing to make an even bigger mistake than the Marlins did. The reality is that while Pudge may not have been an incredibly hot commodity, he was still one of the few guys in the league capable of providing standout offensive production along with GG defense at a defensive position. While starting pitching is always a got commodity, it's not as if Vazquez is one of just a handful of starters out there who could potentially provide it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enterthemadness Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 The Marlins are 3-13 in their last 16 not because of Volstad, Vazquez, and the BP, but because of the offense choking their chicken instead of hitting with runners on base, esp on 2nd and 3rd. Yeah, I said it....choking....their....chicken.:thumbdown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbob1313 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Pudge: 2001 - .308 avg 25 HRs, 2002 - .314 avg 19 HRs (they aren't among his best years of 1999 and 2000)...but not exactly hurting there with the productivity either... I doubt teams passed on him because of his skill, it was probably the $10M a year that was the sticking point for some teams It was, 100%, based on the perception that he was no longer capable of being a full time starting catcher, and yet still wanted to be paid like a full time starting catcher. He played 103 games on average the three seasons prior. To portray that move, retroactively, as some sort of slam dunk, is to play the result, just like you are doing with Vazquez. There was a lot more interest in Vazquez this offseason than there was in Pudge that year, and a few teams were willing to make an even bigger mistake than the Marlins did. The reality is that while Pudge may not have been an incredibly hot commodity, he was still one of the few guys in the league capable of providing standout offensive production along with GG defense at a defensive position. While starting pitching is always a got commodity, it's not as if Vazquez is one of just a handful of starters out there who could potentially provide it. Vazquez was perceived to be one of the top pitchers on the market beyond Cliff Lee. He was offered a two year contract by at least two team's and was likely offered more than we gave him by a few teams. No, he was not considered to be one of the top pitchers in baseball, but the market for him, nonetheless, was stronger than the market for pudge. And ive never said anything about pudge's production at the time. The concern was that he was no longer capable of staying healthy over the course of a season. He proved everyone wrong, and that's great, and it worked out well for us, but that move was just as big a question mark as Javy; remember, there weren't that many people who were against the Javy signing. Sometimes these one year veteran bounceback deals work out and sometimes they don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbob1313 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Pudge: 2001 - .308 avg 25 HRs, 2002 - .314 avg 19 HRs (they aren't among his best years of 1999 and 2000)...but not exactly hurting there with the productivity either... I doubt teams passed on him because of his skill, it was probably the $10M a year that was the sticking point for some teams It was, 100%, based on the perception that he was no longer capable of being a full time starting catcher, and yet still wanted to be paid like a full time starting catcher. He played 103 games on average the three seasons prior. To portray that move, retroactively, as some sort of slam dunk, is to play the result, just like you are doing with Vazquez. There was a lot more interest in Vazquez this offseason than there was in Pudge that year, and a few teams were willing to make an even bigger mistake than the Marlins did. The reality is that while Pudge may not have been an incredibly hot commodity, he was still one of the few guys in the league capable of providing standout offensive production along with GG defense at a defensive position. While starting pitching is always a got commodity, it's not as if Vazquez is one of just a handful of starters out there who could potentially provide it. Vazquez was perceived to be one of the top pitchers on the market beyond Cliff Lee. He was offered a two year contract by at least two team's and was likely offered more than we gave him by a few teams. No, he was not considered to be one of the top pitchers in baseball, but the market for him, nonetheless, was stronger than the market for pudge. And ive never said anything about pudge's production at the time. The concern was that he was no longer capable of staying healthy over the course of a season. He proved everyone wrong, and that's great, and it worked out well for us, but that move was just as big a question mark as Javy; remember, there weren't that many people who were against the Javy signing. Sometimes these one year veteran bounceback deals work out and sometimes they don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbob1313 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Pudge: 2001 - .308 avg 25 HRs, 2002 - .314 avg 19 HRs (they aren't among his best years of 1999 and 2000)...but not exactly hurting there with the productivity either... I doubt teams passed on him because of his skill, it was probably the $10M a year that was the sticking point for some teams It was, 100%, based on the perception that he was no longer capable of being a full time starting catcher, and yet still wanted to be paid like a full time starting catcher. He played 103 games on average the three seasons prior. To portray that move, retroactively, as some sort of slam dunk, is to play the result, just like you are doing with Vazquez. There was a lot more interest in Vazquez this offseason than there was in Pudge that year, and a few teams were willing to make an even bigger mistake than the Marlins did. The reality is that while Pudge may not have been an incredibly hot commodity, he was still one of the few guys in the league capable of providing standout offensive production along with GG defense at a defensive position. While starting pitching is always a got commodity, it's not as if Vazquez is one of just a handful of starters out there who could potentially provide it. Vazquez was perceived to be one of the top pitchers on the market beyond Cliff Lee. He was offered a two year contract by at least two team's and was likely offered more than we gave him by a few teams. No, he was not considered to be one of the top pitchers in baseball, but the market for him, nonetheless, was stronger than the market for pudge. And ive never said anything about pudge's production at the time. The concern was that he was no longer capable of staying healthy over the course of a season. He proved everyone wrong, and that's great, and it worked out well for us, but that move was just as big a question mark as Javy; remember, there weren't that many people who were against the Javy signing. Sometimes these one year veteran bounceback deals work out and sometimes they don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jalenamoskovy Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Wow Bob, you really wanted us to know that LOL. You posted it 3 times LOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.