To elaborate -- there is no hole at first base as Gaby Sanchez is a proven All-Star. Getting Albert Pujols wouldn't fill any hole, it would just greatly help in commercializing the "new" franchise and generating revenue. In that sense he is needed. But the real need is starting pitching. There are real holes in the rotation, and with the money we're able to throw at the likes of Pujols, it would be a damn shame if the Marlins entered Spring Training without a Buehrle, Wilson or Gonzalez.

Albert Pujols will help sell tickets and get Miami excited.

 

Mark Buerhle will not.

 

 

This can't be denied. But more SPs would have been nice too

Albert Pujols will help sell tickets and get Miami excited.

 

Mark Buerhle will not.

 

 

In the first year, the ballpark will help sell tickets. Beyond that, winning is going to help sell tickets. If after 5 years, Albert is a deterrent to winning, he'll do the opposite.

Albert Pujols will help sell tickets and get Miami excited.

 

Mark Buerhle will not.

 

 

In the first year, the ballpark will help sell tickets. Beyond that, winning is going to help sell tickets. If after 5 years, Albert is a deterrent to winning, he'll do the opposite.

Unless he's going for HR #600. People will show up to see him reaching that.

To elaborate -- there is no hole at first base as Gaby Sanchez is a proven All-Star. Getting Albert Pujols wouldn't fill any hole, it would just greatly help in commercializing the "new" franchise and generating revenue. In that sense he is needed. But the real need is starting pitching. There are real holes in the rotation, and with the money we're able to throw at the likes of Pujols, it would be a damn shame if the Marlins entered Spring Training without a Buehrle, Wilson or Gonzalez.

 

 

Not really. I like Gaby, but he's not a proven All-Star. He was an All-Star last season because we needed a representative and Hanley sucked last year.

Hearing marlins won't do 2 more big free agents. If they get pujols they'll be out on wilson/buehrle and trade for SP instead

 

 

 

-Heyman

Gonna have a lot of fans hoping no Albert now....

Or pissed off about giving $9 million/yr to a closer. If the above is true, it absolutely seems like Bell inhibited the Marlins ability to sign additional players.

This is very fair. Hard to disagree in hindsight. I understand the need to jump on a player before someone else gets him, but if they get Pujols but no FA SPs, then the plan didn't exactly unfurl perfectly.

Albert Pujols will help sell tickets and get Miami excited.

 

Mark Buerhle will not.

 

 

In the first year, the ballpark will help sell tickets. Beyond that, winning is going to help sell tickets. If after 5 years, Albert is a deterrent to winning, he'll do the opposite.

eh....i agree to a certain extent but pujols in conjunction with hanley, stanton and etc. that come on down the line should be able to fill the seats

To elaborate -- there is no hole at first base as Gaby Sanchez is a proven All-Star. Getting Albert Pujols wouldn't fill any hole, it would just greatly help in commercializing the "new" franchise and generating revenue. In that sense he is needed. But the real need is starting pitching. There are real holes in the rotation, and with the money we're able to throw at the likes of Pujols, it would be a damn shame if the Marlins entered Spring Training without a Buehrle, Wilson or Gonzalez.

 

 

Yes and no. You've got to remember the chain reaction of the matter. Gaby = pitcher when he's traded.

 

Right now I'm on the Pujols bandwagon as well just for the buzz. But I agree, if there was some way we could get both Buehrle and Wilson or something along those lines of TWO great starting pitchers, I'd take that over Pujols.

Bell filled a huge gap of ours. I'm totally not liking $9 million on a closer, but you've gotta imagine that if you're gonna do it, at least do it right and go get Heath Bell. One of the best guys at what he does, eh?

 

I don't see how that was a "huge gap" at all. The bullpen was the team's strongest aspect. It's not hard to groom someone to work the ninth. They have plenty of depth in the pen.

 

The huge gap was the rotation.

 

The biggest gap is the rotation, yes. However there were clear gaps for a closer, 3B, and CF. Those have all been filled now. The addition of Pujols also means we'd be getting another starter with the dump off of Gaby.

 

I agree with you though, Bell is somewhat of a blocker. But my point being that at least he wasn't an utter waste. Other than shades of Leo Nunez and Clay Hensley, this team has had a hard time finding a go-to guy for the 9th inning.

So you are saying that the Marlins should overlook the biggest gap (the rotation) and fill the smaller needs (closer, etc-which could be filled internally)? Giving Bell a multi-year deal and not signing a free agent pitcher basically does that.

 

The bottom line is that spending that kind of money on a closer-assuming the rumors are true-prevents them from adequately addressing the rotation issue. The ninth inning really isn't that big of an issue; a solid closer gives you maybe one extra win a year. That's why you try to look at your internal options. In short, Bell offers very little to the team, but comes with a huge price tag.

To elaborate -- there is no hole at first base as Gaby Sanchez is a proven All-Star. Getting Albert Pujols wouldn't fill any hole, it would just greatly help in commercializing the "new" franchise and generating revenue. In that sense he is needed. But the real need is starting pitching. There are real holes in the rotation, and with the money we're able to throw at the likes of Pujols, it would be a damn shame if the Marlins entered Spring Training without a Buehrle, Wilson or Gonzalez.

 

 

Yes and no. You've got to remember the chain reaction of the matter. Gaby = pitcher when he's traded.

 

Right now I'm on the Pujols bandwagon as well just for the buzz. But I agree, if there was some way we could get both Buehrle and Wilson or something along those lines of TWO great starting pitchers, I'd take that over Pujols.

but lyk omg pujohlz wyl sel tikutz

So you are saying that the Marlins should overlook the biggest gap (the rotation) and fill the smaller needs (closer, etc-which could be filled internally)?

 

The bottom line is that spending that kind of money on a closer-assuming the rumors are true-prevents them from adequately addressing the rotation issue. The ninth inning really isn't that big of an issue; a solid closer gives you maybe one extra win a year. That's why you try to look at your internal options. In short, Bell offers very little to the team, but comes with a huge price tag.

 

 

Where did I say that? Sheesh. Read what I write. I'm much more of a 'go and fix the rotation' person. As in... don't get Pujols and get pitchers instead. I'm just saying 'don't blame Bell if the rotation is under par'. Blame Pujols, if we sign him.

I would agree with you all about pitching if we didn't have the line-up that we would potentially have.

 

1. Reyes

2. Boni

3. Hanley

4. Pujols

5. Stanton

6. LoMo

7. Buck

8. Infante

 

If we were a small-ball sort of team, then yes, pitching would be needed to win games. But we would transform into a mashing, smashing line-up where we can afford to give up 4 or 5 runs from a SP and still probably be in it to win the ballgame.

 

Let's not forget that we have an excellent bullpen with a legitimate closer for the first time in years.

 

Yes, of course, it would be nice if our rotation was stronger, but if we sign Pujols it doesn't have to be.

To elaborate -- there is no hole at first base as Gaby Sanchez is a proven All-Star. Getting Albert Pujols wouldn't fill any hole, it would just greatly help in commercializing the "new" franchise and generating revenue. In that sense he is needed. But the real need is starting pitching. There are real holes in the rotation, and with the money we're able to throw at the likes of Pujols, it would be a damn shame if the Marlins entered Spring Training without a Buehrle, Wilson or Gonzalez.

 

Why does this have to be Pujols vs. pitching?

 

I hate to keeping dwelling on the Bell stuff, but the Marlins basically handed him a contract not much smaller than what Buehrle will get. Bell has much less to offer this team than Pujols does.

 

A "lock down" closer should be the last piece of the puzzle rather than the first.

Once pujols is announced I would look to trade lomo + prospect for gio and then gaby + prospects for another sp. Let petersen play lf.

 

Could also look at a Ryan Ludwick-type to play LF.

Hearing marlins won't do 2 more big free agents. If they get pujols they'll be out on wilson/buehrle and trade for SP instead

 

 

 

-Heyman

Gonna have a lot of fans hoping no Albert now....

Or pissed off about giving $9 million/yr to a closer. If the above is true, it absolutely seems like Bell inhibited the Marlins ability to sign additional players.

This is very fair. Hard to disagree in hindsight. I understand the need to jump on a player before someone else gets him, but if they get Pujols but no FA SPs, then the plan didn't exactly unfurl perfectly.

I was a bit uncomfortable with the Bell signing as soon as it was announced, but I was cool with it somewhat in the end because I was pretty certain that they would end up with Buehrle/Wilson too.

I think we could pull off Pujols and Oswalt and then trade for another pitcher

#Marlins' Loria, Samson, Hill just went in to meet with Dan Halem of commissioner's office. #MLB

 

Don't know what this means.

#Marlins' Loria, Samson, Hill just went in to meet with Dan Halem of commissioner's office. #MLB

 

Don't know what this means.

Hmm ...

...

 

sh*t'S GOIN' DOWN!

Ken_Rosenthal Ken Rosenthal

 

 

 

 

#Marlins' Loria, Samson, Hill just went in to meet with Dan Halem of commissioner's office. #MLB

1 minute ago

#Marlins' Loria, Samson, Hill just went in to meet with Dan Halem of commissioner's office. #MLB

 

Don't know what this means.

 

Where's Beinfest? securing Buerhle right???

So you are saying that the Marlins should overlook the biggest gap (the rotation) and fill the smaller needs (closer, etc-which could be filled internally)?

 

The bottom line is that spending that kind of money on a closer-assuming the rumors are true-prevents them from adequately addressing the rotation issue. The ninth inning really isn't that big of an issue; a solid closer gives you maybe one extra win a year. That's why you try to look at your internal options. In short, Bell offers very little to the team, but comes with a huge price tag.

 

 

Where did I say that? Sheesh. Read what I write. I'm much more of a 'go and fix the rotation' person. As in... don't get Pujols and get pitchers instead. I'm just saying 'don't blame Bell if the rotation is under par'. Blame Pujols, if we sign him.

I'm making deductions based upon your own logic, even if you didn't say that explicitly.

 

Why is the blame on Pujols and not Bell? If you spice up Bell's contract just a tad, you land Buehrle. Then you probably have enough room for Pujols. Signing Pujols gives you the ability to trade Gaby and Logan for a second starter.

 

Then if you have money left over, you sign Heath Bell.

I would agree with you all about pitching if we didn't have the line-up that we would potentially have.

 

1. Reyes

2. Boni

3. Hanley

4. Pujols

5. Stanton

6. LoMo

7. Buck

8. Infante

 

If we were a small-ball sort of team, then yes, pitching would be needed to win games. But we would transform into a mashing, smashing line-up where we can afford to give up 4 or 5 runs from a SP and still probably be in it to win the ballgame.

 

Let's not forget that we have an excellent bullpen with a legitimate closer for the first time in years.

 

Yes, of course, it would be nice if our rotation was stronger, but if we sign Pujols it doesn't have to be.

 

 

Looking at that lineup just makes me smile.

 

If we turn into a Texas Rangers type offense the pitching wouldn't have to be as great day in and day out until the team gets into the playoffs when they would really start facing great pitching and the pitchers would be needed to have stellar outings.

 

Then again the Rangers have been to two world series in a row.

 

The more I think about it the more I see Pujols coming to Miami he himself is a huge marketing tool and in a way I would almost take a chance on him because of the financial benefits as opposed to playing it safer and just going after a C.J. Wilson. (Who is still expensive)

 

All this being said we still need solid pitching to compete and a consistent #2 would be nice I feel like LeBlanc can fill the #5 roll.

@Ken_Rosenthal: Asked Loria if decision was in Pujols' hands and he said, "I wouldn't say that." Offered no further comment. #Marlins #MLB

Dan Halem works as part of MLB's General Counsel....perhaps working out some last minute legal technicalities in the contract :deal

To elaborate -- there is no hole at first base as Gaby Sanchez is a proven All-Star. Getting Albert Pujols wouldn't fill any hole, it would just greatly help in commercializing the "new" franchise and generating revenue. In that sense he is needed. But the real need is starting pitching. There are real holes in the rotation, and with the money we're able to throw at the likes of Pujols, it would be a damn shame if the Marlins entered Spring Training without a Buehrle, Wilson or Gonzalez.

 

Why does this have to be Pujols vs. pitching?

 

I hate to keeping dwelling on the Bell stuff, but the Marlins basically handed him a contract not much smaller than what Buehrle will get. Bell has much less to offer this team than Pujols does.

 

A "lock down" closer should be the last piece of the puzzle rather than the first.

 

Because we can't take Bell's contract away now.