August 8, 201214 yr I don't know what some of you are going to do with all this payroll that these "overpaid useless player" are going to command. I doubt many teams are going to take them. I think a team might be interested in Bell, especially if he continues to not suck for the remainder of the season.
August 8, 201214 yr If they are going to re-tune, then Nolasco is 100% in next year's rotation because you need to get some wins out of him so he can be traded for value mid-season. Even if not, he is solidly a 4 or 5 starter.
August 8, 201214 yr -Make a trade for Peter Bourjos -Sign Eric Chavez -Sign Jeff Keppinger -Sign Brandon McCarthy -Bring back Randy Choate Lineup vs. RHP 1. Emilio Bonifacio - LF 2. Jose Reyes - SS 3. Giancarlo Stanton - RF 4. Logan Morrison - 1B 5. Eric Chavez - 3B 6. Jeff Keppinger - 2B 7. Rob Brantly - C 8. Peter Bourjos - CF 9. Pitcher Lineup vs. LHP 1. Jose Reyes - SS 2. Jeff Keppinger - 3B 3. Giancarlo Stanton - RF 4. Justin Ruggiano - LF 5. Logan Morrison - 1B 6. Peter Bourjos - CF 7. John Buck - C 8. Emilio Bonifacio - 2B 9. Pitcher Other/Bench Players Greg Dobbs - 1B/3B/OF (really though, pinch-hitter vs. RHP, please) Donovan Solano - Util (can pinch-run or whatever) Donnie Murphy - Util Rotation 1. Josh Johnson - RHP 2. Mark Buehrle - LHP 3. Brandon McCarthy - RHP 4. Ricky Nolasco - RHP 5. Wade LeBlanc - LHP Bullpen Closer: Heath Bell - RHP Setup: Steve Cishek - RHP Lefty Specialist: Randy Choate - LHP Dunn/Jennings/Webb/Hatcher/Reed/Rosario/Sanabia/Koehler, etc. (pick four) Turner/Eovaldi start the year in AAA. Do this You aced the test 'till i read the words "Heath Bell" at Closing Pitcher. We're not getting anything for him. We're already paying him so might as well try it again. What's the worst that can happen? He blows a couple of saves and you go back to Cishek. You don't give up on a 3-year investment after a couple of months. Relievers are volatile and Bell has already been pitching better lately, albeit in a different role.
August 8, 201214 yr Also, I think that unless the Marlins are certain that they want to sign him to an extension, I think you consider trading Josh Johnson in the offseason. The return in such a trade should help set them up nicely for 2014.
August 8, 201214 yr I would not want Ricky Nolasco on my ballclub. Those of you who have him in your rotation for next year are coocoo. Again, we're not getting anything for him.
August 8, 201214 yr Also, I think that unless the Marlins are certain that they want to sign him to an extension, I think you consider trading Josh Johnson in the offseason. The return in such a trade should help set them up nicely for 2014. I agree.
August 8, 201214 yr We're not getting anything for him. We're already paying him so might as well try it again. What's the worst that can happen? He blows a couple of saves and you go back to Cishek. You don't give up on a 3-year investment after a couple of months. Relievers are volatile and Bell has already been pitching better lately, albeit in a different role. This doesn't make sense to me. If they can get any team to eat that salary (by trade or by waivers), you do it. Even if he's not as bad as he was for most of 2012, that's still a bad contract and the money could be spent more efficiently in other areas. The last thing the team needs in 2013 is having to spend $9 million on a closer, regardless of whether or not he is regressing.
August 8, 201214 yr We're not getting anything for him. We're already paying him so might as well try it again. What's the worst that can happen? He blows a couple of saves and you go back to Cishek. You don't give up on a 3-year investment after a couple of months. Relievers are volatile and Bell has already been pitching better lately, albeit in a different role. Exactly. Relievers can be tricky sometimes. I wouldn't be angry if Ozzie made Heath the closer again next year. But he better be on a very short leash, Cishek has definitely earned the right to be a full-time closer. And unfortunately I also agree that we should trade JJ the soonest possible if we don't plan on extending him. Although keeping him would at least give us a little bit more hope towards next years success.
August 8, 201214 yr Also, I think that unless the Marlins are certain that they want to sign him to an extension, I think you consider trading Josh Johnson in the offseason. The return in such a trade should help set them up nicely for 2014. The problem is they seem to be overvaluing him. They may still think he's an ace, but I don't think most other teams think so. With that said, will they wait to long and then trade him, like Hanley, when his trade value is past its peak ?
August 8, 201214 yr We're not getting anything for him. We're already paying him so might as well try it again. What's the worst that can happen? He blows a couple of saves and you go back to Cishek. You don't give up on a 3-year investment after a couple of months. Relievers are volatile and Bell has already been pitching better lately, albeit in a different role. This doesn't make sense to me. If they can get any team to eat that salary (by trade or by waivers), you do it. Even if he's not as bad as he was for most of 2012, that's still a bad contract and the money could be spent more efficiently in other areas. The last thing the team needs in 2013 is having to spend $9 million on a closer, regardless of whether or not he is regressing. If you get a team to eat his salary, you're just going to have to take another bad salary back probably. I doubt any team wants to take the entirety of that contract, anyway. Reliever performance is difficult to predict, as well. Relievers suck one year and can comeback looking great the next. Happens every year. If he starts getting some saves next year, he'll probably have some trade value by the trade deadline at least.
August 8, 201214 yr We're not getting anything for him. We're already paying him so might as well try it again. What's the worst that can happen? He blows a couple of saves and you go back to Cishek. You don't give up on a 3-year investment after a couple of months. Relievers are volatile and Bell has already been pitching better lately, albeit in a different role. This doesn't make sense to me. If they can get any team to eat that salary (by trade or by waivers), you do it. Even if he's not as bad as he was for most of 2012, that's still a bad contract and the money could be spent more efficiently in other areas. The last thing the team needs in 2013 is having to spend $9 million on a closer, regardless of whether or not he is regressing. I think if we could've gotten someone to take Bell's or Nolasco's contract it would've been done already. You want us to be the Cubs? They paid 12M of Zambrano's 13M, just so they could save 1M and get Volstad. So should we ship Bell back to the Padres, pay them 7M of the 9M just so we can shed 2M and get some fringe crap prospect or mediocre player? You keep him and wait to see what he does. Nolasco is done after this year, so I just pray he has a good start of the year and that we can trade him before the deadline for a solid prospect and shed his salary for the remainder of the year which woudl be about 5M.
August 8, 201214 yr I've said this before, but I would be fine with Bell closing again this season, because it would give everyone a better indication of where he stands. If he doesn't suck, his trade value increases as does the possibility that another team takes him off of the Marlins' hands. However, I get the impression that Bell's a goner. The Marlins seem to have a low tolerance for that kind of poor performance and have probably soured on him because of his "attitude." The fact that Guillen isn't letting him close despite the team being out of contention tells me that everyone is just fed up with him.
August 8, 201214 yr We're not getting anything for him. We're already paying him so might as well try it again. What's the worst that can happen? He blows a couple of saves and you go back to Cishek. You don't give up on a 3-year investment after a couple of months. Relievers are volatile and Bell has already been pitching better lately, albeit in a different role. This doesn't make sense to me. If they can get any team to eat that salary (by trade or by waivers), you do it. Even if he's not as bad as he was for most of 2012, that's still a bad contract and the money could be spent more efficiently in other areas. The last thing the team needs in 2013 is having to spend $9 million on a closer, regardless of whether or not he is regressing. If you get a team to eat his salary, you're just going to have to take another bad salary back probably. I doubt any team wants to take the entirety of that contract, anyway. Reliever performance is difficult to predict, as well. Relievers suck one year and can comeback looking great the next. Happens every year. If he starts getting some saves next year, he'll probably have some trade value by the trade deadline at least. If he continues to pitch decently, I sincerely think that if they want to trade him for cash, it could be done without taking on any extra payroll. I also think that if they waive him, someone will bite. I wouldn't be surprised that if some team looks at the first half as an aberration and decides to take a chance on him for 2 years.
August 8, 201214 yr We're not getting anything for him. We're already paying him so might as well try it again. What's the worst that can happen? He blows a couple of saves and you go back to Cishek. You don't give up on a 3-year investment after a couple of months. Relievers are volatile and Bell has already been pitching better lately, albeit in a different role. This doesn't make sense to me. If they can get any team to eat that salary (by trade or by waivers), you do it. Even if he's not as bad as he was for most of 2012, that's still a bad contract and the money could be spent more efficiently in other areas. The last thing the team needs in 2013 is having to spend $9 million on a closer, regardless of whether or not he is regressing. I think if we could've gotten someone to take Bell's or Nolasco's contract it would've been done already. You want us to be the Cubs? They paid 12M of Zambrano's 13M, just so they could save 1M and get Volstad. So should we ship Bell back to the Padres, pay them 7M of the 9M just so we can shed 2M and get some fringe crap prospect or mediocre player? You keep him and wait to see what he does. Nolasco is done after this year, so I just pray he has a good start of the year and that we can trade him before the deadline for a solid prospect and shed his salary for the remainder of the year which woudl be about 5M. I don't agree. I think that the trade market at the deadline is radically different in the offseason than it is around the deadline. I'm not suggesting that it's absolutely certain that a team takes Bell, but it's silly to say that "it would've been done already." He still has almost 2 months to build on what has so far been an okay second half.
August 8, 201214 yr Also, I think that unless the Marlins are certain that they want to sign him to an extension, I think you consider trading Josh Johnson in the offseason. The return in such a trade should help set them up nicely for 2014. I think a lot will depend on how he finishes out the season. If he strings together a few dominant starts, I really don't think they trade him because they can't rule out an extension. Particularly considering extending Anibal is no longer a contingency and doesn't weigh on payroll. I don't think the time has come to concede 2013 yet either. It's too early to say how this team will approach next season (the offseason hasn't even started). There's no way this team brings back the same group with a few pieces added here and there. If they are serious about being in the realm of competitive next year, I really don't think they trade JJ even if they aren't sure about extending him beyond 2013.
August 8, 201214 yr Considering how cautious the Marlins are when it comes to offering multi-year contracts to pitchers, I would not be surprised at all if they decide not to extend Johnson even if he has a solid last several weeks. There's his injury history and his decline in velocity. I can see the Marlins not wanting to lock him down again. It's too risky and the warning signs are there. If they move him in the offseason they could get a pretty killer return and some of those guys could probably contribute as early as 2013.
August 8, 201214 yr i would look into that bay for bell and buck trade. Does nothing for next year besides rids 2 pieces of garbage for 1, and sheds bells salary for 2014.
August 8, 201214 yr I have been thinking a lot about who we could sign and guys like melky, torii hunter, bourn, Brandon McCarthy, Kyle lohse, aj pierzynski and plenty others come to mind. I would 100% get rid of Ricky nolasco and even pay half. Brett Hayes would be gone. If you can't get a guy like pierzynski, and I doubt he would leave Chicago, then go with buck and brantly. Pierzynski only if you get rid of buck. Certainly try to sign melky Cabrera but not for more than 12-14 million per year. There are holes in the outfield, rotation, and third. So in a perfect world it would be melky, a Brandon McCarthy or lohse at 9-11 million per, and maybe Stephen drew at third for 7-8 million. Lineup would be Reyes, bonifacio, Stanton, melky, drew, Morrison, buck/brantly, Ruggiano, and pitcher in whatever order. Rotation would be Johnson, buehrle, turner, Eovaldi, and the solid free agent like lohse or McCarthy with Leblanc as insurance. Maybe even take a look at anibal but not for 13-14 million. Bullpen of bell, cishek, Dunn, Leblanc, Jose ceda (hopefully), And look at a Matt belisle in a trade maybe or someone similar. Give me some time to work through the payroll numbers.
August 8, 201214 yr Melky 13 million Reyes 10 million Bonifacio 3.5 million Morrison 700 thousand Stanton 800 thousand Drew 6 million Buck 6 million Ruggiano 500 thousand Johnson 13.75 million Buehrle 11 million Bell 9 million Dunn 600 thousand Ceda 500 thousand Leblanc 700 thousand Cishek 600 thousand Turner 1.175 million Eovaldi 500 thousand McCarthy 6 million Belisle 4.1 million Acquired Brantly 500 thousand Dobbs 1.5 million Nolasco 5 million paid Bench bat 800 thousand Solano 500 thousand Bench 500 thousand And I have that at 97.225 million.
August 8, 201214 yr This isn't a change but it needs to be done soon, sign Giancarlo to a long contract, hopefully something like the Longoria deal with the Rays
August 8, 201214 yr This isn't a change but it needs to be done soon, sign Giancarlo to a long contract, hopefully something like the Longoria deal with the Rays Yeah...That's not happening. Longoria's deal was one of the rarest deals in baseball history. I think he signed it after less than week of playing in the majors, thus the reason for it being such a small amount of money (baseball wise anyway). Stanton's gonna command somewhere in the ballpark of a Hanley Ramirez deal, so think more in terms of 6 years, $65-70 million or so. If we wanted to get him signed for relatively cheap, then we should've done if after the 2010 or 2011 season. Now's too late for a discount.
August 9, 201214 yr Considering how cautious the Marlins are when it comes to offering multi-year contracts to pitchers, I would not be surprised at all if they decide not to extend Johnson even if he has a solid last several weeks. There's his injury history and his decline in velocity. I can see the Marlins not wanting to lock him down again. It's too risky and the warning signs are there. If they move him in the offseason they could get a pretty killer return and some of those guys could probably contribute as early as 2013. They've also signed JJ, Buehrle, Nolasco, and Bell to long-term deals in the recent past. I think that's just an ideological thing of the past, not unlike their whole "build around the '03 team's defense and pitching". They've done what their resources and belief in value have led them to do, despite the ideology they convey to fans. They don't necessarily have to extend him this off season either. They can reassess a couple months into next season based on how he's performing and potentially move him at the deadline if they're out of contention. And I'm still fine with them asking for the whole house for Johnson from teams in the offseason like they probably did last deadline. I suspect they're really going to have to feel like they're getting a massive haul from somebody to move him. His decline in velocity is definitely a concern but he's still flashed brilliance at times with high K bursts. His line probably looks quite a bit better to if you factor out those early starts where he was getting unlucky with bloop hits and guys hitting him for an unsustainable BABIP. Not being a medical expert with access to Johnson, it's hard to say whether or not he's an injury risk going forward simply because of his past. Look at Anibal. I still think a lot will depend on these next 7-8 starts.
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.