I am no GM, but tell me what you think...

[PcolaMarlin]

I am growing tired of this patch work crap the Marlins cannot seem to get away from. I believe taking a business model akin to Oaklands or Tampas would prove to be much better for the Marins now and into the future.

 

With the hiring of Mike Redmond, the Marlins now have a "fun" clubhouse leader (Joe Madden anyone). A clubhouse full of younger players would respond much more than that of one littered with veterans, IMHO.

 

Don't get me wrong, I believe our star veterans are amazing players , namely JJ, Buehrle, and Reyes but I believe their pinnacle will occur a little too quickly for the Marlins to receive their full value, in on-field play that is (and I realize JJ and Nolasco weren't "patches").

 

I believe the Marlins should continue to deal "older" players in a Sanchez-Infante'esqe manner. Especially considering the thin market for both positions of the aforementioned players in the free agency pool (Rangers like JJ and have Olt :-)

 

I hate feeling this way, but I just don't see the Marlins really competing in 2013, I believe we should build around Stanton (obviously) and our other coveted young stars (Turner, Eovaldi, Fenandez, Yelich, and MAYBE Morrison) and quit "patching" our problems. If we were to fix them from the ground up, there would be minimal need for patch work, if any at all.

 

Seriously, whats the worst that could happen, WE WERE LAST IN THE DIVISION WITH THESE PLAYERS!!!

 

But I digress, just venting a little. I've been a fan of the Marlins since before they even played their first game against the Dodgers and I will continue to be. Although, it is getting harder to witness this abomination of a front office wreck our hopes with the seemingly endless amount of just....bafoonery.

 

One more thing on our *genius* front office; the hiring of Mike Redmond (which I happen to like) got me thinking on this. Is it just me, or would it be amazing if the Marlins still had Freddi Gonzalez, or Joe Girardi?! But alas! these guys were "let go" because of clashes with the front office, well......... look at them now and look at us now...maybe the "brass" should have listened a little more.

 

Tell me what you think.

[yokofox33]

You lost me when you called Nolasco a star player.

[Michael]

You lost me when you called Nolasco a star player.

 

Honestly, I was thinking the same thing, but at the same time, he was just naming veterans off the top of his head, not necessarily the top tier ones.

 

However, I was a little turned away when you compared Oakland and Washington's business models. Washington sucked horrifically and got two incredible top picks, as well as owners willing to spend a lot of money on some players [Jayson Werth] and willing to trade talent for current stars [iE the package they sent for Gio Gonzalez]. Oakland, opposite. Not spending money, just developing proper talent and using their method.

I'd love to be like Oakland, really, but with playoff success.

[Dr Beinfest]

You lost me when you called Nolasco a star player.

 

 

and ruined any interest I had in reading it once I read yokofox's post.

[PcolaMarlin]

Lol, yeah, with Nolasco I meant a veteran with some trade value, should have re-read before I posted.

 

and yeah, forget I said Washington, lets replace Washington with Tampa

[Erick]

We should keep Reyes.

 

I agree with the rest.

[Admin]

Yeah, I think that Reyes is the only non-club controlled guy I want them to keep. I'd like the rest of them should go. Unfortunately most of them have contracts that other teams probably won't pick up.

[Wild Card]

I still disagree on Buerhle, dude is the most consistent starter in baseball. He might not blow you away but he pretty much gives you an opportunity to win every single time he's on the mound and that's all you can ask for. Not to mention he's the perfect veteran to have around guys like Turner and Eovaldi.

[yokofox33]

I don't think anyone is arguing Buerhle is a solid, consistent, #3 starter. Borderline #2 during some stretches. But is that worth 15-18 million a year? I like Buerhle a lot, but he is being paid ace-like money on this team when he is not an ace.

[poptart]

I don't think anyone is arguing Buerhle is a solid, consistent, #3 starter. Borderline #2 during some stretches. But is that worth 15-18 million a year? I like Buerhle a lot, but he is being paid ace-like money on this team when he is not an ace.

 

that's how the market's operating nowadays. when those Haren rumors were going down yesterday, I checked his contract. 15.5m next year. hell, Hanley's getting 15.5 next year and he's OPSing like .740

mediocre-to-good players with impressive pasts get $$$$

[Erick]

I still disagree on Buerhle, dude is the most consistent starter in baseball. He might not blow you away but he pretty much gives you an opportunity to win every single time he's on the mound and that's all you can ask for. Not to mention he's the perfect veteran to have around guys like Turner and Eovaldi.

 

 

No he's not.

You think Buehrle is an ace?

[Erick]

I don't think anyone is arguing Buerhle is a solid, consistent, #3 starter. Borderline #2 during some stretches. But is that worth 15-18 million a year? I like Buerhle a lot, but he is being paid ace-like money on this team when he is not an ace.

 

that's how the market's operating nowadays. when those Haren rumors were going down yesterday, I checked his contract. 15.5m next year. hell, Hanley's getting 15.5 next year and he's OPSing like .740

mediocre-to-good players with impressive pasts get $$$$

 

That's not how the market operates.

 

At the time Hanley signed his contract, he was the best SS in baseball; now, he's not anymore. If Hanley became a free agent this offseason, he'd get about half of that, maybe a little more.

 

Same with Dan Haren; he's not getting 15+ million per year this offseason.

[Michael]

I still disagree on Buerhle, dude is the most consistent starter in baseball. He might not blow you away but he pretty much gives you an opportunity to win every single time he's on the mound and that's all you can ask for. Not to mention he's the perfect veteran to have around guys like Turner and Eovaldi.

 

 

No he's not.

You think Buehrle is an ace?

He never once said the word "ace." He said he's the most consistent starter in baseball, and, given his stats over the last 13 years now, I can't argue with that statement. Maybe not THE most consistent, but he's been consistent, definitely, over the course of his career.

Don't grasp for straws just for the sake of an argument.

[Erick]

I still disagree on Buerhle, dude is the most consistent starter in baseball. He might not blow you away but he pretty much gives you an opportunity to win every single time he's on the mound and that's all you can ask for. Not to mention he's the perfect veteran to have around guys like Turner and Eovaldi.

 

 

No he's not.

You think Buehrle is an ace?

He never once said the word "ace." He said he's the most consistent starter in baseball, and, given his stats over the last 13 years now, I can't argue with that statement. Maybe not THE most consistent, but he's been consistent, definitely, over the course of his career.

Don't grasp for straws just for the sake of an argument.

 

It makes no sense to say someone is the most consistent at something if he's not even elite.

 

I could name plenty of pitchers who have been more consistent than Mark Buehrle over the years.

And the bottom line is the last two years of his contract pay him ace-like money. I don't think anyone has said that he's a bad pitcher.

[Michael]

You don't have to be "elite" to be consistent, either. You can be consistently decent to good, as Buehrle's been his entire career.

Yeah, the last two years of his contract pay him ace-like money, just like the last two years of Hanley's contract pays him near-MVP like money. Granted, Hanley was more MVP-like than Buehrle was ace-like during the contracts being signed, but Buehrle is still at the level he was before the contract and when the contract was signed, where-as Hanley has regressed terribly. And you're right, nobody said he's a bad pitcher, but nobody said ace, either.

[Erick]

You don't have to be "elite" to be consistent, either. You can be consistently decent to good, as Buehrle's been his entire career.

Yeah, the last two years of his contract pay him ace-like money, just like the last two years of Hanley's contract pays him near-MVP like money. Granted, Hanley was more MVP-like than Buehrle was ace-like during the contracts being signed, but Buehrle is still at the level he was before the contract and when the contract was signed, where-as Hanley has regressed terribly. And you're right, nobody said he's a bad pitcher, but nobody said ace, either.

 

 

He said "dude is the most consistent starter in baseball."

 

That's not me putting words in his mouth (or, in this case, text); that's exactly what he said.

 

In order to be the most consistent starter in baseball, you have to be an ace. I don't know about you but when I think of THE MOST consistent starters in baseball, I think about Felix Hernandez, Clayton Kershaw and pitchers of their caliber. Not Mark Buehrle.

 

Also, the only thing that's consistent about Mark Buehrle is basically that he gives you 200+ innings every year. So it's basically durability and quantity. In terms of quality (which is what matters most), he's had some mediocre/bad years.

[Erick]

Yeah, the last two years of his contract pay him ace-like money, just like the last two years of Hanley's contract pays him near-MVP like money.

 

 

By the way, I have no idea why you mentioned Hanley here.

[Michael]

Really only 3 years you can call mediocre or bad for Buehrle, the rest have been decent to good. Regardless, he does have consistency. Don't have to be an ace to have consistency whatsoever.

 

I mentioned Hanley as a comparison of their contracts. Buehrle is still the same pitcher he was when he signed, Hanley has gotten much worse since he signed.

 

Really, straws.

[Erick]

Really only 3 years you can call mediocre or bad for Buehrle, the rest have been decent to good. Regardless, he does have consistency. Don't have to be an ace to have consistency whatsoever.

 

I mentioned Hanley as a comparison of their contracts. Buehrle is still the same pitcher he was when he signed, Hanley has gotten much worse since he signed.

 

Really, straws.

 

 

Really, your argument makes no sense.

 

I never said Buehrle wasn't consistent; I said he wasn't even close to being the most consistent and there's a huge difference. Consistent is replaceable; the most consistent are more difficult to replace and worth the money.

 

As for the Hanley thing, it still makes no sense. When did I say the Hanley contract was good given his current production? What are you trying to prove with the Hanley comment? Is it for the context of consistency? In which case, I never really said that Hanley has had a consistent career in this thread so I still don't get it...

[PcolaMarlin]

I believe Buehrle is a decent value at the moment. But the Marlins just are not in position to maximize his value. And really, its not whether they are good or not, its that we have these great ball players on a team with a minimal chance to win.

 

We have guys with value who will not be around (at least still at an elite'ish level) when the Marlins are in position to make consistant runs.

 

Although, I didn't think about Wild Card made about having a guy like Buehrle around our young staters, the more I think about it, the more I like that idea. Maybe the same could be true about Buck-Brantley.

[Piazza31]

You don't have to be "elite" to be consistent, either. You can be consistently decent to good, as Buehrle's been his entire career.

Yeah, the last two years of his contract pay him ace-like money, just like the last two years of Hanley's contract pays him near-MVP like money. Granted, Hanley was more MVP-like than Buehrle was ace-like during the contracts being signed, but Buehrle is still at the level he was before the contract and when the contract was signed, where-as Hanley has regressed terribly. And you're right, nobody said he's a bad pitcher, but nobody said ace, either.

 

 

He said "dude is the most consistent starter in baseball."

 

That's not me putting words in his mouth (or, in this case, text); that's exactly what he said.

 

In order to be the most consistent starter in baseball, you have to be an ace. I don't know about you but when I think of THE MOST consistent starters in baseball, I think about Felix Hernandez, Clayton Kershaw and pitchers of their caliber. Not Mark Buehrle.

 

Also, the only thing that's consistent about Mark Buehrle is basically that he gives you 200+ innings every year. So it's basically durability and quantity. In terms of quality (which is what matters most), he's had some mediocre/bad years.

 

He's not putting words in your mouth, but you are for him.

 

Your misinterpreting his statement how you see fit. He's consistant. Just like someone can be consistently bad and consistently good. He's consistent, for the longest amount of time.

 

Therefore, the most consistant.

[Erick]

You don't have to be "elite" to be consistent, either. You can be consistently decent to good, as Buehrle's been his entire career.

Yeah, the last two years of his contract pay him ace-like money, just like the last two years of Hanley's contract pays him near-MVP like money. Granted, Hanley was more MVP-like than Buehrle was ace-like during the contracts being signed, but Buehrle is still at the level he was before the contract and when the contract was signed, where-as Hanley has regressed terribly. And you're right, nobody said he's a bad pitcher, but nobody said ace, either.

 

 

He said "dude is the most consistent starter in baseball."

 

That's not me putting words in his mouth (or, in this case, text); that's exactly what he said.

 

In order to be the most consistent starter in baseball, you have to be an ace. I don't know about you but when I think of THE MOST consistent starters in baseball, I think about Felix Hernandez, Clayton Kershaw and pitchers of their caliber. Not Mark Buehrle.

 

Also, the only thing that's consistent about Mark Buehrle is basically that he gives you 200+ innings every year. So it's basically durability and quantity. In terms of quality (which is what matters most), he's had some mediocre/bad years.

 

He's not putting words in your mouth, but you are for him.

 

Your misinterpreting his statement how you see fit. He's consistant. Just like someone can be consistently bad and consistently good. He's consistent, for the longest amount of time.

 

Therefore, the most consistant.

 

In what way is the bold true? Are you basing this just on the fact that he throws 200 innings every year?

[Michael]

And that his ERA is consistently under 4 save for 3 seasons, that he's consistently made at least 30 starts every year [save his first season, which was short], that he's not been injured ...

Not that it matters, he also had his lowest WHIP of his career since 2001 [which is also on a consistent plane for the most part].

Consistently a great defender, too.

[Erick]

I pointed out his durability already.

 

So, fair enough.

 

Buehrle is a career 3.82 ERA guy, good for 30+ starts every year and 200+ innings.

Consistent? Yes. I never said no.

 

THE MOST consistent?

 

Also, is that worth the amount of money Buehrle is going to make for the last two years of his contract?

 

Consider the ballpark we play in and the team's payroll. Is it worth it to pay a significant portion of our payroll to a high 3 ERA guy? Especially in our ballpark, it should be cheaper to find quality pitching. Heck, a reason why Buehrle's ERA was below 4 last year was because he got to pitch in Marlins park; he was mediocre on the road.

 

As for WHIP, it's dependent on team defense, especially with a pitcher like Buehrle. It's really not indicative of skill in his case, especially when you consider that the rate of line drives he allowed was the highest it's been since 2003.

His WHIP is based on how well guys catch the ball behind him because he does not strike guys out. If the ball is caught, the WHIP will be low because he does not walk many hitters.

 

He is what he is. A good #3 on a winning team being paid ace money starting in 2013 (hence the reason why now would be the time to trade him if we're going to trade him). If you're fine with that, he's your guy.

[Dr Beinfest]

I think you should just bend over and accept Mark Buehrle's contract Erick, because if you don't this team is sh*t screwed with an empty ass rotation for next season.

 

Good deal or not, this team needs Buehrle right now.

 

In the future? Debatable of course.