Pretty interesting article from Yahoo! Sports. I think they nailed it all, in regards to this year's team.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/fantasy-roto-arcade/pressing-questions-miami-marlins-100235189--fantasy.html;_ylt=AwrTImHouftQLGsASQa5bZ8u

 

The Marlins entered last year with a ton of promise, moving into a new stadium while adding Jose Reyes, Mark Buehrle and Heath Bell (and just missing Albert Pujols) through free agency. The optimism even led to Showtime featuring them for Season 2 of “The Franchise.� Instead, things didn’t go quite as planned, as Miami finished in last place and 29 games out of the N.L. East, scoring the second fewest runs in major league baseball (even leading to Showtime ending its run of episodes early). The disappointment resulted in a fire sale both in-season and afterward, as the publicly funded stadium continues to look more and more like a huge fraud perpetrated by owner Jeffrey Loria. Not only were newcomers Reyes, Buehrle and Bell moved (with the former two explicitly promised they would not be traded), but Hanley Ramirez, Josh Johnson, Emilio Bonifacio and John Buckwere also dealt. Ozzie Guillen was also fired as manager after just one season, with three years remaining on his contract.

 

As a result, the Marlins enter 2013 as one of the favorites to finish with the fewest wins in baseball (the Astros being the other main contender), and while they have succeeded in total rebuilds before, this feels different, or at least like much more of a long-term plan, to put it nicely. With their current strategy, it’s more a question of “when� the team will trade Giancarlo Stanton than “if,� which makes the franchise possibly the most depressing to root for, even before you consider the taxpayers getting screwed. Marlins fans deserve better. With such a depleted roster in arguably the best division in baseball, somehow avoiding 100 losses may ultimately look like a successful season.

 

Now onto some pressing questions:

 

Q: How high should Giancarlo Stanton be drafted?

 

A: While Stanton is likely to get traded at some point, it’s probably not going to be this season. Injuries (mainly his knee) limited him last year to just 123 games (and he played at less than 100 percent in many others), but he still finished with 37 homers – the second most in the National League, and he was just 22 years old. While the new Marlins Park was neutral in runs scored, it greatly suppressed home runs, ranking 26th according to Park Factors. It’s obviously a small sample, but most predicted as much based on the stadium’s dimensions, so it’s something he’ll likely have to continue to deal with moving forward. However, Stanton led the National League in “No Doubt� home runs, including the longest of the MLB season, so his power is prodigious enough that it matters less, although it would be nice to see what he could do if he played in Coors Field.

Stanton hit 21 home runs over 202 at-bats on the road last season. He also hit 18 homers over 164 at-bats after the All-Star break after returning from knee surgery, posting a .299/.356/.701 line in the process. He’s 23 years old! The upside here shouldn’t be understated (he somehow had 56 home runs over his first 875 ABs in the majors despite hitting more groundballs than fly balls, a ratio in which he totally changed last year (0.87)). Players with a possibly volatile batting average who don’t contribute a ton in steals and runs scored are typically overrated in fantasy circles, but Stanton is a special talent who should be considered the favorite to lead baseball in home runs this year – I’d personally set his over/under at 49.5, but 60 aren’t out of the question. Plenty of studies have been done by people far smarter than me have proven lineup protection to be a total myth, but Stanton will really test that theory in 2013. Only his home park and teammates (even if his BB rate and Zone% remain constant, there’s no question Miami’s lineup will hurt him when it comes to runs scored and RBI) prevent him from being a top-five fantasy pick. As is, he’s still worthy of a late first round selection.

 

Q: Is Ricky Nolasco better than his ERA suggests?

 

A: Nolasco is now the team’s ace thanks to all the trades, and for those who are into advanced metrics, he’s been the poster boy for being unlucky. Over the past four seasons, here are his ERAs: 5.06, 4.51, 4.67 and 4.48. And here are his xFIPs: 3.23, 3.37, 3.55 and 4.17. Put differently, Nolasco has produced the 19th best xFIP (3.59) over the past four years. His ERA (4.68) over that same span ranks 137th. I’m hardly the first to suggest this, as it’s become pretty obvious by now, but Nolasco is most definitely not the product of bad luck. His career BABIP is .309 and his career HR/FB% is 10.6 – hardly anomalies. Here are his K rates over that same aforementioned four-year stretch: 9.49, 8.39, 6.47 and 5.89. Just to be clear, that trend is going in the wrong direction.

Let’s look a bit deeper at Nolasco’s peripherals and why there’s consistently such a drastic difference between his ERA and xFIP. After his impressive breakout 2008 season, he had the worst LOB% in all of baseball the following year. His 61.0 mark was significantly worse than the next lowest (Carl Pavano, 66.1%). The next season Nolasco got a bit better, but had he qualified he would have tied for 55th among all starters. In 2011, his LOB% ranked 89th among the 94 qualified starters, while last year he ranked 77th among 88 qualified starters. Put differently, Nolasco is dead last in LOB% over the past four years, recording a 66.9% mark. At some point bad luck needs to be shifted to the pitcher’s responsibility, and when you combine Nolasco’s horrendous strand rate with his rapidly declining strikeout rate, he’s not exactly someone even the most ardent sabermetricians should be championing at this point.

 

 

Q: Who will be Miami’s closer?

 

A: With Heath Bell traded, this role is pretty wide open, althoughSteve Cishek looks like the current favorite, if for no other reason than there are no other viable alternatives. Cishek is decent enough, holding a career 9.24 K/9 rate while allowing just four homers over 122.2 innings. But he also has a career 3.60 BB/9 rate, and it’s safe to expect Miami to produce among the fewest save opportunities in major league baseball this season. I normally don’t pay much attention to that, but it does matter when it comes to really bad teams, and this isn’t even considering the uncertainty of the percentage of opportunities Cishek will receive, even if he’s given the first shot at the role. In other words, Even if a Marlins reliever is clearly named closer before the season, he should still be among the last drafted in fantasy leagues.

 

Q: Can Logan Morrison stay healthy?

 

A: Morrison has shown some promising signs with his bat early in his career, but he seemingly can’t shake knee problems, which even have his availability for Opening Day in doubt. After hitting .230 last season and with his health status a question mark, he’s going to be much cheaper on draft day. Morrison is still just 25 years old and will hit in the middle of Miami’s lineup whenever he’s physically ready to return to action, so he shouldn’t be totally overlooked. Even if he isn’t ready for the start of the season, there’s hope he’ll be playing at closer to full strength once he does return than when he was on the field last year.

 

Q: Can Juan Pierre once again be a valuable fantasy asset?

 

A: After signing a one-year deal in the offseason, Pierre is set to become the Marlins’ every day left fielder. He’s 35 years old and offers nothing in the power department (he has five homers over the past six seasons, a span that’s included 3,107 ABs), but he posted a .351 OBP last year and recorded 37 steals in fewer than 400 at-bats, so he clearly has something left in the tank. In fact, his SB success rate (84.1%) was actually the best of his career. He tied for the fifth-most stolen bases in the National League despite being a part-time player. Pierre’s 27:23 K:BB rate was plenty solid too. Bottom line, despite his advanced age, Pierre is looking at an increased role and should be a nice asset for those looking for help in steals and batting average.

 

 

Q: What about the young pitching?

 

A: A big piece of the Hanley Ramirez trade, Nathan Eovaldihasn’t posted impressive K rates in the majors, but he averaged 94.1 mph with his fastball last season, which would have ranked as the sixth highest had he qualified. Meanwhile, another newcomer,Henderson Alvarez, had the ninth highest average fastball velocity (93.3 mph) last year. Jacob Turner is also a former top-10 overall pick, so there’s some upside with the team’s young arms, especially while playing in a pitcher’s park. And that’s before even mentioning 20-year-old Jose Fernandez, who might very well be the most valuable pitcher on the team’s current roster long-term (if I were starting a dynasty league, he’d be my first pick among Marlins pitchers). Fernandez just posted a 1.75 ERA and 0.93 WHIP with a 4.5:1 K:BB ratio as a 19-year-old. The Cuban right-hander sits regularly in the 95-97 mph range with his fastball and has a developing changeup to go along with a nasty slider. He might even reach the majors as soon as this season.

 

Q: Any other prospects worth watching?

 

A: Yes, and his name is Christian Yelich. He hasn’t played above High-A, but he just hit .330/.404/.519 with 12 homers and 20 steals over 397 at-bats as a 20-year-old. With such a depleted roster, Yelich is worth mentioning here, as there’s actually a chance he might make an impact in Miami this year.

Typical Yahoo crap.

 

Yammering about fraud and players who whine, but were too dumb to get an actual no-trade clause in writing. Followed by a bunch of obvious stuff.

 

Is there any outfit that writes more totally useless articles than Yahoo?

Typical Yahoo crap.

 

Yammering about fraud and players who whine, but were too dumb to get an actual no-trade clause in writing. Followed by a bunch of obvious stuff.

 

Is there any outfit that writes more totally useless articles than Yahoo?

 

Of course looking at it from the other side of the coin.........Had they been smart enough to hold out for that no-trade clause they wouldn't have signed here in the first place.

 

"Miami fans deserve better." Given our national reputation, I would like to hear the explanation for that one.

Closers not getting save opportunities on bad teams is also a myth, much like the lineup protection thing. For fantasy purposes (which is all this article is), Cishek should be drafted in all leagues. There is no closer controversy, and he's better than "decent." Also, if you're even thinking about drafting Morrison, either a) your league has a lot of teams/it's NL only or b) your team sucks.

Closers not getting save opportunities on bad teams is also a myth, much like the lineup protection thing. For fantasy purposes (which is all this article is), Cishek should be drafted in all leagues. There is no closer controversy, and he's better than "decent." Also, if you're even thinking about drafting Morrison, either a) your league has a lot of teams/it's NL only or b) your team sucks.

Look at it from someone's perspective that doesn't really follow the Marlins. We have three names that they know (four I guess with Pierre) and Morrison is one of them and then a bunch of rookies. They write about the guys people know about. You don't see Astros articles on non-Astros fan sites talking about why you should draft Fernando Martinez, do you?

 

And how is the thing about closers not getting ops on bad teams a myth? If you're not leading late in games, how does a closer get an opportunity? I thought that was pretty much common sense.

 

Example: as a team, the Cubs, one of the worst teams in the league, had 28 saves. The Yankees, always a favorite going into a season, had 51. Somehow I think I would've drafted Rafael Soriano over Carlos Marmol.

 

I guess if there's a team that only loses late and close games or blows saves then your theory of it being a myth could work but how often does a bad team only lose close games? I doubt it's very often. To a point (and I think it's a pretty big point) the success of a closer depends on the success of an offense and the rest of a bullpen to hold a lead. The quality of a closer comes second to that success. At least that's what I think about when I'm rating closers. And it's usually worked out for me.

Closers not getting save opportunities on bad teams is also a myth, much like the lineup protection thing. For fantasy purposes (which is all this article is), Cishek should be drafted in all leagues. There is no closer controversy, and he's better than "decent." Also, if you're even thinking about drafting Morrison, either a) your league has a lot of teams/it's NL only or b) your team sucks.

Look at it from someone's perspective that doesn't really follow the Marlins. We have three names that they know (four I guess with Pierre) and Morrison is one of them and then a bunch of rookies. They write about the guys people know about. You don't see Astros articles on non-Astros fan sites talking about why you should draft Fernando Martinez, do you?

 

And how is the thing about closers not getting ops on bad teams a myth? If you're not leading late in games, how does a closer get an opportunity? I thought that was pretty much common sense.

 

Example: as a team, the Cubs, one of the worst teams in the league, had 28 saves. The Yankees, always a favorite going into a season, had 51. Somehow I think I would've drafted Rafael Soriano over Carlos Marmol.

 

I guess if there's a team that only loses late and close games or blows saves then your theory of it being a myth could work but how often does a bad team only lose close games? I doubt it's very often. To a point (and I think it's a pretty big point) the success of a closer depends on the success of an offense and the rest of a bullpen to hold a lead. The quality of a closer comes second to that success. At least that's what I think about when I'm rating closers. And it's usually worked out for me.

Bad teams still win 60+ games.

Of the 60+ they win, you're still going to have approximately 40 opportunites most of the time. The Marlins were bad last year and still had 34 saves from their primary closers: Bell (19) and then Cishek (15). This doesn't even take into account all the blown saves that could've been saves.

 

There will be opportunities.

 

In this case, there is no controversy, meaning Cishek is going to spend the entire year closing probably. He's a great option in the latter rounds which is when you should be getting your closers in fantasy, anyway.

Closers not getting save opportunities on bad teams is also a myth, much like the lineup protection thing. For fantasy purposes (which is all this article is), Cishek should be drafted in all leagues. There is no closer controversy, and he's better than "decent." Also, if you're even thinking about drafting Morrison, either a) your league has a lot of teams/it's NL only or b) your team sucks.

Look at it from someone's perspective that doesn't really follow the Marlins. We have three names that they know (four I guess with Pierre) and Morrison is one of them and then a bunch of rookies. They write about the guys people know about. You don't see Astros articles on non-Astros fan sites talking about why you should draft Fernando Martinez, do you?

 

And how is the thing about closers not getting ops on bad teams a myth? If you're not leading late in games, how does a closer get an opportunity? I thought that was pretty much common sense.

 

Example: as a team, the Cubs, one of the worst teams in the league, had 28 saves. The Yankees, always a favorite going into a season, had 51. Somehow I think I would've drafted Rafael Soriano over Carlos Marmol.

 

I guess if there's a team that only loses late and close games or blows saves then your theory of it being a myth could work but how often does a bad team only lose close games? I doubt it's very often. To a point (and I think it's a pretty big point) the success of a closer depends on the success of an offense and the rest of a bullpen to hold a lead. The quality of a closer comes second to that success. At least that's what I think about when I'm rating closers. And it's usually worked out for me.

Bad teams still win 60+ games.

Of the 60+ they win, you're still going to have approximately 40 opportunites most of the time. The Marlins were bad last year and still had 34 saves from their primary closers: Bell (19) and then Cishek (15). This doesn't even take into account all the blown saves that could've been saves.

 

There will be opportunities.

 

In this case, there is no controversy, meaning Cishek is going to spend the entire year closing probably. He's a great option in the latter rounds which is when you should be getting your closers in fantasy, anyway.

 

In later rounds, sure. Every starting/probable closer is always drafted. I just think the article was making the case that he should be one of the last closers drafted. And he should be.