What about moving Dietrich and Lomo for Middlebrooks and a prospect?

 

The Red Sox re-signed Napoli and don't have any use for Morrison.

I've said this probably a million times already, but having two lefties in a row is more desirable than having someone with bad on base ability hitting in the second spot.

 

Morrison isn't the type of guy you would need in the middle of the order to "drive in runs."

 

I disagree with both of these severely. Having two lefties back to back puts you at a huge disadvantage later in a game, and LoMo is EXACTLY the kind of hitter that should be in the middle of the lineup if he can produce what most of us think he can this year.

He shouldn't be in the middle of the batting order. Maybe on a AAA-team, but not a major league team.

Having multiple opportunities to score runs early in the game easily offsets the at most one time that the opposing manger is likely to use a specialist, which can also be counteracted by pinch hitting.

 

Morrison's power ability has been dwindling. I'd like to see your statistical reasoning saying otherwise. That's probably even why the Marlins want to bring in Jones.

 

So let's do this:

 

1. Stanton

2. Yelich

3. Morrison

4. Saltalamacchia

5. Ozuna

6. Dietrich

7. Furcal

8. Hechavarria

 

It makes for perfect statistical reasoning.

No, it doesn't.

No, it doesn't.

 

It was sarcasm. I figured you would love that lineup, since, you know, since it's in the order of best on base percentage.

I knew it was sarcasm. My point is that it accomplishes nothing.

 

OBP is important for the first two spots of the lineup, but power more essential for the middle of the lineup. Furcal has neither so he should be at the bottom.

I knew it was sarcasm. My point is that it accomplishes nothing.

 

OBP is important for the first two spots of the lineup, but power more essential for the middle of the lineup. Furcal has neither so he should be at the bottom.

 

Except you're ignoring the big fact that nobody else, outside of Yelich (who should lead off) and Stanton (who is obviously batting 3rd or 4th) gets on base at a higher rate than Rafael Furcal except Salty. And I would actually be absolutely fine batting Salty second if we have enough power in the middle of the lineup without him there.

 

So, if you want Salty in the middle, there is nobody else that gets on base more than Furcal. So that should be his logical spot in the order. What's really funny about all this is that from the things I've read in articles and on twitter, all the "experts" are predicting Furcal to lead off, which is much more absurd than my assumption he should bat second.

Morrison is likely to get on base more than Furcal. I've already made this case, so what am I ignoring? We also don't even know who is playing third base or CF yet.

 

The major point I've been making (which you are ignoring), is that even if Furcal is a number 2 hitter by default, he's not going to be "productive" there. You said he has the ingredients to be a productive number 2 hitter. I think that is a dumb thing for you to have said because you completely ignored OBP. This is the critical issue of this discussion as far as I'm concerned.

 

Salty doesn't necessarily need to bat in the middle. We don't know what kind of numbers he will put up--his OBP was decent last year but horrible the two years before that.

 

Furcal probably will end up hitting 1st or 2nd, because that's something that the Marlins would do. That doesn't mean that Furcal would be "productive" in that role.

Morrison is likely to get on base more than Furcal.

 

And this point is irrelevant because he won't be playing here and his replacement won't be batting second. Leaving... Furcal.

 

And my point is that if Furcal, by default, is the best person to hit second, it's because he does have the ingredients to possibly succeed there. At least more so than anyone else.

 

I am not disagreeing with you that he should not be batting second if at all possible. However it's not looking like that will be the case.

The other important thing here is the number of plate appearances, which is something that you never mention in your absurd ramblings about "natural" positions in the lineup.

 

I see Furcal as being more of a number 7 than anything else--ideally he would be number 8 but Hecchavarria has that locked down. If you bat him second, he's likely to get 90-100 more plate appearances than he should otherwise be getting over the course of the season. In the end, a large part of who bats second should come down to the overall talent of the player.

Morrison is likely to get on base more than Furcal.

 

And this point is irrelevant because he won't be playing here and his replacement won't be batting second. Leaving... Furcal.

 

And my point is that if Furcal, by default, is the best person to hit second, it's because he does have the ingredients to possibly succeed there. At least more so than anyone else.

 

I am not disagreeing with you that he should not be batting second if at all possible. However it's not looking like that will be the case.

Morrison is still on the team. If it were irrelevant, you shouldn't have wasted time with that silliness about two lefties in a row.

 

He doesn't have the ingredients to "succeed" or be "productive" there, because he's old and not good at getting on base anymore. He doesn't have the talent to warrant getting 90-100 extra plate appearances over the course of a season.

Maybe we should wait another month or so, see what happens, then make lineup projections.

 

However, let's throw out some scenarios here.

 

Morrison stays, LF platoon:

 

CF Yelich

2B Furcal

RF Stanton

1B Morrison

C Salty/LF Ruggiano

LF Jones/C Salty

3B Dietrich

SS Hech

 

Or

 

CF Yelich

C Salty

RF Stanton

1B Morrison

LF Jones/Ruggiano

3B Dietrich

2B Furcal

SS Hech

 

Or

 

CF Yelich

1B Morrison

RF Stanton

C Salty

LF Jones/Ruggiano

3B Dietrich

2B Furcal

SS Hech

 

I'm just not seeing how lineups 2 and 3 would be better than 1, personally. For 2 and 3, you stack your deck up at the top 4 and then hope the bottom 4 can do something. First one, to me, is more balanced. Not saying Furcal is a good #2 hitter, but I think he's the lesser of two evils here.

 

This is why I'd LIKE to sign Michael Young for a two year deal, especially if we can keep Morrison, or even if we can't. Two lineups:

 

With Morrison:

CF Yelich

3B Young

RF Stanton

1B Morrison

C Salty/LF Ruggiano

LF Jones/C Salty

2B Furcal

SS Hech

 

Without:

LF Yelich

3B Young

RF Stanton

CF Ozuna

C Salty/1B Ruggiano

1B Jones/C Salty

2B Furcal

SS Hech

 

... it's still a shit sandwich regardless.

 

Let's see what happens after Morrison is traded, if he is traded. Winter Meetings are this week, I doubt we're done signing/trading/whatevering.

lol, I love all the predictions everyone makes in regards to the line-up, lets just see how it goes...5 more months till opening day, I know,seems so far away,but time moves so fast these days.... Can we get any worse then last season? We can only getting better from here...patience, .patience...

I think that the extra plate appearances given to the second hitter matters more than anything else in terms of wins over the course of the season.

 

Also, Michael Young is terrible. A zero WAR player at best.

Oh, never mind.

 

As FloridaMarlinsForever said, 5 months til opening day. Let's see what happens.

I'm actually curious to know why you think Michael Young would be a good fit here and an upgrade over Ed Lucas even.

Consistent veteran, gives us a player all over the infield, still a decent hitter, probably better than anything we have right now at anywhere but first base. If anything, a bench bat.

 

Besides ... Ed Lucas has to re-adjust to the ever-adjusting league.

I'm not sure he's really that consistent anymore with the drop off in offensive production. His power has gone down a lot even for playing in hitter friendly parks. I'm not sure he's much of a decent hitter anymore, but even if he is, his terrible defense easily overshadows that.

 

I seriously think that Ed Lucas would put up a higher WAR than Michael Young would.

*shrug* Maybe so.

He also gives that infield versatility, so ... I don't know, maybe I was just throwing names around.

 

Question for you, Mr. Penguin - assume we trade Morrison and do not get any MLB-ready players in return, just prospects. What do you make the lineup?

Depends on who is playing 3rd base, CF, and if there is a platoon mate for Jones at first (is he on the team?).

 

There are possible scenarios where I could envision Furcal being plugged into the second spot (like maybe when Mathis is playing). My whole point here, what Wild Card keeps missing, isn't a question of whether or not there are better options than Furcal. I am refuting his claim that Furcal would be productive in that role.

 

I don't know how much versatility Young brings if he is lousy at every IF position. He should basically be a DH at this point.

Marlins interested in Michael Morse? Hmmm...

Marlins interested in Michael Morse? Hmmm...

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ...

Depends on who is playing 3rd base, CF, and if there is a platoon mate for Jones at first (is he on the team?).

 

Assume... Dietrich. Ozuna. Yes, Ed Lucas.

 

Now I would be interested in seeing your best lineup as well.

Marlins interested in Michael Morse? Hmmm...

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ...I mean he does have pop and can play first base vs lefties. Kinda intriguing.

Marlins interested in Michael Morse? Hmmm...

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ...I mean he does have pop and can play first base vs lefties. Kinda intriguing.

Last time I checked we only have enough roster spots for a few guys. We can't have Morse/Jones/Furcal/Hech/Dietrich/Solano/Dobbs all playing the infield.