February 5, 201412 yr Super solid signing. Jones and Baker platooning should combine for a competent 1st baseman this year, with Baker getting time at multiple positions. Two years is nothing, less than $2 million a year is Dobbs money, and I think we'll get solid production from Baker. This is actually a positive signing, although I'd like to see the team let some younger guys get playing time instead of giving all these 30+ year olds starting time in what should be a transition season to 2015. This team still needs more hitters to be taken seriously. Again, love the signing, but the overall strategy the Marlins have exhibited the last two seasons has been a bit odd. Well, like you said, "transition season." Going to be quite a few stopgaps required. We are transitioning into the future, and in 2015, we'll probably have a few more of those future players up in the Show. This is a good signing, and we'll have him as a good right-handed bat off the bench in 2015. I approve.
February 5, 201412 yr Totally agree. I still think if the Front Office truly understood that it was going to be hard to compete in both 2013 and 2014 with the lineups we were/are putting out, then it's smarter to throw young guys out and see which ones stick (with hopefully some breakout candidates). I feel like that Astros have taken that strategy the last few years. Put young guys out and see which ones perform well, bottom out so you consistently get top players in the draft, and build for the future. Guys like Baker, Pierre, Furcal, Polanco, etc... serve no point getting paid to just play during meaningless seasons and then leave. At that point you'd rather just pay rookies minimum scale and hope you find some good ones. At least this year I think we found a good old guy in Baker.
February 5, 201412 yr I like this sign. Infielder and Backup depth are getting bigger. Also Baker was famous for lefty killer. Even not expensive.
February 5, 201412 yr Hey doesn't someone now have to be taken off the 40 man roster to make room for Baker?
February 5, 201412 yr Well, like you said, "transition season." Going to be quite a few stopgaps required. We are transitioning into the future, and in 2015, we'll probably have a few more of those future players up in the Show. This is a good signing, and we'll have him as a good right-handed bat off the bench in 2015. I approve. Wait, I thought 2006 was our "transition season." Or was it 2009? Or 2011? I can't keep track with all of our transition seasons...
February 5, 201412 yr Wait, I thought 2006 was our "transition season." Or was it 2009? Or 2011? I can't keep track with all of our transition seasons... From 2004 until our next championship = "transition seasons"
February 5, 201412 yr Totally agree. I still think if the Front Office truly understood that it was going to be hard to compete in both 2013 and 2014 with the lineups we were/are putting out, then it's smarter to throw young guys out and see which ones stick (with hopefully some breakout candidates). I feel like that Astros have taken that strategy the last few years. Put young guys out and see which ones perform well, bottom out so you consistently get top players in the draft, and build for the future. Guys like Baker, Pierre, Furcal, Polanco, etc... serve no point getting paid to just play during meaningless seasons and then leave. At that point you'd rather just pay rookies minimum scale and hope you find some good ones. At least this year I think we found a good old guy in Baker. The reasons you don't just throw the young kids out are that they can sometimes get more appropriate experience in the minors, and you also push back arbitration/free agency. Those are very important things, especially for small- budget teams who can't afford big $$$.
February 5, 201412 yr Hey doesn't someone now have to be taken off the 40 man roster to make room for Baker? Chris Hatcher, Michael Brady, Sam Dyson, and Rob Brantly could all be a DFA candidates. They have some promise, but are likely back end bullpen/bench catcher candidates and they have better options coming in pipeline. This isn't to big a deal. I suspect it'll be Hatcher who they have DFA'd a few times. Fun fact - Hatcher is the oldest pitcher on 40 man roster. He's 29. That is pretty amazing.
February 5, 201412 yr Chris Hatcher, Michael Brady, Sam Dyson, and Rob Brantly could all be a DFA candidates. They have some promise, but are likely back end bullpen/bench catcher candidates and they have better options coming in pipeline. This isn't to big a deal. I suspect it'll be Hatcher who they have DFA'd a few times. Fun fact - Hatcher is the oldest pitcher on 40 man roster. He's 29. That is pretty amazing. My first guess was Hatcher too... and that's amazing that he's the old guy at 29.
February 5, 201412 yr these incremental improvements would look even nicer if they came after a Stanton deal.
February 6, 201412 yr I like this deal, but you shouldn't be signing guys like this for two years. I'm guessing we were the only team offering that, so of course he took it.
February 7, 201412 yr I like this deal, but you shouldn't be signing guys like this for two years. I'm guessing we were the only team offering that, so of course he took it. Having Garrett Jones for two years is what makes us have Baker for two years.
February 8, 201412 yr Baker will probablg get most of the starts at second base 1) Furcal 2) Lolno He's going to be getting starts vs lefties at first base.
February 8, 201412 yr 1) Furcal 2) Lolno He's going to be getting starts vs lefties at first base. I also think he'll see some time at third if McGehee isn't his old Brewers self.
February 9, 201412 yr I could see Baker getting some time at 3B in 2014, but not 2B. I think the strict platoon of Jones and Baker at 1B will give them much more production than Logan Morrison would have.
February 9, 201412 yr I still can't believe how ignorant the majority of you are, begging for the FO to platoon this guy all over the diamond. His defense is SOOOOOO TERRIBLE that it has outweighed any offensive production he's brought to the table in four of the last five seasons. The exception is last year, where he magically produced power equivalent to his previous three years combined. He's had a negative WAR 4 out of his 5 last seasons. How did the John Buck signing after his career year work out? Lay off the Kool-Aid.
February 9, 201412 yr Comparing him to Buck is terrible. Baker isn't making close to $6m over the length of this contract, let alone one year. He gives us a good option against lefties, really no reason to be against this move. It's not like he's going to start 90 games. I'd say at most he starts in 60. All depends on how many lefties we face. His defense, overall, is irrelevant. We have the lead late, we take him out, simple as that.
February 9, 201412 yr He hit 7 of his 11 HR on the road last year. Luckily, the Marlins face lefties in hitters parks on the road too. I think he's pretty good bat for the price given that he can play 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and corner OF. He gives the team multiple platoon options. . I acknowledge the fact that the Marlins will face "lefties on the road" as well. Not in the hitter's parks he hit them in last season, though. You have yet to acknowledge his defensive deficiencies, or the fact that his 11 HR's last season are an outlier when looking at his last five seasons.
February 9, 201412 yr His defense, overall, is irrelevant. First of all, the context I was comparing him to Buck in, was the fact that we signed them coming off of their best offensive season, not their contract terms. Secondly, WAR shows that his defense IS relevant, in the fact that it has negated his offensive contributions 4 out of the last 5 seasons, no matter what part of the game he plays or what part of the game you pull him.
February 9, 201412 yr I still can't believe how ignorant the majority of you are, begging for the FO to platoon this guy all over the diamond. His defense is SOOOOOO TERRIBLE that it has outweighed any offensive production he's brought to the table in four of the last five seasons. The exception is last year, where he magically produced power equivalent to his previous three years combined. He's had a negative WAR 4 out of his 5 last seasons. How did the John Buck signing after his career year work out? Lay off the Kool-Aid. He has a career 4.7 UZR/150 at 2B, so he's actually above average there and not SOOOOOO terrible. Probably should look into the basis of facts before just spouting off the end numbers. Also, last year and 2011, he had a pretty positive grade at 1B. He is below average for his career at the position, but those numbers seem skewed by quite hilariously bad stats for 2012 in another small sample size. Regardless he has been pretty ok lately and I think it's safe to say he is likely, at worst, slightly below average at 1B. Conversely, absolutely terrible at 3B/Corner OF spots which is why his WAR is so low. The answer is simple, play him at 1B and 2B against lefties or when Furcal needs a breather. He's not a defensive liability and he can hit a little bit. For the love of god don't play him at 3B or the OF under any circumstance but desperation extra inning games. I suspect this is what happens as Bugo/Dobbs/G. Jones will shift to outfield if Baker comes in late some game. This is not a big deal, and Baker is a significant upgrade over the 250+ PA he will rake lefties. Also, as noted above, comparing him to Buck when the contract is 1/5th the value is a bit ludicrous.
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.