I know it’s early, but I’m wondering if anyone had any regrets or changed their mind on the Luzardo for Marte trade?  

In trade thread it seemed like it was well received besides a few.   

This dude's been our worst starting pitcher all year. Like I don't even think that's hyperbole or an overreaction. 

Not really, no.

Marte wasn’t interested in our contract extension offer.

Plus, as I said at the time of the trade, we have no real need for Marte because we have the best CF’er in baseball, Lewis Brinson.

11 minutes ago, Erick said:

Not really, no.

Marte wasn’t interested in our contract extension offer.

Plus, as I said at the time of the trade, we have no real need for Marte because we have the best CF’er in baseball, Lewis Brinson.

I was talking about the trade in itself, not the other factors that lead up to the trade. 

Is that Terrell “love me some me”  Owens in your avatar?

If we sign back Marte then it's a great trade …

1 hour ago, FishFry said:

Is that Terrell “love me some me”  Owens in your avatar?

@Erick

I, too, am curious to know who it is.

I'll wait til after next season to make up my mind on Luzardo. I already expected him to struggle this season. He needs the pitching development staff to get a hold of him, tinker around, and see what they can fix.

1 hour ago, QbanCastillo said:

I'll wait til after next season to make up my mind on Luzardo. I already expected him to struggle this season. He needs the pitching development staff to get a hold of him, tinker around, and see what they can fix.

Do we send him down now?  Maybe that should have been a better thread question. 

53 minutes ago, FishFry said:

Do we send him down now?  Maybe that should have been a better thread question. 

Honestly, a game like today was probably great for him. He definitely struggled, but the team gave him a big enough lead that he could keep pitching and try to get it together. I think I read on Twitter or something somewhere that he lost a lot of spin in the middle of this year. He's probably one of the folks having to get used to pitching without the sticky stuff, and frankly, there's no better place to know whether your new approach is working or not than facing actual major league hitting. If the season isn't going to be a championship season, then why not use it to get Luzardo right?

20 minutes ago, Photo-Realistic Billy said:

Honestly, a game like today was probably great for him. He definitely struggled, but the team gave him a big enough lead that he could keep pitching and try to get it together. I think I read on Twitter or something somewhere that he lost a lot of spin in the middle of this year. He's probably one of the folks having to get used to pitching without the sticky stuff, and frankly, there's no better place to know whether your new approach is working or not than facing actual major league hitting. If the season isn't going to be a championship season, then why not use it to get Luzardo right?

I’m not sure what would be the best course of action, but in order to see the problem(s) they need some sample size first, after that they should break him down with a new approach system like you said.  I think he’s been taught to make batters miss (sticky ball).  But now he needs to make his pitches at the corners instead.  A new approach is hopefully the answer and our rotation players should help as they seem to attack (approach) hitters the same way. 

Welcome back.  

1 hour ago, Photo-Realistic Billy said:

He's probably one of the folks having to get used to pitching without the sticky stuff

Did the rules of “prohibit applying foreign substances to baseballs” implemented in the minor league too ? if you can't do it in the majors then you can't do it in the minors too or the stats of minors would be untrustworthy. 

Marte was a free agent at end of season and they weren’t in race so it made no sense to keep him.  

Anyone who expected Luzardo to come in and be good immediately was being too optimistic. His season had been bad. The reason for acquiring him was the raw talent he possessed and the years of control.  The idea is over time the Marlins are able to “fix” him and make him a valuable asset. 

Considering Marte was a rental, I still think getting Luzardo for him was a good return.  We weren’t going to get a top prospect for a rental so I like going for a young SP who has shown big league success before. 

It’s way too early to decide on this trade. 

Let our pitching development crew work with him over an offseason and then we'll see how he is next year.

Remember when Pablo first came up, he wasn't all that great. Now? Injuries aside, pretty good!

Look at what this group has done with guys like Zach Thompson. Even Cody Poteet looks viable when he's on the mound for us.

Let them work their magic on Luzardo. Too much talent there to let it go to waste.

2 hours ago, SonOfJack said:

Marte was a free agent at end of season and they weren’t in race so it made no sense to keep him.  

Anyone who expected Luzardo to come in and be good immediately was being too optimistic. His season had been bad. The reason for acquiring him was the raw talent he possessed and the years of control.  The idea is over time the Marlins are able to “fix” him and make him a valuable asset. 

Considering Marte was a rental, I still think getting Luzardo for him was a good return.  We weren’t going to get a top prospect for a rental so I like going for a young SP who has shown big league success before. 

It’s way too early to decide on this trade. 

The concept of the trade was poor in that our need for positional players or bats should have trumped any raw potential of an already stacked rotation. If they had to sweeten the pot with additional prospects then that was the time. 

We may very well trade a nice pitching prospect to make up for this trade (player of need) and close another spot in the rotation. Talk about killing two birds with one stone.  I’m probably overreacting but it wouldn’t surprise me. Just look at Bass and his 7 losses, the FO can’t accept when a player doesn’t belong in the order they originally had planned.  

 

1 hour ago, FishFry said:

The concept of the trade was poor in that our need for positional players or bats should have trumped any raw potential of an already stacked rotation. If they had to sweeten the pot with additional prospects then that was the time.

Now as much as I said "let's wait and see" on Luzardo in my last post, I agree with this. We've got so many starting pitching prospects in a time when starting pitching is probably the MOST valuable thing in the sport ... we've really got to start using some of that to get bats. Like I said before, we can't have 12 aces on the staff. lol

12 hours ago, Erick said:

Not really, no.

Marte wasn’t interested in our contract extension offer.

Plus, as I said at the time of the trade, we have no real need for Marte because we have the best CF’er in baseball, Lewis Brinson.

Liar. 

Luzardo shouldnt be in the MLB rotation right now is the actual issue.  

He needs to be down on the farm getting his mechanical issues fixed, not at the MLB level losing confidence.

If they can fix it great trade.

If they can not then whatever, who cares.  

 

Still you make that trade 10 times out of 10. 

On 8/14/2021 at 9:53 AM, Das Texan said:

Luzardo shouldnt be in the MLB rotation right now is the actual issue.  

He needs to be down on the farm getting his mechanical issues fixed, not at the MLB level losing confidence.

If they can fix it great trade.

If they can not then whatever, who cares.  

 

Still you make that trade 10 times out of 10. 

Das Texan is speaking Da Truth

On 8/14/2021 at 8:53 AM, Das Texan said:

If they can fix it great trade.

If they can not then whatever, who cares. 

Cardinal fan opinion, really. 

8 hours ago, FishFry said:

Cardinal fan opinion, really. 

um ok?