1 hour ago, taiwanmarlin said:

Have no idea why the expanded postseason would be a big issue in the negotiations, it seems not a big "money " related stuff. 

Oh it is a MASSIVE money related item.

For the owners anyways.

Don't know if Mad Dog is reliable, but this is interesting.

52 minutes ago, FishFan95 said:

Don't know if Mad Dog is reliable, but this is interesting.

I’m all for it 🤞🏻

2 hours ago, FishFan95 said:

Don't know if Mad Dog is reliable, but this is interesting.

Does this mean teams could have still been proposing trades during the lockout? I hadn't thought of that before and might mean that trades are announced pretty much minutes after the lockout ends because they may have already been agreed to. 

5 hours ago, SilverBullet said:

Does this mean teams could have still been proposing trades during the lockout?

They aren’t supposed to but likely have been. 

 

This is pretty easy. If Sherman stays pat or makes a dumb, throwaway signing, I'm not interested in watching this upcoming season. If he goes out and gets significant pieces, I will watch.

1 hour ago, SonOfJack said:

 

What losses? If they only miss (parts of or all of) April, there's no loss! Haven't they been saying they actually lose money in April??

9 hours ago, SilverBullet said:

Does this mean teams could have still been proposing trades during the lockout? I hadn't thought of that before and might mean that trades are announced pretty much minutes after the lockout ends because they may have already been agreed to. 

I just have no any idea how the league to prevent something like that to happen.

1 hour ago, SonOfJack said:

 

True or not this feels like a dig on us as always. He said there's other teams but only bothered to specify the Marlins. Cheap heat. 

6 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

True or not this feels like a dig on us as always. He said there's other teams but only bothered to specify the Marlins. Cheap heat. 

Even D*vid S*mson got annoyed by it.

12 hours ago, FishFan95 said:

Don't know if Mad Dog is reliable, but this is interesting.

Lol, I think a mad dog is always not reliable. Marlins and Mariners, so it's a Mar & Mar bidding war. 

10 hours ago, SilverBullet said:

Does this mean teams could have still been proposing trades during the lockout? I hadn't thought of that before and might mean that trades are announced pretty much minutes after the lockout ends because they may have already been agreed to. 

I fucking said that back in December and was routinely jeered as saying, hey you cant do that.

When I said, why cant you talk the trades in theory and just need to finalize.

yet again....

Das was basically right. 

4 hours ago, SonOfJack said:

They aren’t supposed to but likely have been. 

that was according to I think an ESPN article.  I pointed out something else saying they really can discuss trades of players within organizations, just cant finalize things. 

2 hours ago, SonOfJack said:

 

Cheap shot?  Yes maybe.

But reality is reality.  The Marlins have shown this behavior time and again so ya..

And like many have said, what losses are we talking about here?  Are we talking about the losses by having to pay less experienced players more?  If so thats exactly why the MLBPA hasnt agreed to a deal!  Its just a reallocation of money instead of actually growing payrolls in line with growth in revenues. 

13 hours ago, SilverBullet said:

Does this mean teams could have still been proposing trades during the lockout? I hadn't thought of that before and might mean that trades are announced pretty much minutes after the lockout ends because they may have already been agreed to. 

 

As has been said, I don't think they're supposed to, but not entirely surprising that teams could be talking "hypothetically, what if....." on the side.

4 hours ago, Entendu said:

This is pretty easy. If Sherman stays pat or makes a dumb, throwaway signing, I'm not interested in watching this upcoming season. If he goes out and gets significant pieces, I will watch.

I hope he has people reading forums like this one, actually getting the pulse of fans to know that the even die hards are done if they don't do more.

 

Impossible that it was worse considering they offered a few things MLB wants.

The same team owners who told the Cubs and fans they didn't have any money to invest into/keep the stars of the team.

Poor owners.

 

 

1 hour ago, Michael said:

The same team owners who told the Cubs and fans they didn't have any money to invest into/keep the stars of the team.

Poor owners.

 

 

We are broke fellas, pay no attention to anything else we do.

Just believe us.  

 

We are very poor!

No compromise no deal, even my two years old son knows it ……

I'm ok with changes to improve the flow and action of the game but larger bases seems like too drastic of a change for me. That's like lowering the net in basketball or shortening the length of a football field. That's changing the game by making the actual physical elements or items of the game easier for the players. I don't think that's the right way to make changes.

13 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

I'm ok with changes to improve the flow and action of the game but larger bases seems like too drastic of a change for me. That's like lowering the net in basketball or shortening the length of a football field. That's changing the game by making the actual physical elements or items of the game easier for the players. I don't think that's the right way to make changes.

Depends how much larger. If they go with what they did in the Atlantic League (15" bases increased to 18" bases), we're talking about ... a foot shorter between bases, once you account for all sides? Perhaps an uneven change, maybe six inches closer from home to first, third to home and a foot between first and second, second and third lol.

 

Either way. It would bring back *some* small ball elements which I do admittedly miss. Give me more steals!!

My first year watching baseball was with JP, Luis, and Derrek Lee running rampant on the basepaths, so that stuck with me.

On 3/6/2022 at 8:11 AM, SonOfJack said:

 

So downsize - Pablo, Aguilar, and Bass shed $12+ million and they will get two massive club controlled players for Pablo. Trust Cooper/Lewin can handle 1B (or Anderson and play Wendle at 3B), and now payroll is sitting low $50s..... trade Meyer/Eury/Burdick/DLC for Reynolds (payroll now high $50s), and you *should* still have $20m to spend on 3-4 guys (DH, innings eater, luxury reliever upgrades). If you defer some money, you can fit Schwarber/Castellanos into this with at least one good veteran pitcher. Remember, who knows what is coming back for Pablo as this hypo also has Reynolds already and maybe you get another reliever from the Pirates (or hell, ask for Thompson back and juice the trade. Thompson makes a lot of sense as a 125 IP guy).

Basically - they can still put together a winner if they are smart about this. Sure trading multiple enormous pitchers can hurt longterm, but you also have Sandy/Rogers/Elisier/Luzardo/Cabrera, and Sixto/Eder/Fulton in the pipeline. Maybe win some games eventually.

Stallings, Fortes
Cooper, Lewin
Jazz
Rojas, Berti
Anderson, Wendle
Sanchez
Reynolds
Garcia
Schwarber/Castellanos

Sandy, Rogers, ______, Elisier, Luzardo
Bender, Floro, Cabrera, Pop, Head
Bleier, ________, Okert

AAA - Neidert, Garrett, Poteet, Holloway, Bleday, Isan, A. Jackson
DL - Sixto
Likely 2-3 other notable depth names not reflected also received from trades

 

Continuing point - they only have themselves to blame if they suck here on out (absent injuries)

Keep Eury. Everyone else can skidoodle.