The Marlins reportedly have offered $3.7 million and $3.5 million, respectively, to arbitration-eligible pitchers Carl Pavano and Brad Penny. Pavano gets the higher offer because he's just a year away from free agency. The Marlins don't appear to be interested in signing either pitcher to a long-term deal.

 

 

Interesting, I'm not sure if that was expected but It came as sort of a surprise to me, for Penny atleast.

I dont think this offer has been made to Brad, I dont know about Carl. Brad left last night to head back to Florida and I just put a call in to him to see if this is true, Will let you know.

Alright, Thanks, :cool It'll be interesting to see what the truth behind this is

Ok so we now have, three insiders on the site? Does this make it more credible than any other site?

 

 

Anyway, the Herald did get a good report on the signing of Donald Audette by the Panthers so they may be right on this one as well...

3.7 and 3.5 million for them? wow, that was totally out of left field.

that sucks.....no long term deal?

but It came as sort of a surprise to me, for Penny atleast.

I think they want to see how he responds to last season, which seems more logical to me. If he improves the way most think he will, I think he'll be signed to a 3/4 year deal next off-season, including Josh Beckett, to avoid arbitration for the next few years. And I think Pavano should be, and will be signed to a two-year deal this off-season.

we are in no rush to sign penny long term, so i think it's smart that we wait to see how he does next season. the FO has already shown that it prefers to make players work for future salary, rather than signing them long-term. hopefully we'll get more mileage out of him this way.

 

i can also see the reasoning behind not giving pavs a long term deal now. what would we gain? after next season, we will have burnett, beckett, willis, and penny secured here. not signing pavs gives us more flexibility for that 5th starter spot for future acquisitions. if he is good this year, we will still have plenty of time to re-sign him.

Neither pitcher will get a long term deal?Sometimes i wonder about payroll flexibilty.

We have a very good rotation but the reason we dont sign them long term is because you know how Beinfest is on signing players omre than 1 year. They are both solid pitchers but i knew he wouldnt sign them long term

It's not like Penny is walking when this deal is done. We have his rights for the 2005 season as well, so it's no rush.

These numbers ($3.7 and $3.5) seem way out of whack to me considering they are both going to arbitration in a short while. Unless both players are planning to go into arb hearings asking for the moon, inwhich case they would be weakening their cases, the Marlins were expected, for example, to offer Pavano two years in the $5.5 mil range and nothing could be gained by offering deals in this range right now.

 

I'm prepared to be proved wrong but these appear to me to be what the players might be asking for in arbitration, not what the team would be offering at this time.

 

A few weeks ago we were debating the Marlins' anticipated 2004 payroll. In both cases I was a half to a million dollars higher on these two players than was the conventional/majority wisdom here and these numbers are $1 million higher than even I anticipated.

 

As we used to say, this does not compute.

I tend to agree with that Marlins2003.

 

I figured they'd both get right about 3 million each if they went through arbitration hearings.

I split the insider off-topic discussion into here

Anyway, I trust Beinfest knows what he's doing. *shrugs*

I always thought Penny would make good trade bait someday. Also, Pavano won't be in our future too much longer. Our future rotation will be Beckett, Burnett, Willis, Allison, and someone else at #5. I wish we would have held on to Denny Bautista. I think he'll be special one day.

im not sure abotu contracts so i might be wrong.

 

but, we should be out of the hampton salary by next year ... and pudge the following year.

 

we do have Castillo, and Lowell signed for a while so the smart thing would be to lock our guns longterm.

 

I know beckett will be signed long term, and willis wont be arb elegible for a while, so signing Penny for a 3 year deal wouldnt be too bad because it would come cheap ... say less than 8-10 mil for the duration of the contract.... Now i would also hope that we could lock Burnett for a long time, but id like to see how he's gonna hold up this year, i dont think we are gonna see the Burnett of 2002 till the end of the year ... or 2005. Now i hope he proves me wrong.

 

Either way i agree with someones post about our rotation of the "future"

 

Beckett , Burnett, Penny, Willis and Allison ... and yes i agree that it would be nice if we had Batista in the backburner

 

Pavs is good but i dont think he will be in our plans come next year... i expect good numbers from him this year, and will probably move to our 3rd best starter in 04.

im not sure abotu contracts so i might be wrong.

 

but, we should be out of the hampton salary by next year ... and pudge the following year.

I believe we're paying Hampton this year and next also. & unfortunately it goes up a million each year.

$9 million in 2003,

$10 million in 2004

$11 million in 2005

 

We're paying Pudge deferred money through 2005 also.

 

But in 2006 that's about 14 million that'll be cleared off the books.

Why do you guys have to pay hampton 11 million? Spoonybarger and pierre aren't worth that much. What was the logic of the deal?

Why do you guys have to pay hampton 11 million? Spoonybarger and pierre aren't worth that much. What was the logic of the deal?

Both Preston Wilson and Charles Johnson had huge contracts. We ended up paying a portion of their contracts.

oh yeah, I forgot. so all in all, what were the costs incurred on the rockies, braves, and marlins?

 

thanks for the info

I know in the end, by giving up PW and CJ, paying for part of Hampton's contract, and acquiring Pierre and Spooney, we ended saving about $25 million.

im not sure abotu contracts so i might be wrong.

 

but, we should be out of the hampton salary by next year ... and pudge the following year.

 

we do have Castillo, and Lowell signed for a while so the smart thing would be to lock our guns longterm.

 

I know beckett will be signed long term, and willis wont be arb elegible for a while, so signing Penny for a 3 year deal wouldnt be too bad because it would come cheap ... say less than 8-10 mil for the duration of the contract.... Now i would also hope that we could lock Burnett for a long time, but id like to see how he's gonna hold up this year, i dont think we are gonna see the Burnett of 2002 till the end of the year ... or 2005. Now i hope he proves me wrong.

 

Either way i agree with someones post about our rotation of the "future"

 

Beckett , Burnett, Penny, Willis and Allison ... and yes i agree that it would be nice if we had Batista in the backburner

 

Pavs is good but i dont think he will be in our plans come next year... i expect good numbers from him this year, and will probably move to our 3rd best starter in 04.

I love Penny and all, but I am convinced that unless he does something with his weight he will not continue to be effective at the major league level. I might be in the minority here, but I would rather keep today's Pavano over today's Penny. Not just physically, but Pavano brings a more effective and completely different game to the table. His pitches vary from Burnett and Beckett's, getting rid of the monotony of the staff. Penny is very similar to Beckett pitchwise (Beckett has better pitches), and if given the choice between signing one or the other long term I would trade Penny and keep Pavano. Personally I think Pavano will be better, and I think Penny would command more in a deal anyways.

im not sure abotu contracts so i might be wrong.

 

but, we should be out of the hampton salary by next year ... and pudge the following year.

 

we do have Castillo, and Lowell signed for a while so the smart thing would be to lock our guns longterm.

 

I know beckett will be signed long term, and willis wont be arb elegible for a while, so signing Penny for a 3 year deal wouldnt be too bad because it would come cheap ... say less than 8-10 mil for the duration of the contract.... Now i would also hope that we could lock Burnett for a long time, but id like to see how he's gonna hold up this year, i dont think we are gonna see the Burnett of 2002 till the end of the year ... or 2005. Now i hope he proves me wrong.

 

Either way i agree with someones post about our rotation of the "future"

 

Beckett , Burnett, Penny, Willis and Allison ... and yes i agree that it would be nice if we had Batista in the backburner

 

Pavs is good but i dont think he will be in our plans come next year... i expect good numbers from him this year, and will probably move to our 3rd best starter in 04.

I love Penny and all, but I am convinced that unless he does something with his weight he will not continue to be effective at the major league level. I might be in the minority here, but I would rather keep today's Pavano over today's Penny. Not just physically, but Pavano brings a more effective and completely different game to the table. His pitches vary from Burnett and Beckett's, getting rid of the monotony of the staff. Penny is very similar to Beckett pitchwise (Beckett has better pitches), and if given the choice between signing one or the other long term I would trade Penny and keep Pavano. Personally I think Pavano will be better, and I think Penny would command more in a deal anyways.

I suggested in November that we send "wanted" posters to all the fast food restaurants in Oklahoma with Brad's picture and the line "DO NOT FEED THIS MAN!".

I'm hoping that Carl has turned the corner into the land of greatness that everyone was predicting for him before he developed arm trouble.

 

That said, I can also admit that it's a risky business to offer any pitcher a long term deal, but Pavs :hat deserves a 2yr deal

I love Penny and all, but I am convinced that unless he does something with his weight he will not continue to be effective at the major league level. I might be in the minority here, but I would rather keep today's Pavano over today's Penny. Not just physically, but Pavano brings a more effective and completely different game to the table. His pitches vary from Burnett and Beckett's, getting rid of the monotony of the staff. Penny is very similar to Beckett pitchwise (Beckett has better pitches), and if given the choice between signing one or the other long term I would trade Penny and keep Pavano. Personally I think Pavano will be better, and I think Penny would command more in a deal anyways.

pavano is good dont get me wrong ... but i thnk that penny brings more to the table, hes a horse i dont mind the weight since i dont think hes overweight or anything.

 

hes our projected 3rd starter (taking into account AJ bounces back and goes to the 2nd slot) but he could be a number 2 anywhere else.... we need to sign all 3 thats my opinion... hopefully penny will show what his about this year

 

pavs projected numbers

16-13 3.97 era