Marlins Official: We’re Never Going To Sign Stanton To A Longterm Deal

27 Comments + Add Comment

• Alex68 March 8, 2013 at 12:48 pm

  Well, to be fair, under sandy alderson, the mets won’t sign him long term either so…… That’s that
  • Met Maniac March 8, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    Pipe dream. Sandy gets rid of all stars, he doesn’t trade for them. If we had Stanton already, we’d be trading him at the deadline for more prospects. That’s how it works now. Sell high no matter what.
    • TRS86 March 8, 2013 at 12:59 pm

      I guess Wright and Niese are the obvious exceptions?
      • Met Maniac March 8, 2013 at 1:03 pm

        Niese is an All Star? I must have missed that. How did he perform?
        • TRS86 March 8, 2013 at 1:09 pm

          Great.

          I missed the All-star part. I guess Wright is the exception then.
          • van March 8, 2013 at 1:11 pm

            all-star would have nothing to do with it anyway. That has no actual correlation to contract $. Unless he is implying that Sandy immediately trades anyone that is really good?
            • Alex68 March 8, 2013 at 1:29 pm

              Unless he is implying that Sandy immediately trades anyone that is really good?”

              Beltran and Dickey… Pagan… then lost reyes in favor of moneyball beliefs and a draft pick we didn’t even sign. That should answer your question or your statement.
              • TRS86 March 8, 2013 at 2:10 pm

                Uhmmm, didn’t we get two picks for Reyes as compensation and signed both of them?
              • Alex68 March 8, 2013 at 2:59 pm

                did we???? Who was that tall pitcher we didn’t sign? wasn’t he part of the compesation?
                • TRS86 March 8, 2013 at 3:08 pm

                  The player they didn’t sign was their own. #75. The two players they received for Reyes were the 35th (Kevin Plawecki) and 71st (Matt Reynolds) picks.
  • DBAssassin March 8, 2013 at 1:38 pm

    This is the thing I just don’t understand. I know you hate Alderson but your insistence on blaming him for everything is pathological. If you believe that the team’s unwillingness to spend the past four years was an Alderson decision you’ve got your head in the sand.

    The Wilpons are/were broke. Period full stop. BROKE. Alderson was brought in to manage the situation, yes. But to imply that he has been holding back on spending money that was otherwise available this whole time is patently absurd.

    Even the Wright re-signing and Bay deals were done in response to Wilpon financial difficulties. Wright agreed to a reduced salary in 2013 and Bay agreed to defer money. Its all tied to the team debt and their personal situation.

    But you go ahead and keep believing it was Sandy. Its always Sandy.

    Tilt away Don Quixote.
    • Joey D. March 8, 2013 at 2:16 pm

      Hi DB,

      The problem most of us have is not with Sandy for we understand fully that he was brought in to help resolve a drastic financial situation that did and still does exist today and still threatens the Wilpon’s ability to hold onto what in the future will still be a billion dollar asset. We know all decisions pertaining to baseball matters are made with the priority on cost savings more than putting together a competitive team.

      Our problem is that there are many who see Sandy’s moves differently – in their viewpoint, despite the fiscal restrictions facing him his moves are part of well thought out, strategic vision of re-buildng a team. With that, there will always be a sharp divide untill it can no longer be said that the core of young players needs further time to develop and that moves to obtain the missing pieces from the outside aren’t taken beyond more prospects and inexpensive fringe players.
      • TRS86 March 8, 2013 at 2:19 pm

        Joey why can’t it be both? The Yankees are trying to cut cost and next year even more but they are also in need of a rebuild. So while yes some of the Mets moves may have been made with finances in mind, that doesn’t change the fact that some of them needed to be made for the good of the team as well. Beltran and Dickey come to mind here.
        • Joey D. March 8, 2013 at 2:43 pm

          Hi TRS,

          Yes, it could easily be both. But circumstances fiscal in nature are so overwhelming that it can’t. Otherwise, Sandy might have allowed his people to make moves that could both, build for the future without sacrificing that future to win for today. And it would not have been feasible to retain some of our more expensive players in lieu of trying to keep them all for that would have indeed produced a mediocre team.

          As Metsie has pointed out, there was no middle ground – at least with the very conservative fiscal philolsophy Sandy has comparing investment to cost savings..
          • TRS86 March 8, 2013 at 2:46 pm

            I see it differently. Beltran IMO was a necessary move and the return on Dickey seems to be applauded by most baseball officials. They re-signed Wright and extended Niese. Hopefully Harvey and Ike are next to get extensions as well.

            Could they have spent more on filler during that time if money wasn’t an issue? Sure. Doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t have still traded Beltran, Krod and Dickey.
            • Joey D. March 8, 2013 at 4:22 pm

              HI TRS,

              All Sandy did was obtain two highly rated prospects while getting rid of every expensive player they could (sans Wright for other reasons). Of those Sandy obtained to be major parts of the club in 2011 and 2012, only Francisco remains. Gone are those he counted on including Carasco, Capuano, Young, Torres, Rameriez, Rauch, Hairston, Paulino, Byrdak, Emaus and Beato. Byrdak re-signed last November but is not on the 40 man roster.

              When admitting one knew one could not win with the iinexpensive players he acquired that could only produce fifty percent, that’s all the evidence one needs to know Sandy was not trying to do both because the fiscal restraints were too much.
• Joey D. March 8, 2013 at 1:19 pm

  Hi Joe D.,

  Never occured to me to bring the Yankees into the equation. But if they want Stanton, I’m sure the Yankees will make an offer that Loria would be unable to refuse – some fringe players for a team that he has little passion for plus a large amount of cash of which he would sell his soul to the devil for.

  And with Stanton, suddenly the whole Yankee team appears different and the future a little less bleak as far as their problems go.
• doug garrison March 8, 2013 at 1:29 pm

  I think for the normal high priced future FA the Mets would not be in the mix, but there has to be a real conversation in the Alderson office about this guy. Marlins want him gone, Stanton wants to be gone and the Mets have enough prospects to try and put together something without giving up the future either.

  Wheeler and Harvey are special. d’Arnaud as well. At least they are supposed to be. But I think we could give up 1 plus others. I think the Stanton-Marlins divorce needs to happen so I would propose the following:

  prospects: d’Arnaud, Flores, Fullmer and Familia.
• DanB March 8, 2013 at 1:36 pm

  I dreammmm about getting Stanton. We obviously have the chips to get him but as awesome as he’d be we can’t give up d’Drnaud or Wheeler for him because it just opens too many holes in our future roster. That said if Flores dominates in Las Vegas and his value continues to clime, Syndergaard continues to impress I could see us sending a package of Flores, Syndergaard, Duda or Valdespin and 1 or two lower level prospects. Beside Wheeler and d’Drnaud the only other person I would exclude would be Montero. He projects to make the majors in front of Syndergaard even if he doesn’t have as high an upside.

  This would give us a lineup of the following…

  1 Cowgill/ Matt DD or CaptKirk platoon
  2 Murph
  3 Wright
  4 Davis
  5 Stanton
  6 d’Drnaud
  7 left fielder
  8 Tejeda

  All that would remain is to sign one more outfielder in the offseason. I’d probably go for Choo as our big FA signing because we could put him in the leadoff spot and move the platoon to the 7 hole. The would be a pretty formidable lineup. With Choo leading off our 1-6 would be deadly and 7-8 wouldn’t be bad either.

  I would hope our rotation next you would be this.

  1 Harvey
  2 Neise
  3 Wheeler
  4 Gee
  5 Montero

  Bacially all this plan would require of us big money wise is signing Choo and getting a few proven peices for the pen.

  Do I think it’s going to happen? No, but there aren’t many teams that can give away even that amount of tallent for Stanton. This could end up being a bit like the Santana trade where it kinda falls to us.
• Hitman March 8, 2013 at 1:54 pm

  Everybody and their mom knows Stanton is living on borrowed time with Miami. Loria is as believable as Lance Armstrong. Get him at all costs. I’d put Wheeler out there to get talks started, but I’d dangle Niese as bait, especially if he has a very strong 1st half. If they ultimately manage to keep Wheeler and Flores, I’ll be very impressed.
• Dave In Spain March 8, 2013 at 2:05 pm

  As I said last week, I´d trade Wheeler before d´Arnaud. We have more potential replacements for Wheeler in Syndergaard, Fulmer, Montero, etc, than we have for d´Arnaud, which is maybe Plawecki. But d´Arnaud is potentially a very difficult commodity to find. If we could do a package of Wheeler or Syndergaard (not both), Flores, Valdespin, Duda, and one of Familia/Mejia/Montero/Fulmer, then I think that´d be about as rich as I´d be willing to go. I´d prefer to give less than that, of course! (Disclaimer– This is off the top of my head, with no research into what the Marlins need, or are missing in their system.)
• DMets3 March 8, 2013 at 2:42 pm

  Stanton still is miffed about the big trade over the off season despite telling reporters that he’s over it. With the way Loria operates the team these days, he’s looking for a big exit out of Miami.
• Matt Mosher March 8, 2013 at 3:41 pm

  It would be one thing if the farm was stacked and we weren’t in Miami’s division. Expect Stanton traded to Texas or Seattle. Maybe even San Diego. The teams with really good, elite-level farms.
  • TRS86 March 8, 2013 at 3:43 pm

    My money is on Seattle. All they have to do is slightly up that package they rumored for Upton. Besides, that’s about the only way they will get hitters to come there.
    • Matt Mosher March 8, 2013 at 4:19 pm

      That would be a win/win trade. They have enough young pitching that they can trade some and still have a good rotation. Add Stanton to Montero, Zunino and Ackley and you’re getting somewhere. I agree with you – Seattle is the frontrunner.
      • DMets3 March 8, 2013 at 9:30 pm

        The M’s already have Morales and former Met Bay on the roster. Why not have Stanton in the middle of the order.
• srt March 8, 2013 at 4:33 pm

  Laughed out loud at this Ted Berg tweet:

  OGTedBerg: Overheard in Marlins’ clubhouse: “Relativity blows.”