reedjohnsonfan

That seems correct. But it also was a poor move on their part, for not being more patient.

No but he'd sign Morales on a three year 33 million deal because he bows down to the front office. He's been doing this for about 10 years from what I can remember.

Either you can't read or are trolling, based on what you put in bold in my post. I'd like to think the latter!

Hard to pass that up. Even if he completely falls off the cliff (unlikely IMO given his skills) it wouldn't be crippling. Remember they just gave Morales 3/33, a guy who has even worse defensive ability than Bautista, and will likely be a worse hitter in the next 3 years.

I'm sure this has been talked about but who is logically offering Bautista a deal, especially for something like 3 years? It would be great if he returned for 1 year.

Those are two completely different things, though. But you tried, it's fine. Let's talk about baseball for once.

Never said that about the EE situation specifically.

The Jays also made a mistake forecasting his market. This is of course subject to change depending on what happens with him, but it sounds like they could have got him for 4/80 if they were more patient. Wake up!

No I'm not. They jumped and offered Morales a contract right away. Still turning their back on him IMO. Even Shi Davidi wrote "Given how much common ground there was [between Encarnacion and the Jays], it’s an awful, awful way to part with a franchise icon."

What are you even talking about? It's common sense... if a player turns their back on the team, it's probably a bad idea to wear their jersey around the season after. That's not the case, so I don't see why fans would stop wearing EE/JB jerseys.

Why not? The team turned their back on them, not the other way around.

That would be terrible but hard to rule it out. Bruce is probably the last guy they should be trying to get.

Yeah, it's interesting to see how these values fluctuate. You wonder why he's thinking of that price tag. Haven't looked into it much, but why is he coming up with 1.7B??

From MLBTR: "Marlins owner Jeffrey Loria is “receptive to the possibility of selling” the organization, Barry Jackson of the Miami Herald reports. Loria has at least floated the rather lofty price tag of $1.7B, Mike Ozanian of Forbes reported yesterday, though Jackson says that he dangled a lower asking price (by how much isn’t known) to one prior would-be buyer who checked in. While the news is notable — as Jackson says, Loria previously has balked at the idea of a sale — it’s important to recognize its limitations. For one thing, the current ownership group has not hired a firm to broker a deal. For another, it has reportedly already failed to progress in talks with several interested suitors in recent months. As has been rumored, one of the entities to pursue the Marlins was Mitt Romney’s Solomere Capital, which brought an offer of less than $1.7B to the table and was rejected. It’s not immediately clear where the market might land for the Miami organization (along with its stadium-rights agreement and other revenue sources), though Jackson cites one “potential buyer” who says he’d consider paying something in the neighborhood of $1.3B — nearly double Forbes’ $675MM valuation. Of course, that paper valuation doesn’t necessarily reflect the market situation; MLB organizations are obviously in high demand and can deliver long-term returns to owners that aren’t strictly tied to annual earnings. There may be some untapped potential in the Marlins’ franchise, too, though surely another stadium bonanza won’t occur again for some time. Stadium naming rights and a new TV rights deal (which would go into effect after the 2020 season) certainly hold out the promise for a cash-flow boost. And it’s at least worth wondering if other prospective owners see opportunities to boost attendance, which continues to lag behind most of the league, or otherwise enhance the margin. Ultimately, whether a serious bidder emerges for the Marlins remains to be seen. And Major League Baseball would certainly need to be involved in approving any sale that ultimately is arranged — which, obviously, has not yet occurred. But it’s interesting to consider that the controversial Loria could seriously weigh a divestiture of his interests in the organization, which he is said to have purchased for $158.5MM back in 2002." This will probably raise a lot of eyebrows. Ultimately it might be good to have him out of the picture.

If true that looks really terrible on them.

It's great when you don't reply with anything except a variation of "your stupid", except maybe we should be thinking about either not replying or being more substance oriented in that case. Your claim seems to be that all the teams who need an OF/1B are stupid if they let Pearce get signed for ONLY 12.5/2. From what I've read since the signing one of your reasons is that his WAR, WRC+, etc was high when he did in fact play- especially in what was something like half a season full time with the Rays. It's almost as if teams never knew that!

To be honest it's late and I don't want to get into a long post. Actual number: he signed for 2 years 12.5 million. This signals he's not a highly coveted player taking everything into account. Sure the market is not perfect, but there's plenty of smart teams out there. Some combination of health concerns (not huge but still present), never playing a full season- whether you think is irrational or not it still happened for some reason, and his age played to some varying degree a role in his small contract. To me it screams small budget team, willing to give him a chance in his age 34 season. We could keep going on, but it's clear a lot of teams weren't jumping at him. If you think the Jays got some sort of steal, good for you!

You admitted you're high on him, which is fine. I just don't think plugging him in as an everyday player is a smart move. It's not that he's a bad player.

As it should be. If they're not signing players like Fowler or Edwin because of the draft pick that is really stupid IMO, and we shouldn't believe that's the case.

Pearce is pretty old and hasn't played a full season (I'm sure you know this). I admit he's probably a better player than Pompey so I was exaggerating, but it's not like he's some legitimate starting corner OF.

Should take quite a bit more than Harold Ramirez. Dyson would be a nice addition although would he hold up for a full season? He's another one of these guys who's very intriguing but you might not want to rely on them as #2 or #3 on your depth chart. Still a good player to acquire obviously.

Didn't know that, thanks for sharing. Edwin's tenure might be a contributing factor?

Also Pearce. Factoring in injury risks/aging/these sorts of things, Pompey could be the team's 2nd best outfielder at the moment.

Why wouldn't it be? You're saying they should sign Valbuena over Bautista, so their value (not the aggregated value for all teams) of the draft pick is an important determinant over deciding which is a better option. I'm not sure how this isn't getting through...

When did I say they have no value? I said you have no idea what the Blue Jays value the draft pick at, which is quite true. I saw some evidence NJH posted a couple weeks ago, it was a shred of evidence from what I remember (although interesting, so it was nice of him to share). Taking that as given and then applying it to one specific team is a pointless exercise.