But what I don't understand (and it seems like they started this after they won the last World Series), is if you keep trading solid players away before their primes, and getting more potential stars in return, nobody ever reaches their potential, nobody's ever a star, and your team never returns to glory.
Doesn't look like a good deal for Pittsburg, but stranger things have happened...U can't argue with Manny's production but I don't think it'll go down...He'll still be in a Sox uniform...Same crap every year...
Who knows, but Manny's worse in the postseason (.269/.376/.513) than he is in the regular (.312/.409/.509). But the A's have been more successful than the Marlins. He bats slightly better against the Yankees than his averages--.321/.411/.618.
Well, also in line with Moneyball, they trade those players (Willis and Cabrera) right before they're due for massive contract extensions and get top prospects for them. Somebody posted a better explanation in the Harden trade thread, but Beane has been successful because he didn't sign guys like Zito, Giambi and Tejada to massive extensions that they arguably haven't lived up to. It may be too soon to tell with Cabrera and Willis, but it looks they made the right decision with Juan Pierre (overpriced), Brad Penny (injuries), AJ Burnett (injuries) and Matt Clement (injuries). Beckett is the only pitcher that has flourished since being traded, but the Marlins did get Hanley Ramirez and Anibal Sanchez for him, and he's still somewhat of an injury risk. The only questionable trade they've made is Derrek Lee for Hee-Seop Choi, although they did manage to get rid of him in the Lo Duca and Mota trade.
But their team *does* reach their potential. They got the best years out of Dontrelle Willis, for example. The got some great years out of Beckett. They locked up Hanley Ramirez to a long-term deal, I believe. They just pick and choose - and don't pay for past performance. If they can get a player for $1 million that's 90% as good as another that they have to pay boatloats of money to, they pick the former. And, yet again, they are within striking distance of the playoffs (and, I believe, they've never lost a postseason series in their history). It may not be conducive to building a fan base, but it's an extremely effective way to build the team. Picture the Astros trading Bagwell and Biggio around 2002 or 2003 and getting boatloads of top prospects. You'd piss off fans and would be a bit less competitive in 2003-2005, but the Astros wouldn't be in the mess they are in today. And if you time it right where all your young players age together, you have the potential to be really good for a year or two before going back to mediocrity.
The downside to the Marlins model, as opposed to keeping their vets, is that baseball is all but dead in South Florida. Because Houston kept their stars, the city has developed tradition and become a baseball town.
good SS prospect, but Nieman is a #3 starter at best. Not that great of a return for a guy with the same career OPS as Mark Texeria, and is under contract for next year at only 7.5 million.
I've always felt that way about the Marlins. That's why I was looking forward to see what would happen if Florida actually got Manny. Looks like Miami will still be a 99% Dolphins town.
Initial deal back on, except with the Dodgers instead of the Marlins. Manny to LA; Bay to Boston. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/07/31/manny.sweepstakes/index.html?eref=T1
Well...he's moving to a division stacked with pitcher-friendly parks, aside from Colorado. LA, SF and SD are places where pitching thrives. But he's a helluva hitter.
