Login to Account Create an Account
Something Positive About the 2013 Roster!
#1
Posted December 5, 2012 - 05:51 PM
Stanton for obvious reasons and Pierre because I have fun watching him have fun, and though he's not HOF caliber, his work ethic and enjoyment with the game has led to a productive career, which looks better and better as he's able to do it with age, considering it's based on speed.
#2
Posted December 5, 2012 - 06:01 PM
This versus other teams that have 9 favorite players every night. Remember how boring the last 2 months of the season was when we couldn't hit, score runs or produce anything resembling good baseball.
#3
Posted December 5, 2012 - 06:06 PM
i agree that the team was extremely painful to watch starting around the time hanley was traded....it was the most painful season i've ever seen...at least during the post 97 firesale they weren't that anemic on offense...the games are tiny bit more tolerable if the team has a chance to actually score runs...but when scoring 3 runs is considered a good night the team just becomes a bore to watch.
can't really say much about the team heading into next season since it'll be laden with unprovens...Lomo moving to first and returning to form would be a massive boost to the offense along with pierre actually getting on base.
#4
Posted December 5, 2012 - 06:19 PM
#6
Posted December 5, 2012 - 07:17 PM
#7
Posted December 5, 2012 - 07:36 PM
#8
Posted December 7, 2012 - 08:22 AM
#9
Posted December 7, 2012 - 08:29 AM
They could win less and it still wouldn't be worse than that piece of s***, overrated roster that set this franchise back some years.
#10
Posted December 7, 2012 - 08:40 AM
They could win less and it still wouldn't be worse than that piece of s***, overrated roster that set this franchise back some years.
The thing that set the franchise back for years is the fact that its owned and managed by incompetent douche bags.
- catchoftheday likes this
#11
Posted December 7, 2012 - 08:47 AM
Incompetent douchebags who overpaid for the overrated roster that was the 2012 team. Not only did they suck on the field, they were annoying off of it. Easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time.
If we're going to suck, I would rather suck this way.
Trading the overrated 2012 roster was the best thing the front office has done in years.
- ... and dirtyarcade like this
#12
Posted December 7, 2012 - 09:04 AM
Trading Bell and firing Ozzie would have been enough. Everything else was just a salary dump so Loria could have more money in his pockets.
#13
Posted December 7, 2012 - 09:11 AM
Incompetent douchebags who overpaid for the overrated roster that was the 2012 team. Not only did they suck on the field, they were annoying off of it. Easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time.
If we're going to suck, I would rather suck this way.
Trading the overrated 2012 roster was the best thing the front office has done in years.
2012 roster was overpaid but they under performed. Who predicted this? No one. The only annoying off the field person was Bell. Maybe Ozzie but he was surprisingly quiet.
Sucking is sucking. I would rather suck with a high payroll and fun to watch players. Same result, more entertainment. I'm not financially invested in the marlins so I don't give a s*** if Loria loses money. Now we get to watch a bunch of s*** prospects suck for a year or two, come up short in their development, watch stanton get traded, and then rely on high draft picks which will probably be busts anyways because the s*** FO is still intact.
#14
Posted December 7, 2012 - 09:27 AM
Incompetent douchebags who overpaid for the overrated roster that was the 2012 team. Not only did they suck on the field, they were annoying off of it. Easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time.
If we're going to suck, I would rather suck this way.
Trading the overrated 2012 roster was the best thing the front office has done in years.
2012 roster was overpaid but they under performed. Who predicted this? No one. The only annoying off the field person was Bell. Maybe Ozzie but he was surprisingly quiet.
Sucking is sucking. I would rather suck with a high payroll and fun to watch players. Same result, more entertainment. I'm not financially invested in the marlins so I don't give a s*** if Loria loses money. Now we get to watch a bunch of s*** prospects suck for a year or two, come up short in their development, watch stanton get traded, and then rely on high draft picks which will probably be busts anyways because the s*** FO is still intact.
Overpaying players for bad results leads to consistent mediocrity because you suck and you have limited flexibility to make moves to improve.
Maybe you should become a Cubs fan. They'd probably be more fun for you.
Also, your form of entertainment is rather odd. Watching paint dry was more entertaining than watching the 2012 Marlins.
#15
Posted December 7, 2012 - 09:27 AM
Incompetent douchebags who overpaid for the overrated roster that was the 2012 team. Not only did they suck on the field, they were annoying off of it. Easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time.
If we're going to suck, I would rather suck this way.
Trading the overrated 2012 roster was the best thing the front office has done in years.
Did you think that the 2012 team was sh*tty and overrated before the season started?
#16
Posted December 7, 2012 - 09:28 AM
#17
Posted December 7, 2012 - 09:31 AM
Incompetent douchebags who overpaid for the overrated roster that was the 2012 team. Not only did they suck on the field, they were annoying off of it. Easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time.
If we're going to suck, I would rather suck this way.
Trading the overrated 2012 roster was the best thing the front office has done in years.
Did you think that the 2012 team was sh*tty and overrated before the season started?
I didn't think they'd make the playoffs. I thought they would finish in 3rd place.
I also don't think that makes a difference. For example, before 2012 everyone was hoping Hanley would rebound. After a couple of years of the same thing, it's now safe to assume that Hanley might just be mediocre now. Hanley was a big part of that team.
The rest of the big signings basically played up to career norms with the exception of Bell.
The team didn't really underachieve. They had a bunch of players who have clearly regressed and, thus, are now overpaid.
Who underachieved?
#18
Posted December 7, 2012 - 09:48 AM
I, for one, didn't expect Hanley to rebound. I do seem to recall that most people had higher expectations for the rotation (part of that was that a lot of people were acting like Josh Johnson was still going to be one of the best pitchers in baseball even after his injury). And people seemed optimistic that Nolasco would "live up to his peripherals" (which always makes me LOL).
I think that people were expecting more out of Hanley, Morrison, Buck, Zambrano, Bell, and maybe even Reyes (his final line was close to his career numbers, but he still had a .100 OPS drop from the 2011 season and his defense seemed to regress).
For what it's worth, I predicted that the Marlins would finish in 4th place in 2012. I won't pat myself on the back, though, because I expected the Phillies to be good.
#19
Posted December 7, 2012 - 10:24 AM
Incompetent douchebags who overpaid for the overrated roster that was the 2012 team. Not only did they suck on the field, they were annoying off of it. Easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time.
If we're going to suck, I would rather suck this way.
Trading the overrated 2012 roster was the best thing the front office has done in years.
Why were they easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time?
#20
Posted December 7, 2012 - 10:34 AM
Incompetent douchebags who overpaid for the overrated roster that was the 2012 team. Not only did they suck on the field, they were annoying off of it. Easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time.
If we're going to suck, I would rather suck this way.
Trading the overrated 2012 roster was the best thing the front office has done in years.
Why were they easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time?
Because he didn't like them.
#21
Posted December 7, 2012 - 12:03 PM
The least likeable Marlins team I can remember was '05. Hell, that team was similar to the '12 team, up and including the part where AJ Burnett got kicked off the team for criticizing management.
So basically we've learned that for the Marlins, when the going gets tough, fire sale.
#23
Posted December 7, 2012 - 02:15 PM
This versus other teams that have 9 favorite players every night. Remember how boring the last 2 months of the season was when we couldn't hit, score runs or produce anything resembling good baseball.
The 2003 championship team did not have 9 starters we liked.
#24
Posted December 7, 2012 - 02:58 PM
Incompetent douchebags who overpaid for the overrated roster that was the 2012 team. Not only did they suck on the field, they were annoying off of it. Easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time.
If we're going to suck, I would rather suck this way.
Trading the overrated 2012 roster was the best thing the front office has done in years.
Why were they easily the least likable Marlins team of all-time?
Well, in my opinion, anyway. You're entitled to yours.
#25
Posted December 7, 2012 - 02:59 PM
Trading away Johnson, Ramirez, and Sanchez was the right move. But trading away Buehrle and Reyes bothers me. They could have kept them and built from there. They didn't have to literally blow it up and stay pat in FA.
Buehrle's contract was bad; I'm glad he's no longer here.
I liked Reyes but I guess there's no point in having him and his contract if the rest of the team is going to suck anyway.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users




Sign In
Create Account
Back to top









