Hey, Geff!

Our paid subscribers have questions, and I've got answers

I recently asked VIEW FROM THE BLEACHERS paid subscribers for questions, and you guys delivered again. Today it’s time for some answers in the next of our periodic Hey, Geff! mailbags.

(Some questions have been modified for brevity and clarity.)

---

HEY, GEFF! Do you really think (the Marlins) have a chance to make the postseason?

—Michelle L.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This question was submitted (and I wrote my answer) Monday, after the Marlins had lost 3 in a row in Baltimore but before the 3-game sweep at the hands of the Cardinals. I’ll stick with the answer I wrote Monday, which feels even a bit more prescient now.

GEFF: I do think they have a chance, but it is not by any stretch a slam dunk. I didn’t see this as a playoff team going into the season. Few who looked at things realistically in the spring did. The Marlins—and other Wild Card hopefuls—have certainly been helped by the utter collapses of the Mets, Padres and Cardinals, who EVERYONE thought would be playoff teams going into the season. Think about that for a minute. 3 playoff spots that no one thought would be available are now up for grabs because of how shockingly bad those 3 teams have been.

Whatever the circumstance, the Marlins clearly put themselves in a good position with a strong first half. But—and this is a big but—I’ve written repeatedly about how much more difficult the schedule is in the 2nd half of the season. Their winning percentage at the end of the season is going to be lower than it is today, particularly if they are unable to add an impactful starting pitcher before the trade deadline, as I’ve advocated for for weeks.

I think the Phillies will pass the Marlins in the NL East and Wild Card standings. What it’s going to come down to for the Marlins if they finish behind the inevitable division champion Braves and the Phillies is whether or not they can beat out the 2nd-place team in the NL Central (most likely the Brewers or the Reds) as well as the D-Backs and Giants (assuming the Dodgers win the West). Assuming they finish 3rd in the NL East, the Marlins cannot have more than one of those teams jump them if they are to win a Wild Card.

If the Marlins are going to make the playoffs, I think it’s going to go down all the way to the wire. You asked if they have a chance. Yes, they have a chance. But I wouldn’t start printing playoff tickets yet.

---

HEY, GEFF! Referring back to your "Why Wait?" on the trade deadline, do you think (the Marlins) will be active buyers? And, indeed, why wait if (they) are?

—Tim D

GEFF: I think the Marlins will be active in trying to improve the ballclub at the deadline. They have a golden opportunity to reach the postseason, and they owe it to their fans to do everything in their power to maximize their chances.

And as you point out, I wrote more than 2 weeks ago that, when you know what you want to add—what you need to add—there’s no reason to wait until 90 seconds before the deadline to make a move. I’ve never understood why more teams aren’t more aggressive in the weeks ahead of the deadline, as the Rangers were when—knowing they needed an impact arm at the back of their bullpen—they acquired Aroldis Chapman from the Royals June 30, more than a month before the deadline. Could they have waited? Sure. But why? They’ve already gotten 6 scoreless appearances from the Cuban lefthander, and we’re still nearly 2 weeks from the deadline. Acting a month early to acquire Chapman could be the difference of one or 2 games that may help the Rangers edge the Astros in the AL West or help them hold off the cast of thousands in the AL East for a Wild Card spot.

When I wrote that piece on July 5, I made the point that a starting pitcher acquired around that time could have made 4 starts for Miami BEFORE the deadline. Could that pitcher have been better than a bullpen day in a loss in Baltimore last Sunday? Could that pitcher have been better than another bullpen day tomorrow against the Rockies?

A position player acquired around that time could have given the Marlins 75 at-bats before the deadline. Would that maybe help the team win a couple of games before August 1?

When a trip to the playoffs could come down to a game or 2, I think it would have been in the Marlins’ interest to act sooner rather than later in advance of the deadline.

If you’re going to “go for it,” sometimes you really have to “go for it.”

That said, trying to improve the ballclub and actually getting it done are 2 different things. That’s why I’ve made note of something we’ve already heard several times in recent weeks.

Have you heard that Bruce Sherman will give Kim Ng whatever resources she needs to try to improve the Marlins at the trade deadline?

All the kids are talking about it.

The Marlins owner said it himself July 5 when, in rare public comments, he responded to questions from the Miami Herald.

“I am prepared to give [general manager] Kim [Ng] and her staff the resources she needs over the next month to help the club.

—Bruce Sherman to the Miami Herald, July 5, 2023

I heard that same thing mentioned on a Marlins telecast shortly before the All-Star break.

Ng appeared on a local radio show last Friday and said Sherman is more than willing to provide the resources to improve the roster at the deadline.

I promise you. You’re going to hear this talking point more between now and August 1.

Here’s why:

The Marlins find themselves in the unfamiliar position of being in contention and thus being a buyer at the deadline this season. But with the expanded playoffs dropping the bar to reach the postseason to a historically low level, there are going to be far more buyers than sellers at this deadline, and many of the buyers will be shopping for the same things. You run into simple supply-and-demand issues. Too much demand for not enough supply. And prices tend to soar.

There are going to be teams that come out of the deadline empty-handed or, at a minimum, with far smaller hauls than their fan bases may desire.

Do the Marlins have enough they’re willing to trade out of their farm system to bring back immediate impact players? Will the Marlins take on salary to potentially trade less talent away in a deal for immediate impact players?

They may. And they may not.

Will prices soar to levels the Marlins aren’t comfortable meeting?

They may. And they may not.

Ng may do everything she can to make a trade or 2 or more and still come up empty on major impact.

That’s why the Marlins want to hammer home the point that Sherman is ready to spend. You’re going to hear it over and over. You already have. They want you to think that this owner really wants to win.

Then, if they get shut out or merely acquire less than many hope, they can still tell you, “Well, we didn’t spend, but we were ready to. We had the money. Bruce Sherman gave us the resources because we’re committed. We just didn’t do anything big. But, remember, we told you for a month how committed we are. Don’t forget that. We’re committed, so you should come out and support the team. You should even think about putting down a deposit on your 2024 season tickets because, in case I haven’t mentioned this, we’re committed. We’re no better today than we were yesterday, and many of the teams with whom we’re competing have improved through the deals they made at the deadline. But we have the resources, even if we haven’t used them, and we really want to win. Bruce Sherman gave us the resources we needed, but we just didn’t use them. So don’t hate us for not doing anything major. Love us for telling you that we were willing to do something we didn’t do. Oh, and did we mention you get first crack at playoff tickets if you put down a deposit on 2024 season tickets, and there’s a Bark at the Park next weekend?”

Kind of makes your head spin doesn’t it?

It’s possible the Marlins do put those Sherman-authorized resources to work. They may swing a big deal or 2 before the deadline. We’ll see. But they’re trying to butter everybody up in case they don’t.

For the sake of the Marlins and their fans, I hope that’s not how it plays out.

---

HEY, GEFF! What does a “winning” trade deadline look like for the Marlins?

—Sean

GEFF: As I explained at length on July 4, if they’re going to have a legitimate shot at a playoff spot in 2023, I think the Marlins MUST add an impact starting pitcher. Not an innings eater. Not another Johnny Cueto. With all of the rotation issues I outlined in that piece—and many of those issues have manifested themselves since that writing—they need at least one quality starting pitcher, someone they would trust to start Game 2 or Game 3 of a playoff series. A true difference maker.

I’d also like to see them add another bat. Whether it’s to play first base or more likely shortstop or third base, they need a legitimate run producer to add to the lineup.

They might tell you they’re hopeful Avisail Garcia returns soon and can make an impact. He began a rehab stint with Double-A Pensacola Tuesday.

Do you trust Garcia to produce based on what we’ve seen over the last 2 years? Also, where would Garcia even play upon returning? Are you sitting Jorge Soler at DH or Jesus Sanchez or Bryan De La Cruz in the outfield in favor of Garcia?

There’s no doubt the Marlins need a long-term upgrade behind the plate, but as I’ve written before, I think that’s an offseason trade when you’re talking to 29 clubs rather than a deadline deal when you’re limited to negotiating with about a dozen teams.

Unless the Marlins can come up with the king’s ransom it would take to convince the Royals to trade 8-time All-Star, 4-time Silver Slugger, 5-time Gold Glove winner and franchise face Salvador Perez—who they have repeatedly said they don’t intend to trade—I don’t think any other catcher they could acquire by August 1 upgrades the lineup enough to justify the negative impact throwing a new catcher in to work with the staff could have down the stretch.

Bringing in a journeyman starting pitcher, an extra bat off the bench and a bullpen arm and calling it a day would be an unforgivable swing and a miss, in my opinion. The 26 guys in that clubhouse have put this team in legitimate playoff contention. The front office needs to reward them with significant reinforcements. Talking about having resources isn’t enough. They must bring in impact contributors.

You can bet the teams with whom the Marlins are in direct competition will.

---

HEY, GEFF! After an unexpected but excellent first half, the Marlins need to reinforce themselves with at least 2 good players, a starting pitcher and a good hitter are urgently needed. It could be a catcher like Willson Contreras or Salvador Pérez. Knowing the history of the management, do you think they bet on players of this caliber?

—RAGG

GEFF: As already mentioned, I truly believe they will try to improve the team. Whether or not they actually do it is another issue.

At this point, we have no reason not to believe them when they say they are prepared with the resources required to bring in the kind of talent they hope will put this team over the top. They added Starling Marte at the deadline in 2020, and I don’t think the Marlins would have made the playoffs in the 60-game Covid-abbreviated season without that move. So I will believe them on this until they give us a reason not to believe them (as they have on other things).

The players have done their part to put this team in the hunt, even with a bad start to the 2nd half. Making a significant move or 2 sends an important message to the clubhouse that the organization truly supports them. In 2020, several players talked about how much it meant to see Michael Hill acquire Marte.

Not making a major move also gets the attention of the guys in that clubhouse. And it would be devastating to them, especially as other teams the Marlins are battling will likely be bringing in reinforcements.

---

HEY, GEFF! Will MLB continue implementing rule changes that favor the offense? If so, is that a good thing, objectively speaking?

—Expos Toujours!

GEFF: After basically eliminating lefty specialists out of the bullpen in 2020, cracking down on “sticky stuff” beginning in 2021 and now restricting shifting on the infield, making the bases bigger and limiting pitchers’ ability to hold runners, I’m not sure what else MLB has left in its bag of tricks to try to boost offense.

I think we’re even seeing that the pitch clock may be an ally of hitters more than of pitchers.

They experimented in the independent Atlantic League with backing up the mound by a foot in 2021, but that idea was scrapped and will live only in the dustbin of history.

I think the jury is out on whether an electronic strike zone would favor hitters or pitchers. I do think we could see that implemented in the future, not in 2024 but maybe in 2025 or, more likely, 2026.

The one other idea I’ve heard floated that could boost offense is this: There’s been discussion at the highest levels of MLB about limiting how deep outfielders are allowed to play. In recent years, most teams have positioned their outfielders deeper than ever, making it easier to cut down balls hit to the gap, limiting doubles and triples. Teams would rather give up a single that falls in front of an outfielder than an extra-base hit. By forcing outfielders to play shallower (let’s say, for example, there is an arc painted in the outfield at 300 feet that all outfielders must be on or in front of at the time of the pitch), you might see more balls split the gap or even get over outfielders’ heads.

I don’t know if that’s something that might be tried on an experimental basis in the minors, but I know it’s at least been discussed as an idea. That would lead to a bit more offense.

You have other thoughts about ways to increase offense?

I’ll close with this thought I’ve expressed in the past: MLB seems to have 2 priorities with most of the rule changes we’ve seen: 1) Picking up the pace of play and reducing time of game and adding offense. But aren’t those 2 things in conflict with each other?

---

HEY, GEFF! Anything to opine regarding the A's move to Las Vegas?

—Expos Toujours! (2)

GEFF: I know everyone thinks this is a done deal, but I’m not 100 percent convinced the Athletics are moving to Las Vegas. I’ll believe it when I see it.

One way or the other, the situation must be resolved by the January 15, 2024 deadline Rob Manfred has set. Without a binding deal for a ballpark in Oakland or Las Vegas on or before that date, the Commissioner has said the A’s will lose their status as a revenue sharing recipient, costing owner John Fisher an estimated $40 million a year.

The reality of the situation is it’s in MLB’s best interest for the A’s to get a new ballpark that keeps them rooted in Oakland, thus leaving Las Vegas as a favorite for one of the 2 possible expansion teams being discussed.

The mayor of Oakland made it clear to Ken Rosenthal in The Athletic she’s ready to offer the club a better deal than the one it’s getting in Las Vegas. But having followed this situation closely, I sometimes get the sense the A’s owner is the kind of guy who’s unwilling to take yes for an answer.

---

HEY, GEFF! Is the Pandora's box of uniform ads now open? Will we see NASCAR-esque billboard uniforms in MLB?

—Expos Toujours! (3)

GEFF: I don’t like it, but I think the next move is an ad on batting helmets and maybe even caps, as we saw in the WBC (above).

I don’t like how naive this makes me sound, but I don’t think we’re going to see an MLB jersey turned into an advertising billboard. As much as they push the envelope in pursuit of every last nickel, I want to believe someone at MLB will say “enough is enough” before we get to that point.

I know that sounds naive based on some of the things we’ve seen over the last few years. But, what can I say? I’m an optimist.

The problem with the jersey patches that were approved by MLB and have begun popping up this season is any money made is local money that goes directly to the individual club. The result is this form of local advertising is only extending the perilous financial gap that exists between the Game’s haves and have-nots.

By way of example: In a jersey patch agreement announced last week, the Yankees will receive $25 million a year from Starr Insurance through 2031. That figure was reported by Darren Rovell of Action Network. Meanwhile, the Marlins’ sleeve patch deal with ADT, which was announced in March, is worth only $5 million a year, according to Sportico.

The Yankees and Marlins sold the exact same product. But the Yankees got $20 million more a year.

Rightly or wrongly, unless MLB nationalizes future deals and divides profits evenly among all 30 clubs (as they do with national broadcasting and merchandising, for example), you’re going to have a lot of teams like the Marlins increasingly upset about this huge disparity. Yes, they’re now making an extra $5 million a year, but they’re falling further behind in the arms race.

THANKS FOR THE QUESTIONS! WE’LL DO THIS AGAIN SOON.

---

While you’re here…

• Learn more about one-on-one play-by-play coaching from Glenn Geffner via Zoom at glenngeffner.com.

• Your feedback is always appreciated. Hit the “LIKE” button below if you enjoyed this post.

• Ideas for future posts? Please share them in the Comments.

• Interested in advertising on VIEW FROM THE BLEACHERS? Email me at glenn@glenngeffner.com.