The 2011 regular season is now less than 90 hours away, so let's kill some time and recap MLBTR's original content from the last seven days…
- Ever wonder what Major League Baseball's Uniform Player's Contract looks like? Well we got our hands on one, so have a look. All of the identifying details have been removed.
- Tim Dierkes explained why prospects Brandon Belt and Zach Britton have different service time cutoff dates. He also looked at the best arbitration-eligible pitchers and position players without contract extensions, and listed the players that will be arb-eligible for the first time after the season plus the average free agent prices by position.
- Ben Nicholson-Smith found an interesting comparison for Scott Kazmir and noted that contract extensions for three young pitchers are going well so far. He also dug up some third base options for the Marlins and some potentially available starters. Ben looked ahead to Clayton Kershaw's first arbitration payday and wrote about the lack of elite shortstops as well.
- The offseason in review series marched along with the Mets.
- This week's poll question asked if Carlos Silva was tradeable.
- The best the blogosphere had to offer can be found in this week's Baseball Blogs Weigh In.
- This week's chat transcript can be found here.
- Don't forget to check out our Agency Database or our spanish-language sister site Rumores de Béisbol. There's also our team and transactions-only feeds.
This has absolutely driven me crazy since the Agency Database got released: Why do we still have a page for Boras Clients?
Bonifacio being the starting 3B should make Fish fans scream even louder for Loria to sell the Fish and someone responsible try to rescue this franchise before it is too late. They have sold everyone off from last year, fired an outstanding manager who will probably lead Atlanta now for years to come and now the marlins have holes at multiple positions on the field and only the rotation is solid.
“This weeks poll question asked if Carlos Silva was tradeable.”
And the answer was a unified “no”.