Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2013 11:50:53 GMT -6
Burnnnnnnn. I wasn't doing this to give phillies a chance to beat you. He may not even win the division. I was just happy he gave me a better offer and he happens to be someone you may have to deal with in the off season!!! Cubs could make his argument if I dealt him to you to make sure he doesn't win this year! Hehe I don't mind at all! I like Indians didn't want to give him a Pick! He got an 8th so I don't see any problem and actually I am the One who supposed to Complain before Yanks cause Phillies is a threat to Me First only 2 Games back! And who knows how long that would be like that! Even so I don't think it is a Collusion just getting Ready dfor Next year and Nate Jones till 2016 also Proves that he is Rebuilding all ready!! This trade is Fine!
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees GM(Tommy) on Aug 12, 2013 11:54:11 GMT -6
I will go back to my original question and simply ask for an intelligent response from anyone. Why do we have a trade committee if dumping at the end of the year, collusion, and lopsided deals are allowed? I propose we just have open trading and eliminate the trade vetos. Anytime someone in this league does veto is causes headaches anyway. I would honestly like to know what constitutes a veto nowadays in this league? Since I am on the trade committee I should be aware of this.
And Indians please shut up about things you don't know about. Lowball offer? Do you know what I offered? Do you know what Cards asked from me? No! So shut your mouth
|
|
|
Post by Brewers GM(Mike) on Aug 12, 2013 12:06:12 GMT -6
With almost every trade that involves a contender and a team that's out of it there is salary excahnge going on and having a salary cap put a limit on what can be done. this is what the committee was set up for to veto what is deemed as unfair trades, no reason to take it personal
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2013 12:11:52 GMT -6
I will go back to my original question and simply ask for an intelligent response from anyone. Why do we have a trade committee if dumping at the end of the year, collusion, and lopsided deals are allowed? I propose we just have open trading and eliminate the trade vetos. Anytime someone in this league does veto is causes headaches anyway. I would honestly like to know what constitutes a veto nowadays in this league? Since I am on the trade committee I should be aware of this. And Indians please shut up about things you don't know about. Lowball offer? Do you know what I offered? Do you know what Cards asked from me? No! So shut your mouth Anyways! Trade Committee should stay No Matter what!! That is why We have 4 or 5 GM's that can Vote and if it's Only ONE GM that is Concern and asking Ridiculous Question that Why we have a Committee?? It is Because the OTHER Trade Committee Members they DON'T see a Problem!!! So I as an Ex Committee Member says that it Should stay no matter what!! Just my opinion! I see NO Issue here!! No Collusion and Nothing Lopsided!! Just someone a lil scare of competition!! And +ne other that Wants to Compete and One who gave up and rebuilds! Good Deal!
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees GM(Tommy) on Aug 12, 2013 12:17:58 GMT -6
Not a problem Cubs. As long as it is established that the holds leader and top ERA man in the AL who are both at almost no salary is fair value for an 8th round pick.
You answered the question, thank you. I am still just curious as to what would be a veto-able trade. Serious question. Not causing a fight here but what is your opinion of a deal that should be veto'd.
|
|
|
Post by Brewers GM(Mike) on Aug 12, 2013 12:21:57 GMT -6
Trades are only supposed to be vetoed for collusion, guess that doesn't apply here and we just veto when we don't like a deal?
|
|
|
Post by Cardinals GM(Jared) on Aug 12, 2013 12:22:52 GMT -6
The trade committee is for blatantly one-sided deals and collusion. Generally, we protect new managers from us more seasoned vets with the TC. The great thing about this league is there is no collusion bc we are all here competing for bragging rights. You can't split those like you could a pot or winnings.
In this deal I get a the pick I wanted that no one else would give. He gets some players for his stretch run.
Plain and simple.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2013 12:34:47 GMT -6
Not a problem Cubs. As long as it is established that the holds leader and top ERA man in the AL who are both at almost no salary is fair value for an 8th round pick. You answered the question, thank you. I am still just curious as to what would be a veto-able trade. Serious question. Not causing a fight here but what is your opinion of a deal that should be veto'd. UFA to me isn't Value at all!!! Doesn't matter if it's a Top Holder guy or Lowest ERA! When it is an UFA then and 8th for a 2 months Rental he can't Used the guys beyond this! And I didn't want go give up an 8th for UFA! U need to remember all GM's Value their players differently so if U can't Respect that I dunno what else to say! I didn't want to waste an 8th on people I can't Use beyond this year I'll prefer taking my chances on the Draft Board again!
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees GM(Tommy) on Aug 12, 2013 12:38:46 GMT -6
So Cards you're saying there can not be collusion in this league but Indians keeps quoting some obscure quote about collusion. Let me get this right because I am confused. Your saying there really can't be collusion in this league and blatantly one sided deals like this one shouldn't be veto'd because you both got what you wanted. Not that I am disagreeing, I understand that point. But if we allow blatantly one sided deals and collusion can not exist the trade committee is solely for new owners protection and we should never veto a deal unless it's a new owner.
|
|
|
Post by Red Sox GM(Landon) on Aug 12, 2013 13:27:52 GMT -6
dumping players isn't collusion. Getting something, even if its next to nothing, is still more than you are going to get for losing them in FA. Yes the deal is absurdly one sided but if it was the most Cards could get for those 2 guys then great for him, he got something for two guys that are about to be free agents
|
|
|
Post by Cardinals GM(Jared) on Aug 12, 2013 14:44:36 GMT -6
Yep....there was no other demand...the best offer I got was a pick upgrade. Everyone else was telling me they were staying put.
There could be collusion but I haven't seen it bc of the intergrity of Kirby Puckett Memorial.
I will argue I'm the winner of the deal. I'm probably out of it baring a miracle. My first rounder is down in wright, byrd is sucking and donaldson carried me through the first half and is awful. Beltran went down yesterday too.
If i get the next taijuan walker in the 8th round like you got in the 7th years ago, even you would want someone with 4 years of kershaw potential for 2 months of players who only keep you out of the cellar - and maybe not even that.
|
|
|
Post by Colorado Rockies GM(John) on Aug 15, 2013 15:22:55 GMT -6
updated
|
|