|
Post by Cardinals GM(Jared) on Aug 9, 2012 11:13:59 GMT -6
Anyways. We are waiting on rays to accept.
Nyy - veto? Col - allow.
Bos - involved Stl - involved
Who are we missing? Cubs? I forget who the tc is?
|
|
|
Post by Colorado Rockies GM(John) on Aug 9, 2012 11:18:35 GMT -6
Im not on the trade committee. (Thank God) lol.
|
|
|
Post by Brewers GM(Mike) on Aug 9, 2012 11:31:03 GMT -6
So the job of the trade commitee is protect a team against his own philosphy and ideas? I thought it was to protect against collusion. Maybe there is a hint of that here idk, definitley not enough to scream veto but probably enough to question the trade and maybe ask Sox what his thinking was and if he doesn't want to explain, I'd be fine with that.
Not putting words in anyone's mouth but if I'm Red Sox I'm thinking.
He's obiviously out of it, Bautista's contract is really clogging up his flexibility, so maybe cut him if need be.
I like LoMo, wish he was consistent and could stay healthy, could be headed for another knee surgery?
Gallardo is having an average year, definitley hasn't lived up to the hype yet but the potential is still there. Should I over pay now in hopes to under pay in free agency?
I don't know and who does except him. Everyone here is their own man and has their own way of thinking. I just think as long as it's not obivious collusion a GM should be able to run his team how he wants to.
-
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Braves GM(T.J.) on Aug 9, 2012 11:32:15 GMT -6
There is no need for a vote here. The trade by itself is fine.
Indians to your point. I sure am sorry there is not a 200 page rule book that addresses every scenario that could ever happen in the league. And yes, loopholes come first a lot of times before the rule exists. The Bill of Rights was not perfect when it was written and is constantly be ammended to adapt to present situations.
Rockies and I will work on a rule that will address this.
All that being said Bautista will be dropped but will not be bid on till the offseason.
|
|
|
Post by Cardinals GM(Jared) on Aug 9, 2012 11:42:23 GMT -6
Lol Tj! Bill of rights! You kill me! Hahaha
|
|
|
Post by Cincinnati Reds (Mike) on Aug 9, 2012 11:44:04 GMT -6
I guess I'll explain where I'm coming from:
It's true the original Cain/Gallardo/Bautista deal originally had me retaining RFA rights. When we found out that we couldn't do that, I suggested to Cards doing a follow-up trade after the season...I can't remember for sure, but I believe it was LoMo and a pick for the two RFA's.
Now there's nothing that would actually require Cards to hold up his end of the bargain. When he started to slip back from the division lead and announced a list of guys he was putting on the trade block, Cain and Gallardo were on that list. At that point, I was starting to regret things, but I PM'd him asking what it would take to make a deal happen, before either guy went elsewhere. He asked for LoMo and a 2nd for Gallardo, I grudgingly offered LoMo and a 3rd.
I guess there is some discrepancy in how people value RFA rights. If someone chose to bid Gallardo up to $50, that could be a major issue, but with a number of guys like Votto and Kershaw hitting free agency, I just don't see him going any higher than the $20-30 range, and then I have the chance to lock him up for multiple years.
As for Bautista, believe me, I wish I could have gotten more for him. I had started to shop him pre-injury, but after the injury, the risk at that cost just wasn't worth it to anyone. I would have had to take some bad contracts in return, and they may not have been expiring after this year.
So that's my thought process. Probably my own fault for agreeing to a deal that was contingent on a later deal, but leaving Cards with all the leverage.
|
|
|
Post by Brewers GM(Mike) on Aug 9, 2012 11:44:27 GMT -6
Kim Jong Il
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees GM(Tommy) on Aug 9, 2012 11:44:37 GMT -6
Indians - my belief if that the trade committe is set up to not only protect against collusion but also to protect the league as best it can. This deal sets a bad precedent and in my opinion can open a can of worms for the future.
If it were a week or two ago I could understand your arguement but you mention felxibility, he now has less than 3 days to sign guys to multi year deals and has not been on the bidding in months.
Again whatever with this deal but it will cause problems in the future. You asked why we are worried about loopholes well I am cutting this one off early. What's to stop Phillies for example from dropping Konerko, Garza, Murphy, and Vogelsong tomorrow ?
This can lead to some bad year ahead, you need to stop thinking of just your team and start seeing the impact on the league itself
|
|
|
Post by Cincinnati Reds (Mike) on Aug 9, 2012 11:52:55 GMT -6
Yanks - last thing I want to do is to harm the league. But the hope that Bautista comes back for the last 3-4 weeks wasn't worth much, especially $65. Short of taking on some contract like Lincecum that would tie me down for 4 years instead of 2 months, I didn't have a lot of options.
|
|
|
Post by Cincinnati Reds (Mike) on Aug 9, 2012 11:58:38 GMT -6
Honestly, Yanks, I see where you are coming from. If the ruling is a veto, I can deal with it.
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Braves GM(T.J.) on Aug 9, 2012 11:58:59 GMT -6
I think I can speak for all of us Mike that we know you will never do anything to harm the league. You are a well respected member of this group.
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees GM(Tommy) on Aug 9, 2012 12:04:28 GMT -6
Mike I know you didn't do it intentionally and really my gripe here was that it sets such a bad precedent for the future as opposed to this year. I have never had a bad word to say about you but I just think this deal can do more harm than we thought.
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Braves GM(T.J.) on Aug 9, 2012 12:14:00 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Brewers GM(Mike) on Aug 9, 2012 12:23:21 GMT -6
LOL!!! Right. Im only thinking of myself lol. If GMs want this to be rule, I am fine with that but I think it should follow the same procedure as the rest, wait till the offseason to be voted on. So everyone's opinion can be heard. What i do have an issue with is that some teams (who usually seem to be on top) tend to make stuff up on the fly and want it enforced. To me it seems that they are looking for the unfair advantage and trying to keep up and coming teams down. Its one player, not a trend and if it is a percieved issue ill be dealt with in the offseason when the whole league has a voice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2012 13:03:12 GMT -6
Im not on the trade committee. (Thank God) lol. Same Goes for ME! Pfew!
|
|