|
|
Post by Red Sox GM (Ty) on Aug 31, 2008 15:26:41 GMT -5
Minnesota Twins trade
Aramis Ramirez
Aquilino Lopez
Guillermo Mota
Justin Duchscherer
George Sherrill
to
Pittsburgh Pirates
Ryan Garko
Rafael Furcal
Milton Bradley
Tony Pena Jr.
Approval 1
|
|
|
|
Post by The Ghost of Swo on Aug 31, 2008 16:25:04 GMT -5
Can someone explain how this trade can be approved... for now I must veto... the twins are giving up a solid 3 starter, a closer and the best hitter in the deal for some decent players but no one that equals these guys.... Bradley is having a good year, FUrcal is hurt all year, and Garko is an avg CI at best, I dont think Tony Pena Jr makes up a huge part of the discrepencency
Veto 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2008 21:53:14 GMT -5
gonna have to take a look at it all, ask around, see what's up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2008 11:05:28 GMT -5
I'm on the fence as well. I see him getting rid of Aramis Ramirez for the salary dump, but Duch from Oakland as well?
Garko didn't live up to his hype this year and Furcal is due back soon, but its a little funky here. If the Twins needed cap room desperately, then I would say ok. He is not only in good shape cap wise, but playoff wise as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Sox GM (Ty) on Sept 1, 2008 12:16:58 GMT -5
This is one I thought was debatable, but I also thought that I'm a lot more veto-happy than most other Panel members. Another thing to consider, and I don't know how or if this impacts anything, is that this is a trade between father and son. I'll take a closer look at the numbers, but let's try to get this resolved ASAP. Thanks guys.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2008 16:54:52 GMT -5
this is a trade between father and son. that's certainly news to me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2008 11:04:19 GMT -5
what seems odd, to me at least, is that every single player coming over from the pirates to the twins is a contract year player. the twins are sending a couple back, but not as many, on a team that has loaded itself up w/ contract year players already. maybe it's a push for this year sort of move, only able to get great players who another team is going to lose in fa, but i'm thinking ramirez/duchscherer would be the better players to have heading to the playoffs rather than garko/furcal/bradley.
i think we should try to remember this deal, pay attention to the offseason/next season and see if any of these players head back in the direction they came. for now though, i'm gonna give these guys the benefit of the doubt.
approval #2
so we need to get four approvals here, correct? since there was a dissenting vote, we need the full four?
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Sox GM (Ty) on Sept 5, 2008 15:16:43 GMT -5
Ideally there would be 4, but I'm not overly confident that enough Panel Members will look at this and take the time to put in their votes in time for the playoffs, and we certainly need to get this resolved by this weekend. We'll see where we are tomorrow night and take it from there.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Ghost of Swo on Sept 5, 2008 16:58:26 GMT -5
what seems odd, to me at least, is that every single player coming over from the pirates to the twins is a contract year player. the twins are sending a couple back, but not as many, on a team that has loaded itself up w/ contract year players already. maybe it's a push for this year sort of move, only able to get great players who another team is going to lose in fa, but i'm thinking ramirez/duchscherer would be the better players to have heading to the playoffs rather than garko/furcal/bradley. i think we should try to remember this deal, pay attention to the offseason/next season and see if any of these players head back in the direction they came. for now though, i'm gonna give these guys the benefit of the doubt. approval #2 so we need to get four approvals here, correct? since there was a dissenting vote, we need the full four? thats fine but the twins are the team in the playoffs and are giving up some of their best players, i guess i dont care because its a team i now wont have to face in the playoffs, but still... this trade isnt even close to fair talent wise... so we need to decide if the other variables (namely contract infio), makes up for the descrepency in talent |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2008 19:04:08 GMT -5
I will give approval #3.
Yes, the trade is not fair talent wise. Contracts as always in this league have to be considered.
Since this is a trade involving father and son, it has come under more scrutiny. They should be monitored in the future. But since the trade does not shift a power balance or hand a team the title, I don't think that it should be vetoed.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Ghost of Swo on Sept 7, 2008 16:05:24 GMT -5
its sunday this trade has a majority votes for what we have in terms of who is voting, so it is approved...
|
|
