Eh, it's a little more than that. Church is, by no means, an all-star. But trading a 0.4 WAR player for a -0.6 WAR player is more like $3 dollars for $1 dollar.Quote:
Originally Posted by OregonDuck1989
Printable View
Eh, it's a little more than that. Church is, by no means, an all-star. But trading a 0.4 WAR player for a -0.6 WAR player is more like $3 dollars for $1 dollar.Quote:
Originally Posted by OregonDuck1989
I'm officially changing the name of the Kansas City Royals to the Kansas City Mariners Lite
Jose Vidro and Richie Sexson would look great in Kansas.Quote:
Originally Posted by 200tang
geez HGM...you must have missed the owe 15 times i said that WASN'T the issue or point i was making. in fact, you are the ONLY one who said that in this thread. multiple times now...when in fact "nobody is saying" that. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Why did you have to post this? For the love of God we are like 2 pages removed from this topic. Why on Earth did you have to post this and get in the last word? WHO CARES?!@?!?!?!?!?!~?!gdhjklrgrQuote:
Originally Posted by dickay
Because the last word means EVERYTHING.
On the internet.
ignore it then. i'm sick of this child continually lying about my position and then continually claiming "i'm saying something nobody is saying". I specifically said umpteen times the exact opposite of his claims in this thread. It is he continually saying something i've not said. Its painfully obvious he's just playing a game right now. I don't need or want the last word...i want this over...in fact it was until his last rediculously false post. I'll play his little game vs. sit back and allow him to spread his BS.Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
I think you guys should take it out on the Baseball Mogul field.
It's hard to ignore when I'm trying to read a thread and the **** keeps coming up. IT doesn't help that the posts have like 6 quotes and are enormous.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
I just don't understand why you have to take this as some sort of personal crusade to protect your integrity. Everyone has since stopped giving a damn, and I doubt anyone is reading either of your posts on the matter anymore. And I'm not taking a side because I'll be equally aggravated if HGM posts a response.
The worst thing is, id rather see HGM and Dice go at it than a certain 13 year old troll.
idk who that is? Eddie? Hihot?Quote:
Originally Posted by ragecage
Some people consider me to be a troll but I'm 14.
That may be the case but you act like you're 10 or below much of the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
dude.. NMG it I didnt fear being banned I would so call you some totaly politicaly incorrect namese that you would DEFINATLY get me banned so :p eff u
You BOTH need the last word...you both always have...it's half the reason your little bickerfests go back and forth for as long as they do.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
So... heard any
TRADE RUMORS
lately? I wonder where Holliday will end up (if he goes anywhere).
I'm thinking either Freddy Sanchez or Jack Wilson is traded to Seattle for a package involving Mark Lowe and another B/C prospectQuote:
Originally Posted by free2131
Trade rumor:
Omar Minaya is going to trade F-mart for Lastings Milledge back.
Dayton Moore will get more Bavasi-era Ms castoffs, sign Vidro and Sexson.
What are the chances that either Holliday is traded this year
I'd say 80% for Holliday and 5% for Halladay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
I think you reversed the names by mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
You meant to say, 80% for Roy Halladay, and 5% for Matt Holliday, I disagree with that greatly, but it still makes more sense.
I didn't reverse any names. 80% Matt Holliday of the Oakland Athletics. 5% Roy Halladay of the Toronto Blue Jays.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
I'd put Halladay at higher than 5%, but I can't tell you you're wrong.
I don't know if Holliday is going to get traded unless Beane brings his price down significantly.
I don't think Matt Holliday is as likely to be traded as 80 percent (IMO) just bc beane doesn't absolutely HAVE to trade him...but i think it's greater then 50 percent.
Not sure about Roy, that's why i asked
I'd put Roy @ 20%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
I think Holliday HAS to be traded. The A's would be MUCH better off by trading him off for a few specs that will help the A's in the near future. Right now, they are one of the worst teams in the league (record-wise), but have a nice, young rotation and alot of developing young hitters in their line-up and farm system. They can really improve their young talent by trading of Holliday, AND he just seems like an odd fit for this smaller market team.
I'm pretty sure Beane realizes he needs to trade Holliday.
I'm going to say Holliday is around 60%. His trade value has declined this season as have his numbers and Beane is going to want the world for him. Seeing as how he traded the world for him.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/0...-hannahan.html
Hopefully, this is just for AAA depth and he won't be our solution at third.
Jeff Sullivan at Lookout Landing says it well; Hannahan is a solid, solid defender (6.3 UZR at third base this season) and is much better at defense than Woodward. It's not the greatest trade ever, but it improves our team. He also says that it's most likely not the last move Z'll make either. Don't worry about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by asianinvasion
I'm pretty sure he's our stop-gap at third. There's no other reason for making the trade. The thing to remember is that Beltre isn't officially out for the year. He won't be 100% if he comes back, but even an 80% Beltre is better than most 3B in the league, as sad as that is. Like Owens said, he has solid defense, he's left handed & he's not an easy out (4.1 pitches per AB).
The Mariners are likely going to trade for Sanchez or Wilson, I'm just not sure who. My guess is that the Mariners trade for Sanchez/Wilson & Ian Snell for Greg Halman/Wladimir Balentien & Clement & ???.
Would the Jays consider Halladay to the Yankees if they include Vernon Wells? It is the Yankees so they could if they wanted to is just cut Wells after the trade ala Andruw Jones in L.A. Wells has about 92 mil left in his contract but it is the Yankees and if they really want Halladay, I guess they could do it. Or they could renegotiate his contract and give him the extra money under the table.
The Jays have said that they won't give a team a window to negotiate a contract with Halladay, and doing so without their permission isn't allowed.Quote:
Originally Posted by asianinvasion
Was talking about Wells. After they trade him, try to renegotiate his contract or just cut him.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Well, they'd need a baseball reason as to why they're cutting him. They can't cut him because of a financial reason, and he's not performing bad enough to do that.
do you really think Wells would object a contract buy out of full value? i think the whole conversation is pointless as imo there's no way in haites that NYY will pay him that much to walk....but he'd take it with a smile if offered.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
and they could cut him for financial reasons. the only reason the "can't cut him for financial reasons" item is being throw around nowadays is the Glavine situation, and that was different as it included a BONUS that he would have been getting which he was no longer eligible for when being cut. You can't cut a guy, or bench him, or send him to the minors, whatever...solely to avoid a contractual bonus. Unions would fight that to the hill and win if they could prove it. But theres nothing saying a team can't buy out an entire contract with or without the players permission.
the whole idea of releasing wells is so rediculous its not funny. so the Yanks will trade for Halladay without knowing if he'll resign in 1.5 years, and also give Wells 92 million to go elsewhere???????? Now i could see the yanks dealing for both and trying to play Wellls and get some of that value for their money, but i highly doubt it unless the Blue Jays were taking some of the contract and/or contracts back in return. We're talkin too much money, even for the Yuckees.
this is kind of dumb if factual. wouldn't the Jays be in a better position to recieve MORE VALUE if the recieiving team knew they would have a long term deal in place before acquiring him? why WOULDN'T you want to allow a team to have talks with him? it only increases what you could get in return.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
i highly highly doubt this is some conspiracy where halladay goes somewhere adn has already agreed to resign with the jays in 1.5 years.
Well, they wouldn't be cutting him for a financial reason if he were still owed all the money. Wells doesn't have a team vesting option like Magglio, so cutting him would have no impact on his finances. I don't even know what the PA could even say in a grievance.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
They don't want a potential trade to break down because a team fails to come to terms with Halladay on an extension. They basically just want that ground rule in place to simplify the negotiations on their end.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
forgot about the mags issue. yeah, he and Glavine both have very different situations than the Wells buyout issue which isn't an issue because it willl never happen with the amount remaining on his deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
thats a good point. they are taking less though by doing this. if the team thats receiving him is serious in resigning him and acquiring him i think TOR could be in a better position to receive more talent.Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar