+- First Class Mogul (https://www.firstclassmogul.com)
+-- Forum: General Manager's Office (https://www.firstclassmogul.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=26)
+--- Forum: Trade Central (https://www.firstclassmogul.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=32)
+---- Forum: Trades Vetoed (https://www.firstclassmogul.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=36)
+---- Thread: Minn/CHC trade (/showthread.php?tid=2148)
Minn/CHC trade - GoIrish - 10-12-2010
:CHC:
send
2B Justin Turner (83) 4M through 2016
2B Pascal Nichols (81) arb till 2016
RP Yoshizumi Li (78/92) arb till 2017
:MIN:
send
SP Kyle Gibson (93) 6.5M till arb 2014
I get a young pitcher that is 26 years old that is under team control for 1 more season. Hopefully, I can work out a deal and get him signed and be the ace to my rebuild. I really like Li but I have plenty of other young bullpen arms that will be ready come next season.
I also agree to the stipulation from minn that if his other trade gets veto'd he has the right to pull out of this trade.
RE: Minn/CHC trade - nycmajik - 10-12-2010
I agree. Nichols and Turner will both play for me come September. Losing Gibson is tough, but I have Webb now (hopefully) and i most likely wouldn't be able to resign Gibson anyway.
RE: Minn/CHC trade - dejota - 10-12-2010
veto temporarily, I think if you cant find a better deal or similar deal by July 31st it doesn't hurt your team either way to take this deal then.
RE: Minn/CHC trade - AndyP - 10-12-2010
I fail to see what direction Minnesota is going in...veto.
RE: Minn/CHC trade - GoIrish - 10-12-2010
DJ, I don't think it is fair to veto a trade based off the principle that he could get more. I think with a player that only has 1 more control year left for a team, that offer is more than fair. He knows he cannot sign the player, I am not sure if I can and that is a risk for me to deal with Boras now with him switching teams.
I can understand Andy's veto because he vetoing based off of the mis-direction of the team in moves and I have no problem if that is the stance you want to take in veto but I think if you look at this logically, the player has obtained a fair offer with the risk involved.
If a stronger offer is needed, cubs will add 1 of Juan Ganzalas (61/90), Keith Chandler (70/88) or Brent Martyn (68/86) to the deal.
RE: Minn/CHC trade - dejota - 10-13-2010
Understandable, to further explain I think by shipping Joe M. to ARZ he clears up enough payroll to warrant further immediate action. With 12M in bad contracts coming off the books, another 10M in bad contracts that can be cut with a small amount of cash (drew/chou) or a payroll dump deal he has plenty of flexibility to keep the majority of his team, especially his (arguably) best asset in Hunter.
I think with some patience MIN could find away to keep his young ace without having to give up anything significant on his end, especially in the midst of another playoff run (and after losing a solid bat)
RE: Minn/CHC trade - GoIrish - 10-13-2010
Ok, so your issue is not in value in return? it is with the reasoning of the move.
RE: Minn/CHC trade - Jordan - 10-13-2010
Approve.
RP is expensive even though Yoshizumi Li's Ctrl + Power are not great. GB% is high. Movement is an underrated vital which Li has a decent ratting on and has good pitches.
Nichols has some pop and eye and could DH, Turner is the opposite with good contact and could play 3B too but his health is a slight concern. But Weeks is not getting the job done, 2B is a big void for MIN.
Looks like he is filling in the holes, and doesn't feel that Gibson doesn't have too much value as he got Webb.
I think Gibson and Mauer > Webb & Montero but if he values depth then what he's getting isn't too bad, and again RP is expensive.
He also has Wilson Ramos for C.
I don't like the deal but I don't think it deserves to be vetoed.
RE: Minn/CHC trade - terrythek - 10-13-2010
When I looked at the trades I came to basically the same conclusion as Jordan in terms of getting depth. I don't see any reason for me to veto this deal so I will approve
RE: Minn/CHC trade - dejota - 10-13-2010
What I fail to see from MIN's end is how having 2 more bench players and a reliever still a year or two away from coming into his own is preferable to one of his best 2 or 3 pitchers depending on POV.
The ONLY logical answer I can come up with is money. And w/ Turner pulling 4M the difference in 2014 is miniscule and even with a generous 50-60% raise in arby for Gibson it will maybe net him 12-15M over the next two years with Turner's salary. Losing an ace caliber pitcher to save 12-15M makes no sense in light of ridding himself of Joe M's horrible deal and his expiring/bad contracts.
IF the return were fair market value I don't think I'd have a reason to veto, but this offer is, at best, average. Combined with the fact I can't see the logic or I think it's very thin and Majik is a new GM I think there's plenty of grounds to veto.
-To address Sean's question: I'd like to hear more reasoning from MIN and I'm not buying what Jordan is selling with the whole depth argument. Ii is legit, the two second basemen are bench players who's production could easily be found on his team or in FA. This basically amounts to Ii for Hunter in my mind.