phronesis
TTC Member
Posts: 752
Favorite Baseball Team: Atlanta Braves
|
Post by phronesis on Dec 17, 2014 15:22:58 GMT -5
Indians trade: Jason Heyward-RF, 6th, 1.8 Mets trade: Brandon Nimmo- OF, 1st, 0.3 (Mets) www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=sa597760&position=OFGabriel Guerrero- OF, 1st, 0.3 (Mariners) www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=sa596948&position=OFTyrell Jenkins- SP, 1st, 0.3 (Braves) www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=sa548158&position=PCarlos Salazar- SP, 1st, 0.3 (Braves) www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=sa737688&position=PIndians cap: -0.6 Mets cap: +0.6 I'm dealing Heyward. He's great. He'll probably be greater, but I'm moving one piece for 4 pieces. I hope to fill my holes at 3B and RF through trade, so more prospects allows that to happen easier. Nimmo's upside is particularly enticing in this format. Guerrero is just cool. I like having him on my squad. Jenkins and Salazar are pieces I probably don't covet, but both could do something and they're going to be sitting in my farm not taking up any cap space. I basically get a B+ prospect, two B's, and a guy with a cannon who could put it together for one year of Heyward. I like the deal. In the event this deal passes, I will most likely be unprotecting Jenkins and Salazar like all my other Braves/Indians prospects.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2014 18:19:17 GMT -5
Accept. I hated giving up Nimmo and Guerrero in particular, but you don't get a chance too often to add a 25 year old veteran that still has plenty of upside. Hopefully he starts getting to his ceiling sooner rather than later.
|
|
bigfly73
Administrator
Posts: 1,366
Favorite Baseball Team: San Francisco Giants
|
Post by bigfly73 on Dec 17, 2014 20:34:26 GMT -5
approve
|
|
miggitymatt
League GM
Posts: 971
Favorite Baseball Team: Tampa Bay Rays
|
Post by miggitymatt on Dec 17, 2014 20:44:49 GMT -5
Indians, can you please double check your cap change.
Also, I would like to hear from an admin but I'm not a fan of specs being designated unprotected before the trade has been approved.
I feel like the cap change is inaccurate. Specs being unprotected should be a separate move after the trade is approved. Also, what happens if one of the "designated unprotected" specs gets traded IRL before the deal is approved?
|
|
bigfly73
Administrator
Posts: 1,366
Favorite Baseball Team: San Francisco Giants
|
Post by bigfly73 on Dec 17, 2014 22:00:54 GMT -5
It should be -1.2, and I don't see the problem with him saying he will unprotect them. If they were traded before the approval, then he would have to protect them. He has the cap space so I don't think it matters, he is just saying he will be unprotecting them upon approval of trade. Unless I'm missing something here, it seems fine.
|
|
phronesis
TTC Member
Posts: 752
Favorite Baseball Team: Atlanta Braves
|
Post by phronesis on Dec 17, 2014 22:32:59 GMT -5
changed
|
|
miggitymatt
League GM
Posts: 971
Favorite Baseball Team: Tampa Bay Rays
|
Post by miggitymatt on Dec 17, 2014 22:39:32 GMT -5
It should be -1.2, and I don't see the problem with him saying he will unprotect them. If they were traded before the approval, then he would have to protect them. Which would change his cap number. That's why it doesn't seem accurate to me. The actual cap numbers of the trade are: Indians -0.6 Mets +0.6 The unprotecting is after the trade. It's a separate transaction, no?
|
|
bigfly73
Administrator
Posts: 1,366
Favorite Baseball Team: San Francisco Giants
|
Post by bigfly73 on Dec 17, 2014 22:49:04 GMT -5
Thanks, technically that is the correct way to post it.
|
|
miggitymatt
League GM
Posts: 971
Favorite Baseball Team: Tampa Bay Rays
|
Post by miggitymatt on Dec 17, 2014 22:50:04 GMT -5
Approve
Again, I'm not trying to be difficult. I'm just shooting for 100% accuracy, that's all.
|
|