ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: Transactions => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Invalid Transactions => Topic started by: papps on October 18, 2014, 07:56:13 PM
-
Phillies get:
MI Tulowitzki, Troy, $15m (2017)
MI Phillips, Brandon, $18m (2016)
Rockies get:
OF Pompey, Dalton, $0.5m (P-n/a),
OF Ramsey, James, $0.5m (P-n/a)
MI Yarbrough, Alex, $0.5m (P-n/a)
RP Giles, Ken, $0.5m (P-n/a),
Phillies add two more specs to the deal. Tulo is great but a health risk and Phillips is on the downside of his career. Giles is going to be a stud closer and the other guys are real good specs. Along with the salary I take on this is a more than fair deal for both teams.
-
rockies agree.
-
Not a fan of this trade. Tulo shopped alone would have netted the Rockies a much better return.
:iatp:
That said, it is close to value of Hanley trade, so good enough.
-
Tulo and Phillips worth more then this. It's tat simple IMO :veto:
-
The purpose of a veto should be if a trade hurts a particular team or hurts the league in any way. The trade does not do that. It should not be about if we think an owner could have gotten more or not. If we are going to vote on if we think an owner should have gotten more or not then I will change the way I vote on trades as well. All the specs in this deal are highly regarded in their organizations and none of you know how good they are going to be. I'm also interested how many of you will give up something to pay Phillips $18m a year.
-
:iatp:
-
:iatp:
-
The purpose of a veto should be if a trade hurts a particular team or hurts the league in any way. The trade does not do that. It should not be about if we think an owner could have gotten more or not. If we are going to vote on if we think an owner should have gotten more or not then I will change the way I vote on trades as well. All the specs in this deal are highly regarded in their organizations and none of you know how good they are going to be. I'm also interested how many of you will give up something to pay Phillips $18m a year.
Agreed, the purpose of my post was to educate a new manager, but I approved.
I agree with your point specs, however there is a huge difference between top 20 lists and how prospect skillsets will score in this league.
-
Ill be the lone wolf.
Horrible trade. Tulo alone should garner more.
The purpose of a veto is make sure a fair trade of talent is being swapped. MI is the toughest position in the league and Tulo is by far the best.
This is a no doubt veto
-
could someone pls send me a offer for tulo and phillips. oh not many have $33 m laying around to spend on the "superman", by that i mean made of steel, that is tulo and a 33 year old MI, yes 33 year old MI, on the down side of his career.
becuz ppl in this league think competive balance is being mess up by sending tulo to a team that won 34 games in the league last year. thats right hes not going to a power house with a $200m cap. hes going to a team that have half the roster is in the minors, which generously half of those might get septmeber callups.
so pls let me see all the offers roll in.....becuz ive already replaced phillips pts from last year and between my other accuired MI and catcher ive almost got tulos, by the way all for under $2m, and i also have 4-5 guys that i actually would like to keep long term that ill need to resign next yr. oh and ill also need four prospects that i like and imo have upside going forward.
so pls with another veto posted by the TC they are both available as a package. thanks and let me know who i have to run stuff by before a trade from now on.
-
This is a joke. I want to see another team give up 4 good specs and $33m in salary. People should be allowed to manage their teams the way they want. This trade is fair. Tulo plays 100 games a year if he's lucky. Vetoing this trade is a disgrace.
-
i tried to post a link from BLB on a offseason trade the TC vetoed. it was for chris davis they thought pittsburgh wasnt giving up enough to get davis coming off his 40+ homer season so the TC made pittsburgh unload all his top talent from his milb roster. now he has no milb roster and chris davis.
-
It is a fair process, very difficult to evaluate.
I do have to say that the Rockies should not pair these two. Phillips with release $$$ would net a return, especially right after FA when some teams have no other MI options. Phillips still scores ok.
Trade Tulo for peak value.
-
"difficult to evaluate" doesnt that imply you dont know who is getting the better end of the deal....so short of conclusion how can anyone veto. trade would have to be oneside to get a veto...wouldnt it?
im bitter right know and wondering what the "F" in this league stands for but your advice here on what i should do and shouldnt make me feel like i want out.
-
"difficult to evaluate" doesnt that imply you dont know who is getting the better end of the deal....so short of conclusion how can anyone veto. trade would have to be oneside to get a veto...wouldnt it?
im bitter right know and wondering what the "F" in this league stands for but your advice here on what i should do and shouldnt make me feel like i want out.
Sorry bud, just figured I would remind you about cap hits for releasing a player. I just went through the same thing at the end of last season with Hanley. Don't forget I approved the deal.
-
as much as i am not a fan of the the trade :iatp:
-
:iatp:
Both Owners know what they are doing IMO.
Taking on 33m in salary is not easy and both Tulo and Phillips are getting older,Apparently Rockies are satisfied with who they got and Phillies do not have players as good as Tulo and Phillips so no harm there IMO.
-
I would like to request a ruling from the commissioner on this trade. Whether I agree with his decision or not I will accept the ruling.
-
Are we waiting for someone else in the TC to vote? The rule book seems vague on what are waiting for? Commish to way in? Is shooter awol?
-
Everyone on the TC has voted. I have sent two messages to shooter47 for review and he has not responded to either message. I'm not quite sure why.
-
Shoo is not awol, he will respond soon.
-
Trade Committee - If zero to one TC members are involved then trade must receive five approvals. If two TC members are involved then trade must receive four approvals.
Robert (MillerTime) :OAK:
Ernesto (flash) :SF:
Nick (NickF) :ATL:
Chris (papps) :PHI:
Dan (OUDAN) :NYY:
Corey (Corey) :NYM:
Dave (tarheels55) :WAS:
Current rules say that if zero or one TC members are involved then the Trade requires 5 approvals. Papps is on the TC so 5 approvals are required.
Robert (MillerTime) :OAK: - Approved
Ernesto (flash) :SF: - Approved
Nick (NickF) :ATL: - Approved
Chris (papps) :PHI: - No Vote
Dan (OUDAN) :NYY: - Veto
Corey (Corey) :NYM: - Veto
Dave (tarheels55) :WAS: - Approved
The trade recieved 4 approvals and 2 Veto's. It needed 5 approvals to pass. This trade is invalid. :judge:
-
I understand how many votes are needed to pass. My question is the reasoning for vetos. They are supposed to be used to make sure there is no collusion and that a trade does not hurt the league. This trade does neither of those. If we are voting on if we think a team should have gotten more in our opinion then its a whole different story. If that is the case then I will start to evaluate trades on if I think an owner could have gotten more of a return or not.
-
I understand how many votes are needed to pass. My question is the reasoning for vetos. They are supposed to be used to make sure there is no collusion and that a trade does not hurt the league. This trade does neither of those. If we are voting on if we think a team should have gotten more in our opinion then its a whole different story. If that is the case then I will start to evaluate trades on if I think an owner could have gotten more of a return or not.
I have never looked at a trade that way in any league I have ever played in. Trades are suppose to be evaluated based on is there fair value. That is the main reason for voting on trades. Like I stated with my vote, I do not think fair value is given based on how scarce MI is and the high production of the MI's in question.
-
I have never looked at a trade that way in any league I have ever played in. Trades are suppose to be evaluated based on is there fair value. That is the main reason for voting on trades. Like I stated with my vote, I do not think fair value is given based on how scarce MI is and the high production of the MI's in question.
We can agree to disagree on your value assessment. But I do respect your vote.
-
We can agree to disagree on your value assessment. But I do respect your vote.
Thank you Chris. Not everyone always agrees on value that's just part of it. The strong nature of the members here is why we are in yr 6 and this thread is a great example. The passion of the original guys makes this league great