Braves/Giants strike a deal.

[Mr.TradeKing]

Sends:

P Walden, Jordan, $0.5m (P-n/a)

Sends:

RP Wilson, Brian, $0.5m (2010) + RFA Tag

The Braves decide to take a chance on keeping Brian Wilson through the bidding process since their bullpen is in shambles after the departure of their star close, Heath Bell.

~MTK

[Dan Wood]

Before this deal goes through, I want to make the participants aware that once you receive an RFA player in trade, you have to immediately sign him. You cannot just receive the matching rights. Just FYI.


This is how Jon Broxton got so rich...

http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=702.0

[Mr.TradeKing]

That's weird, I read somewhere in the rules that if you traded a RFA Tagged player the Tag simply went with him.

~MTK

[Mr.TradeKing]

Also, I don't believe I was around when this rule was decided upon, so without going to in-depth, can someone please give me the reasoning behind this deal?

~MTK

[Dan Wood]

It's in the rules under RFA

"Trading RFA
A player may be traded while tagged as RFA during the off-season period in which free agency has not begun.  The player then must be signed to a contract extension by the new team."

It was created before my time, so some of the old RC would prolly be better able to answer the reasoning behind its creation.

[Mr.TradeKing]

Obviously I am not apart of the RC, but is there anyway would could re-open this discussion unless an adequate reason is produced?

~MTK

[MillerTime]

I think that it is too late for additional discussion for this offseason.  Other trades have been made under the current rule this offseason.  To change now would be unfair to other teams following the rule. 

Discussion could be had for change following next season. 

[Flash]

Sends:

P Walden, Jordan, $0.5m (P-n/a)

Sends:

RP Wilson, Brian, $0.5m (2010) + RFA Tag

The Braves decide to take a chance on keeping Brian Wilson through the bidding process since their bullpen is in shambles after the departure of their star close, Heath Bell.

~MTK

Wow, don't know about all the qualifiers, I do remember reading the rules regarding the immediate signing of RFAs if you rec'd them in a trade.  That said, I agreed to this trade because I can't afford to re-sign Brian Wilson to a contract extension and would probably lose him in the FA bidding.  So the opportunity to get an up and coming prospect like Jordan Walden makes more sense for me. 

[Colby]

RFAs, when traded, must be signed to an extension.  The reasoning for this rule is to put an inherent NTC in the contracts of some veterans.  Many of the players that end up as RFAs are players that a team won't sign because of their high market value.  In real life, the trading of these players' rights would end up in a new deal.

Aubrey should be given the chance to rescind this deal based on his misinterpretation of the rules.

Happy Holidays.

[Flash]

RFAs, when traded, must be signed to an extension.  The reasoning for this rule is to put an inherent NTC in the contracts of some veterans.  Many of the players that end up as RFAs are players that a team won't sign because of their high market value.  In real life, the trading of these players' rights would end up in a new deal.

Aubrey should be given the chance to rescind this deal based on his misinterpretation of the rules.

Happy Holidays.

Even though I would have really liked to have gotten Jordan Walden, I'm not looking to cause anyone any grief.  So in the interest of goodwill, I agree to rescind the deal.