ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
ProFSL Front Office => Franchise GM: Transactions => Franchise GM => MLB DYNASTY GM HOME => Franchise GM: Completed Transactions => Topic started by: Colby on June 25, 2011, 10:54:42 AM
-
After well over a year, Turner rejoins the Pirates. Helton and Swisher replace the current point production of Holliday and a bit of Verlander's margin over a cheap SP. DeShields is a bonus. This deal clears my future cap issues while retaining my existing goal of a championship.
:PIT: receive
OF DeShields, Delino, Jr., $0.5m (P-n/a)
CI Helton, Todd, $15.5m (2011) + $10m in 2011
OF Swisher, Nick, $5.5m (2012) + $3m in 2012
SP Turner, Jacob, $2m (2012) + $1.5m in 2011 and 2012
:NYY: receive
OF Holliday, Matt, $17m (2014) + $7m in 2011, $5m in 2012
OF Cameron, Mike, $4m (2012) + $3.5m in 2011
SP Verlander, Justin, $18m (2014) + $12m in 2011, $6m in 2012
CI-OF Jones, Garrett, $0.5m (P-2011)
-
yanks REALLY hate to give up turner who we feel will be as good as verlander one day but that is one day this makes my team dominant this year. so i trade the future for the present just like any good yankee fan would lol
colby great negotiations my only regret it u got tuner from me
-
Rob, the cash exchanges on Turner, Swisher, and 2012 for Verlander are all new. You can probably combine the Helton cash exchanges into a single line as well.
-
Where's the TC?
-
i wish i knew man
-
Sorry been moving this weekend.
I think it is passable. Given the financial situation the Pirates were in this gives competitive pieces in return, Helton and Swisher, while landind a top spec in Turner.
In another scenario the value of Holliday and Verlander could be argued as higher, but a rule change since Colby acquired this two makes him have to adapt. He did fairly with in a bad leverage position.
Approved.
-
I agree is passable given everything as whole involved with contract numbers the restraints Pirates are in. :iatp:
-
I know the trade committee has come under fire lately for not approving trades. I find myself wrestling with this deal. This is an absolutely terrible deal for the Pirates in my opinion. I totally understand the money and needing to get rid of the contracts. There are plenty of really good players in this league with cheap contracts. Turner will be lucky to be as nearly as good as Verlander in my opinion. Holliday is a top 5 OF. Helton is at the end of his career and Swisher is an ok OF. I think LTD pulled an absolute STEAL here in this deal. I think there needs to be more value going back to the Pirates. Obviously Colby knows what he is doing and I've negotiated with LTD a lot but I cannot approve this deal. I'm sorry, I know that this is an unpopular decision that may make people mad but there needs to be more talent going back for Verlander and Holliday. Turner is a nice prospect but I think there needs to be more. I'm just one vote, I see others have approved. I'm not going to start a two day back and forth about how the TC is so terrible. Its just my opinion. I'm sorry guys.
-
no worries man u are allowed to have your opinion, if it was anyone other then colby i was trading with then i may question it lol
-
need more feedback from the TC guys
-
What I don't understand about this deal is why Colby gives up Garret Jones as well. Holliday, Verlander and the dumping of Cameron for Swisher Helton Turner and Deshields already looks like a steal, but could be argued for because of the economic situation. The inclusion of Jones in the deal really baffles me. I would recommend a renegotiation.
-
i would like to put it out there that colby proposed this trade to me and i said i need another bat and jones was added in. i will add in one more spec if that helps this deal, but since there are 2 approvals i would like to see if we get another first....
-
Colby is a sensible manager and I expect he know's what he's doing. Can I hear from Colby in regards to Daniel's post?
-
Hmm, I felt the return was okay, but doable for my goals and cash situation. I want to move these guys without paying much for them in the future. Most teams wouldn't even negotiate with me, and I starts to like this deal. Perhaps I was in a rush to clear my roster violation, but mine is unique and caused by a rule change. I am fine with the veto.
-
Currently
2 Approvals
2 Veto
-
Hmm, I felt the return was okay, but doable for my goals and cash situation. I want to move these guys without paying much for them in the future. Most teams wouldn't even negotiate with me, and I starts to like this deal. Perhaps I was in a rush to clear my roster violation, but mine is unique and caused by a rule change. I am fine with the veto.
Colby, I approve this trade. You said you mulled this over for a while which shows your competency and etc. As a team will little cap space I understand why you might make a move like this. Again I approve. Sorry if you were regretting it at this point, :thumbsup:
-
3 approvals
2 vetoes
Jake has to vote still.
-
Weren't two vetoes enough for a renegotiation? I don't know if the rule changed, but originally it was so.
-
i though just had to be 4 approved votes?
-
Approved. I can't think of another team besides possibly the Mets who could take on the millions that the Yankees are accepting. Helton and Swisher are underrated in this format in my opinion, and two top 100 prospects (one probably in the top 10 next season if we don't see him in '11) seems like a fair deal to take on roughly $30m in the later years of these contracts.
-
4 approvals
2 vetoes
looks to me that its a deal.
-
I can move on now!
-
I can move on now!
You'll finally be able to get some sleep! haha
-
finally!!!!! JUSTICE! hahaha i will take my two allstars now thank u! :winner: :soapbox: :judge:
-
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=22085.msg110678#msg110678
I don't remember if or when this was changed but I found a thread where it said that two vetoes were enough to renegotiate. I believe those have been the rules since the beginning of this league. Even when there were more TC members it was so.
-
and its not over yet
-
Thanks Daniel the thread also says 3 approvals to pass the deal. In this case there is 4 approvals. 4 of 6 Approve a trade, which is double the accepts than vetoes. I also believe Colb chimed saying "I can move on now" if the 2 vetoes would have vetoed the deal, I'm sure he would have said something.
-
Thanks Daniel the thread also says 3 approvals to pass the deal. In this case there is 4 approvals. 4 of 6 Approve a trade, which is double the accepts than vetoes. I also believe Colb chimed saying "I can move on now" if the 2 vetoes would have vetoed the deal, I'm sure he would have said something.
The veto overruled the approvals. That is what the rules used to say. If rules are going to be changed they need to appear somewhere. Come on guys we are starting to run this league as if there were no rules. I clearly recall that if the two vetoes came the trade was renegotiated without considering what the rest of the TC thought. Just as it happened when the three approvals came first (which is one of the reasons so many crappy trades passed - some TC members just stamped their approval whenever someone posted a trade).
And if the Yankees think I veto this trade because it means a stronger division rival let them think whatever they want. I also vetoed a trade in which he was getting screwed and a trade in which Boston was getting screwed. Which teams are trading players is of no concern to me, I only evaluate the players and their values.
-
as Colb stated. The rules are 4 approvals of 6 in a trade involving 0 tc members then its approved.
So like previously stated....Deal approved and processed