DBacks create Yohannis 6-Perez
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:40 am
DBacks create Yohannis 6-Perez
1/14/1990RedSox wrote:RedSox create Danilo 6-Alvarez
Not sure on Alvarez' DOB, when I find it I'll pass it on.
Did I miss Alvarez signing with someone? I remember checking him out several times and tried signing him based on what were posts from last March, I don't think he ever signed though...would like some proof if he did.RedSox wrote:RedSox create Danilo 6-Alvarez
Not sure on Alvarez' DOB, when I find it I'll pass it on.
And never mind, he signed with the Braves.Dodgers wrote:Did I miss Alvarez signing with someone? I remember checking him out several times and tried signing him based on what were posts from last March, I don't think he ever signed though...would like some proof if he did.RedSox wrote:RedSox create Danilo 6-Alvarez
Not sure on Alvarez' DOB, when I find it I'll pass it on.
yeah, he signed in December, looked like he was going to NY for the longest time.Dodgers wrote:And never mind, he signed with the Braves.Dodgers wrote:Did I miss Alvarez signing with someone? I remember checking him out several times and tried signing him based on what were posts from last March, I don't think he ever signed though...would like some proof if he did.RedSox wrote:RedSox create Danilo 6-Alvarez
Not sure on Alvarez' DOB, when I find it I'll pass it on.
LaHair certainly doesn't make or break this deal, but it just feels fishy to me to see that happen.Yankees wrote:I know that when I was dealing with Jagger we had worked out a deal that both of us had liked... LaHair was not in the deal, but I knew Jagger did like LaHair.
I had to drop someone so I added him into the deal and Jagger accepted.
Only after the matter did Jagger say that he did not want LaHair. Well I was too lazy to re-enter the deal into the system, so he just accepted as is and dropped him after the deal was processed.
Look at the deal, LaHair certainly was not going to make or break this deal on either side. So in that regard I dont think it would have any affect on a TRC vote. If he wanted to drop him for someone else what is wrong with that?
And yet I had very little support last May when Jagger traded Ivan De Jesus for Brad Hennessey straight up, then released De Jesus 2 weeks later.Athletics wrote:LaHair certainly doesn't make or break this deal, but it just feels fishy to me to see that happen.Yankees wrote:I know that when I was dealing with Jagger we had worked out a deal that both of us had liked... LaHair was not in the deal, but I knew Jagger did like LaHair.
I had to drop someone so I added him into the deal and Jagger accepted.
Only after the matter did Jagger say that he did not want LaHair. Well I was too lazy to re-enter the deal into the system, so he just accepted as is and dropped him after the deal was processed.
Look at the deal, LaHair certainly was not going to make or break this deal on either side. So in that regard I dont think it would have any affect on a TRC vote. If he wanted to drop him for someone else what is wrong with that?
I think one GM - or the league - having the authority to tell another GM when he can or can not RELEASE a player is absolute BULLSHIT ... and smacks of the same kind of crap that an over intrusive government stinks of! I hate to see the latter and hope never to see, in this league, the former.Athletics wrote:I don't know if human posts are allowed here but Jagger you've done this several times now and it really pisses me off. Why would you trade for someone and then release him the next day? Doing that invalidates the balance the TRC makes to evaluate the trade. If you didn't want the guy why trade for him? Just keep the open spot on your roster so you can create your prospect du jour. Anyone think I'm out of line for bitching about this? I think if you trade for a guy he should have to stay on your roster for at least a couple weeks or something before he can be released (of course that player could still be traded, but released is a different thing).
I think it says more about TRCs than it does underhanded GMs in general. Trades passing should be about the key players in the deal making sense, not who puts enough side dressing on there.Rockies wrote:Why ruin a good thing. GM's including an extra player to get a trade passed (that otherwise wouldn't pass) that the other GM doens't want has been an underhanded trait of Sim leagues for years.
Until there's a rule about it, I can see it happening at least 4-5 times a season.