Page 1 of 2

April 2007 Trades

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:25 pm
by Dodgers
Posted here by OOPSS.

Indians/RedSox Trade Approved

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:33 pm
by Dodgers
RedSox trade<br>
Clay 5-Buchholz, Fernando Cabrera, Zack Greinke, Chuck James, Garrett Olson, , , <br>to Indians for<br>
Jake Peavy, Kevin Mench, , , , , ,

Brewers/Astros Trade Approved

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:10 am
by Dodgers
Astros trade<br>
Salomon Torres, , , , , , , <br>to Brewers for<br>
Bengie Molina, , , , , , ,

Mariners/Giants Trade Approved

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:10 am
by Dodgers
Giants trade<br>
A.J. Burnett, Dontrelle Willis, Elijah Dukes, , , , , <br>to Mariners for<br>
Jeremy Bonderman, Brad Penny, Nick Johnson, , , , ,

Dodgers/Mets Trade Approved

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:06 pm
by Dodgers
Mets trade<br>
Rich Hill, , , , , , , <br>to Dodgers for<br>
Chris Capuano, Carlos Ruiz, , , , , ,

Cardinals/Dodgers Trade Approved

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:18 pm
by Dodgers
Dodgers trade<br>
Matt 6-Antonelli, Jeremy Sowers, , , , , , <br>to Cardinals for<br>
Adam Lind, Lyle Overbay, Derrick Turnbow, , , , ,

Giants/Angels Trade Approved

Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2007 12:09 pm
by Dodgers
Angels trade<br>
Brandon McCarthy, Pat Neshek, , , , , , <br>to Giants for<br>
Marcus 0-McBeth, John Danks, David DeJesus, , , , ,

Braves/Astros Trade Approved

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 10:25 am
by Dodgers
Astros trade<br>
Hiram Bocachica, , , , , , , <br>to Braves for<br>
Sean Gallagher, Angel Salome, , , , , ,

WhiteSox/Astros Trade Approved

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 10:25 am
by Dodgers
Astros trade<br>
Brandon Wood, Tadahito Iguchi, , , , , , <br>to WhiteSox for<br>
Evan 6-Longoria, Rick Bauer, , , , , ,

Astros/Angels Trade Approved

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 10:28 am
by Dodgers
Angels trade<br>
Kory Casto, Kendry Morales, , , , , , <br>to Astros for<br>
Aaron Thompson, Brandon Jones, , , , , ,

Nationals/Astros Trade Approved

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 9:29 am
by Dodgers
Astros trade<br>
Luke 6-Hochevar, Ryan Braun, Angel Salome, Kendry Morales, , , , <br>to Nationals for<br>
Tim 6-Lincecum, Matt Murton, Juan Encarnacion, , , , ,

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 10:04 am
by Yankees
I don't even know how long it's been and I haven't heard a word on what happened with my trade. Shouldn't someone have told me something by now? This is ridiculous...

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 10:36 am
by Padres
Royals wrote:I don't even know how long it's been and I haven't heard a word on what happened with my trade. Shouldn't someone have told me something by now? This is ridiculous...
I have not seen it approved ... nor have I heard word it was not approved.

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:33 am
by Dodgers
Mets wrote:
Royals wrote:I don't even know how long it's been and I haven't heard a word on what happened with my trade. Shouldn't someone have told me something by now? This is ridiculous...
I have not seen it approved ... nor have I heard word it was not approved.
The trade appears to have been vetoed, I will have to look into the function that sends Jim a PM on veto. Sorry.

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:42 am
by Yankees
Call me an asshole, but I'm pretty sure it shouldn't take 10 days to veto something and not tell anyone about it.

Even just a goddamn email would suffice - and then I can put together a trade appeal.

This is totally unacceptable...and I am royally pissed off...

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 12:38 pm
by Athletics
Royals wrote: This is totally unacceptable...and I am royally pissed off...

Im sure no pun was intended, but still funny.

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:06 pm
by Yankees
Pun was totally intended...I'd say I'm almost blue in the face about my anger though...

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:25 pm
by Dodgers
Royals wrote:Call me an asshole, but I'm pretty sure it shouldn't take 10 days to veto something and not tell anyone about it.

Even just a goddamn email would suffice - and then I can put together a trade appeal.

This is totally unacceptable...and I am royally pissed off...
Z, normally teams who have trades that are vetoed are notified by Jim as soon as it happens. Jim only receives his cue from a PM sent automatically through the board. This didn't happen and I'm looking into why.

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:36 pm
by Padres
Royals wrote:Call me an asshole, but I'm pretty sure it shouldn't take 10 days to veto something and not tell anyone about it.

Even just a goddamn email would suffice - and then I can put together a trade appeal.

This is totally unacceptable...and I am royally pissed off...
I don't personally believe you are an asshole but if you want me to call you one ....

On April 5, Z and I had a chat, a small portion of which is copied below:

12:34 PM me: Gotta a minute?
royals: sure
12:36 PM me: Heilman is legit and a very nice target but it may not get approved due to ... edict about discounting players without real AA experience ...
No official vote yet ... just comments on e-mails


It went on 57 lines but there is no need to repeat it all. Since then another trade, currently being appealed and polled was not approved by the TRC for basically the same reason. As I indicated in a previous posting, I have not heard that the trade has been officially denied nor have I seen it approved. Perhaps some TRC members are waiting to see the results of the current appeal which might serve as guidance on how the league GMs feel about the "less then AA edict". On April 7 I was advised rather tersely by Bren that this edict or rule "was voted in by a 2/3 majority of the league".

When I get any notification that a trade has been vetoed I notify the affected parties on behalf of the TRC whether or not I personally agree with the veto or not. In this case there has not been notification ... I have voted and followed the league rules as they are currently implemented and interpreted.

Finally - this does not need to be this public. I would happily responded to a personal e-mail requesting the status of the review and would have even attempted to find out more from other TRC members about what is or isn't happening with this review. This is not the way I would prefer to carry this dialogue on ... but then I did not initiate this venue.

Astros/Dodgers Trade Approved

Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:12 am
by Dodgers
Dodgers trade<br>
Daric Barton, Joseph Bisenius, , , , , , <br>to Astros for<br>
Joe Saunders, , , , , , ,

Giants/Astros Trade Approved

Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:12 am
by Dodgers
Astros trade<br>
Matt Murton, Ryan Wagner, , , , , , <br>to Giants for<br>
Mark Prior, , , , , , ,

Giants/Yankees Trade Approved

Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:13 am
by Dodgers
Yankees trade<br>
Ricardo Romero, Austin Kearns, , , , , , <br>to Giants for<br>
Nick Johnson, , , , , , ,

Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 5:08 pm
by Yankees
Woah, woah, woah...

The entire dialogue of our conversation was about my thoughts on why it should go through - INCLUDING my repeated thanks for giving me a HEADS-UP.

That was a heads-up, nothing more, nothing less. If I have a problem with you one-off then I'll email you. If there is a flaw in the system then I'm going to alert the entire league. Since I was actually thankful to you for giving me a heads-up, I wouldn't characterize my attitude towards you as "problematic" - thus it would fall in the latter category.

As much as I participate in this league, you will notice my solid absence from any sort of position with any sort of power - that is because I don't want it, and I don't want to have to pay attention to it. This was a problem and I had no idea what the answer was - I let stuff go on for a week without saying anything. Then I said something - well within my right.

Shawn apologized for the glitch, and I let it be at that. At no point did I blame anyone for this - and I had every right to be upset and point out the problem to the league. You can say whatever you want, but it's absurd if more then a week goes by on a deal without hearing a resolution - if I'm alone in that thought I'd be shocked.

If I'm gonna be knit-pickey (which I apparently will be), then I still have had no official word on the deal. Just a lot of assumptive statements to work off of.

Do all you people want to know my honest thoughts here? No? Well you're gonna get them. I traded two pretty decent starting pitching prospects for a professional middle reliever. He is not the Mets setup guy - he is a situational right-hander. If he was ever going to be a starter, it was going to be this year - and they chose to not have him make a go at the rotation. Is Heilman a good pitcher? Absolutely. Would this trade have helped me this year? Absolutely. But I'm worried about the intensity of the league's trade restrictions if we can't move middle relievers and/or bench players for minor league prospects. That's my simple stance on it. Once I receive official word from the league that my deal has been rejected, I will contemplate an appeal - but at this point am thinking that it's just not worth the bullshit.

Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 5:58 pm
by Padres
Royals wrote:Woah, woah, woah...

The entire dialogue of our conversation was about my thoughts on why it should go through - INCLUDING my repeated thanks for giving me a HEADS-UP.

That was a heads-up, nothing more, nothing less. If I have a problem with you one-off then I'll email you. If there is a flaw in the system then I'm going to alert the entire league. Since I was actually thankful to you for giving me a heads-up, I wouldn't characterize my attitude towards you as "problematic" - thus it would fall in the latter category.

As much as I participate in this league, you will notice my solid absence from any sort of position with any sort of power - that is because I don't want it, and I don't want to have to pay attention to it. This was a problem and I had no idea what the answer was - I let stuff go on for a week without saying anything. Then I said something - well within my right.

Shawn apologized for the glitch, and I let it be at that. At no point did I blame anyone for this - and I had every right to be upset and point out the problem to the league. You can say whatever you want, but it's absurd if more then a week goes by on a deal without hearing a resolution - if I'm alone in that thought I'd be shocked.

If I'm gonna be knit-pickey (which I apparently will be), then I still have had no official word on the deal. Just a lot of assumptive statements to work off of.

Do all you people want to know my honest thoughts here? No? Well you're gonna get them. I traded two pretty decent starting pitching prospects for a professional middle reliever. He is not the Mets setup guy - he is a situational right-hander. If he was ever going to be a starter, it was going to be this year - and they chose to not have him make a go at the rotation. Is Heilman a good pitcher? Absolutely. Would this trade have helped me this year? Absolutely. But I'm worried about the intensity of the league's trade restrictions if we can't move middle relievers and/or bench players for minor league prospects. That's my simple stance on it. Once I receive official word from the league that my deal has been rejected, I will contemplate an appeal - but at this point am thinking that it's just not worth the bullshit.
At this point in time, I still have no offical (or unoffical) notice ... otherwise, I would have notified Z.

Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:11 pm
by Tigers
Mets wrote:At this point in time, I still have no offical (or unoffical) notice ... otherwise, I would have notified Z.

I'm sure this doesn't add anything of value to the conversation and this obviously isn't directed at you, Jim .......but it sure sounds like there is an awful lot of official ass dragging going on by the trade committee members who haven't voted on this deal.