|
Post by Dan on Apr 15, 2008 22:23:35 GMT -5
This will be put through in the Off Season.
Rays send: Carl Crawford 2007 second round pick
Angels send: Jerry Owens Casey Kotchman
I agree.
PAGE 2 HAS THE EDITED TRADE: WE BOTH AGREED. HERE IT IS.
Made a change to the trade.
Rays send: Carl Crawford 2007 second round pick
Angels send: Jerry Owens Casey Kotchman Matt Morris
I agree. Now It can work.
CHECK PAGE 2 FOR THE CONFIRMATIONS THOUGH..
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 15, 2008 22:26:31 GMT -5
Carl is an absolute beast. He stole 80 plus bags this past season, and will thrive here because I run that kind of game. He will be apart of this team for awhile, he is young, 25 same age as owens, and signed a nice long deal. He is a great addition to this team for next season. Kotchman I had plans to bring up next season, so now I may have to look elsewhere, maybe we can add someone nice with the pick. Owens looks good, but this was too good to pass up IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Bluedevils on Apr 15, 2008 22:27:33 GMT -5
Deal
This probably won't be a popular deal for me, but I get two players that are ready to play in Owens and Kotchman. Owens is the ideal replacement for Crawford and should pick up right where Craw left off. I see him being a .300 AVG, good OBP, 80 SB type of guy. Kotchman serves as a guy that can protect guys like Baldelli and Owens.
|
|
|
Post by Bluedevils on Apr 15, 2008 22:30:31 GMT -5
I had another for that was probably better, but this fit my team needs more. My team will be loaded with young talent next year... Bankston, Ramirez, and Upton should all be coming up.
Anyways, nice dealing
|
|
steve
Starter
Oakland Athletics
Posts: 424
|
Post by steve on Apr 15, 2008 22:46:39 GMT -5
where does the money come from to pay for Crawford's contract?
|
|
PB
Starter
Houston Astros
"I always thought trains were safer than planes..."
Posts: 767
|
Post by PB on Apr 15, 2008 22:50:00 GMT -5
I understand this deal for the Rays. Owens and Kotchman are no one too special but they should be two solid MLB ready players. However I did think Crawford would have been worth a little more value. Right now for Dan this makes no sense. Crawford is a beast, but Dan, you are going to be 20 M in debt this year and by the end of next season, if you keep your current payroll, you are on pace to be 45M in debt! My only guess is that you plan on dealing Pedro or many other high salaried players? If so, this is a good move for both sides. Good luck to the two of you.
|
|
Nanz
Starter
Arizona Diamondbacks
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by Nanz on Apr 15, 2008 22:53:29 GMT -5
I thought the one of the rules was that you couldnt trade for a higher payroll if you were in debt or had no money or something...i dont really remember but i know duce did this. I guess its up to bob and josh
|
|
masej
Starter
Chicago White Sox
"We might as well just win this game." -Adam Jones
Posts: 488
|
Post by masej on Apr 15, 2008 22:54:00 GMT -5
but why would he get rid of his players when he is going to the playoffs again... hes got a great team
|
|
PB
Starter
Houston Astros
"I always thought trains were safer than planes..."
Posts: 767
|
Post by PB on Apr 15, 2008 22:54:56 GMT -5
I thought the one of the rules was that you couldnt trade for a higher payroll if you were in debt or had no money or something...i dont really remember but i know duce did this. I guess its up to bob and josh hahaha, if the deal goes through now he is not in debt yet!
|
|
Nanz
Starter
Arizona Diamondbacks
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by Nanz on Apr 15, 2008 22:56:00 GMT -5
I dont know maybe il dreaming. Whatever who cares we suck.YEE
|
|
PB
Starter
Houston Astros
"I always thought trains were safer than planes..."
Posts: 767
|
Post by PB on Apr 15, 2008 22:56:39 GMT -5
Is it just me or is half of the league in or going to be in huge financial trouble next year?
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 15, 2008 23:12:52 GMT -5
I was only in debt because of Vlad and Pedros contracts I believe. I took one of the books and for some reason I feel that is why I am still in debt. Either way I am not adding that much salary and it is doable considering I had 20 million earlier in the year.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 15, 2008 23:15:39 GMT -5
but why would he get rid of his players when he is going to the playoffs again... hes got a great team Crawford is better than Owens, Kotch was in triple a all year. Get your facts straight shit head, and worry about that franchise in Chi town.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 15, 2008 23:16:28 GMT -5
I thought the one of the rules was that you couldnt trade for a higher payroll if you were in debt or had no money or something...i dont really remember but i know duce did this. I guess its up to bob and josh hahaha, if the deal goes through now he is not in debt yet! exactly this goes through in the off season, clean slate. Lots of salary comes off.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 15, 2008 23:17:34 GMT -5
I understand this deal for the Rays. Owens and Kotchman are no one too special but they should be two solid MLB ready players. However I did think Crawford would have been worth a little more value. Right now for Dan this makes no sense. Crawford is a beast, but Dan, you are going to be 20 M in debt this year and by the end of next season, if you keep your current payroll, you are on pace to be 45M in debt! My only guess is that you plan on dealing Pedro or many other high salaried players? If so, this is a good move for both sides. Good luck to the two of you. peter, this makes no sense? You drunk?
|
|
steve
Starter
Oakland Athletics
Posts: 424
|
Post by steve on Apr 15, 2008 23:21:29 GMT -5
Where is any money taken off besides with Vlad? Just getting rid of Vlad and adding Crawford wouldn't be enough, I don't think...
Plus you should be in debt by the time this trade would process...
Whatever, technically I'm not involved, I shouldn't care.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 15, 2008 23:25:38 GMT -5
Where is any money taken off besides with Vlad? Just getting rid of Vlad and adding Crawford wouldn't be enough, I don't think... Plus you should be in debt by the time this trade would process... Whatever, technically I'm not involved, I shouldn't care. Why wouldn't it vlad made 25 million he makes 8 million next season. Plus I have a few expiring deals headed to FA, and arbitration guys contracts going down and up. I believe I will be in less debt this upcoming season than this past one.
|
|
masej
Starter
Chicago White Sox
"We might as well just win this game." -Adam Jones
Posts: 488
|
Post by masej on Apr 15, 2008 23:26:38 GMT -5
but why would he get rid of his players when he is going to the playoffs again... hes got a great team Crawford is better than Owens, Kotch was in triple a all year. Get your facts straight shit head, and worry about that franchise in Chi town. fuck you dan... i just wanted crawford you bitch
|
|
steve
Starter
Oakland Athletics
Posts: 424
|
Post by steve on Apr 15, 2008 23:31:30 GMT -5
Yes, you will not lose as much as last season. But you will still lose a good amount of money which will just add to your debt. You got great value with this trade, getting a player like Crawford for Owens and Kotchman, so I understand it being hard to pass up. But Peter's right, there are a lot of teams going in to debt who will not come out.
|
|
PB
Starter
Houston Astros
"I always thought trains were safer than planes..."
Posts: 767
|
Post by PB on Apr 16, 2008 0:41:39 GMT -5
Daniel! Your 3 players going to FA = roughly 7M off your payroll. Matt Wise's arbitration increase will nullify all the other players' arbitration that is estimated to go down. The extensions you made this year will also add roughly 7M to your payroll. Thus, before signing Crawford, your payroll was on pace to be the same as it is now (85M). By adding Crawford's 8M contract you are adding 8M to your payroll so now it jumps to 93M.
With the 93M payroll you had this season and a winning record, you lost 24M. This will put you this offseason at -20M. Now with Crawford's contract and assuming you keep the same payroll, and that you have another winning season, you will again lose 24M and be around 45M in debt.
If you plan to trade your expensive players (aside from Crawford) than the deal makes sense but if you plan on fielding the same team, your franchise will be financially handicapped (as my own franchise and many teams are already headed) for many years to come.
|
|
|
Post by CardinalsGM on Apr 16, 2008 8:49:16 GMT -5
I'm thinking if he's in debt after the season is over, this trade will have to be vetoed per league rules..... From league rules: - Teams under probation may not make trades that result in an increase of payroll And seeing that you lost $24,642,947 and have only $5,448,892 (plus playoff revenues, offseason award bonuses) I would say there's a good chance you'll be on probation....but we'll see. I could be reading this all wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 16, 2008 10:31:21 GMT -5
I should have enough money to not go over. I get 3 million in a deal from the yankees that will add to this. And peter I am pretty sure your debt does not take the previous years and the year you are in and add them together, to give me 43 million. That does not sound right at all. I have no idea where you are getting this from.
|
|
steve
Starter
Oakland Athletics
Posts: 424
|
Post by steve on Apr 16, 2008 10:56:03 GMT -5
You have 5 million in cash, if you lost 25 million this year that comes out of your cash, putting you at 20 million in debt. If you lose 20 million next year, which is even an improvement on this year, then that will be taken out of the same cash category, where you are already 20 million in debt. I see what Peter sees, unless we're both wrong. But I guess we should wait for Bob or Josh to clarify.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 16, 2008 11:18:01 GMT -5
Either way under the rules there is no way this deal does not go through.
|
|
|
Post by CardinalsGM on Apr 16, 2008 11:52:08 GMT -5
Either way under the rules there is no way this deal does not go through. I showed you the rule. Any team on probation will not be able to take on salary in a trade. You'll be on probation after losing roughly 20 million this year. At least that is my interpretation of the rules. As was said earlier, our great and wonderful commishes will let us know for sure when they see this. And if it was an earlier trade with the Yankees, the cash has probably already been put in...otherwise it won't be added until next season when you're already in the hole.
|
|