MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

He wanted Cleveland to decline the 17 team option.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Cleveland also told him they would be starting Yan Gomes in 2017 and Lucroy would be a backup C/1B/DH which would kill his trade value. I am 100% on Lucroy's side in this. He had the leverage and has a right to get fair compensation

[NothingTrivial]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Cleveland also told him they would be starting Yan Gomes in 2017 and Lucroy would be a backup C/1B/DH which would kill his trade value. I am 100% on Lucroy's side in this. He had the leverage and has a right to get fair compensation

Agreed 100%. Well within his rights to veto it, and I don't blame him.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[KBLover]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Cleveland also told him they would be starting Yan Gomes in 2017 and Lucroy would be a backup C/1B/DH which would kill his trade value. I am 100% on Lucroy's side in this. He had the leverage and has a right to get fair compensation

I can see him not wanting to just be a back up, but if he didn't want a 2017 year on the deal...why did he take a contract that had 2017 on it?

Or make it a player option?

I get he has the leverage of the no-trade clause so I have no opinion of that, but it just seems odd that he basically wants the contract to be one year shorter than he signed it for. Why should a team capitulate to that?

I can see both sides.

[CBoller1331]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

lol no they wont. but good try though. as much as you want to feel better about the boston trade, it wont in any way shape or form set the market, it was just dumbrowski getting desprite again.

indians have needed a solid feilding power hitting 3B for like 2 decades now and turned down a deal.witht he reds for Todd Frazier because the Reds wanted Zimmer or Frazier as the headliner

theres an incredibly low chance Frazier is anything but an indian after TDL, same with Bradley and Aiken. and i think its crazy people think the indians have to give up these guys like they dont have a great farm system, despite the fact the indians had what 8 guys in BA mid season top 100 prospect list? but sure, a team is going to turn down 3 top 100 prospects because they werent one of the indians top 4, all because one GM made a very bad deal value wise.

yeah, wont happen.

what would it take to get andrew miller to the indians ? fraizer, meija, bradley, aiken arent going anywhere in the deal.

Buster Olney says Indians and Brewers are talling about Lucroy/Smith. what do the Brewers need? dont think the indians will send out Frazier, Bradley or Aiken in this type of deal either, though.

These are so much funnier today

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

I can see him not wanting to just be a back up, but if he didn't want a 2017 year on the deal...why did he take a contract that had 2017 on it?

Or make it a player option?

I get he has the leverage of the no-trade clause so I have no opinion of that, but it just seems odd that he basically wants the contract to be one year shorter than he signed it for. Why should a team capitulate to that?

I can see both sides.

When he signed it was probably a way to get security. It would be hard to turn $5+ million down. Maybe he was willing to include an option if he could have a no trade clause.

Why did Salvy Perez sign for so cheap? Young guys like security and often give up money to get it. It isn't a mistake that the first 3 teams on the NTC are the Yankees, Red Sox and Dodgers. A NTC is a way to get financial incentives to accept a trade. Open market Lucroy is probably looking at $17 million APY.

The Indians have to decide whether they want to win and give in to the player or if they want to be petty and let their feelings get hurt because Lucroy "didn't want to be there"

So I think I was wrong on the teams on the NTC but point is players will conceed something in a deal to get a no trade so they have leverage down the line

[redsox4evur]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

These are so much funnier today

Watching Mill's stream and said I would love to send this guy a message.

[Mattchu12]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Trying to rebuild my bullpen in the wake of the Miller trade. How does the following trade feel?

McCann (4.59 WAR) + Eovaldi (3.08 WAR) + Beltran (1.42 WAR) for Gallo (1.79 WAR) + Diekman (0.54 WAR) and/or Luke Jackson (1-0, 19.1 IP, 1.40 ERA, 1.34 FIP, 12.3 K/9, 2.8 BB/9 at Triple-A)

[KnickNation17]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Yeah, with Myers playing well I don't think those are pieces that are going to get it done. Gabriel Ynoa an 89 POT? Word? Matz has a 4.63 ERA and only a 0.36 WHIP? Is that physically possible?

Even with Rivero severely overrated (91 POT??? a starter??), I don't see it. Matz isn't enough either. It would take someone of deGrom's ilk even if you don't have deGrom anymore.

Repeat after me..."make it hurt." You need to offer up somebody you really don't want to trade to get Myers (someone the Padres don't want to trade). The whole quantity approach isn't gonna cut it.

I really never saw this response lol. But yeah I mean the "make it hurt" thing makes sense. I think the reason Ynoa has high potential is because's he's progressed over the years the same with Rivero. Keep in mind this was the very first OSFM set from 2015. So that might impact something I'm not sure. The only reason I thought they might want to move Myers is because they aren't going anywhere, they have no pitching and I have an abundance, and he's becoming a free agent after next year with the expectation of making 25.2M. Regradless, do Yona, Rivero, and Matz have zero value or just not the right guys for this trade ?

[Tmizzle]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Cleveland also told him they would be starting Yan Gomes in 2017 and Lucroy would be a backup C/1B/DH which would kill his trade value. I am 100% on Lucroy's side in this. He had the leverage and has a right to get fair compensation

He is a moron for vetoing it as he just gave up his best shot at getting a ring. He could have made the Indians World Series favorites

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

He is a moron for vetoing it as he just gave up his best shot at getting a ring. He could have made the Indians World Series favorites

He isn't a moron. He made an informed decision for what was best for Lucroy not what was best for Cleveland. I doubt you would do something that negatively impact your ability to make money.

[CBoller1331]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

He is a moron for vetoing it as he just gave up his best shot at getting a ring. He could have made the Indians World Series favorites

He's probably still going to get dealt to a contender who is willing to let him play catcher in 2017

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

He's probably still going to get dealt to a contender who is willing to let him play catcher in 2017

Cole Hamels used his NYC to decline a trade to Houston last year. Was he a moron for doing that?

[Mattchu12]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Cole Hamels used his NYC to decline a trade to Houston last year. Was he a moron for doing that?

I don't remember who the Astros were going to give up, if we ever knew, but I don't wanna think about how good they would've been with Hamels and the way that Kuechel was pitching.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Trying to rebuild my bullpen in the wake of the Miller trade. How does the following trade feel?

McCann (4.59 WAR) + Eovaldi (3.08 WAR) + Beltran (1.42 WAR) for Gallo (1.79 WAR) + Diekman (0.54 WAR) and/or Luke Jackson (1-0, 19.1 IP, 1.40 ERA, 1.34 FIP, 12.3 K/9, 2.8 BB/9 at Triple-A)

Getting a bit greedy here. Trying to dump too much salary on the Rangers in one trade. Take out Beltran and Diekman and you're good to go, imo.

I really never saw this response lol. But yeah I mean the "make it hurt" thing makes sense. I think the reason Ynoa has high potential is because's he's progressed over the years the same with Rivero. Keep in mind this was the very first OSFM set from 2015. So that might impact something I'm not sure. The only reason I thought they might want to move Myers is because they aren't going anywhere, they have no pitching and I have an abundance, and he's becoming a free agent after next year with the expectation of making 25.2M. Regradless, do Yona, Rivero, and Matz have zero value or just not the right guys for this trade ?

They have some value. Just not the right pieces for Myers.

He is a moron for vetoing it as he just gave up his best shot at getting a ring. He could have made the Indians World Series favorites

Even with Lucroy and Miller, the Indians would not have been World Series favorites. The Cubs/Giants/Nats >> anything in the AL right now.

[Mattchu12]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Getting a bit greedy here. Trying to dump too much salary on the Rangers in one trade. Take out Beltran and Diekman and you're good to go, imo.

Just to clarify, are you thinking take out Jackson as well? I was thinking Diekman or Jackson, but it's hardly a breaking point for me.