Posted by Thunderclese on 12/3/2010 3:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bbqjason on 12/3/2010 1:26:00 PM (view original):
I don't think it's abusive. I can see how someone would give up Castillo (older) for this bunch, especially considering that Bergen is only 23. Castillo may have 3-4 very good seasons left, but Bergen is eleven years younger and is definitely a very good pitcher. He's almost tripling the seasons that he would have a good SP in his rotation while sacrificing a little quality in the next few years.
Depends on franchise depth, and the noob's chances of contending this year and next. If he didn't shop Castillo, that his fault.
I'd approve it.
Agreed.
It's not a terrible trade. Besides, in my opinion, just because many of you (who are posting and reading this) would "never" do this trade for whatever the reason, does not make it veto worthy. Also, we are all unaware of or if any trade chats were made during the process. It amazes me how some owners throw a fit about a trade they would never do. It's obvious that tanking or moving money or collusion is not the issue in this trade so why waste the energy to be the trade police? Let the noob learn from his mistakes. Or, maybe think outside the box and look at both teams more and see why this is going on. Unless it obviously affects world integrity for the three reasons I mentioned above, get over it and let it go through. Stop worrying about how you would do it and focus on your own team. Not all trades can be "fair". Most times there is a team who is getting a better deal, but that's just plain and simple part of the game. Unfair doesn't mean veto, it just means unfair.
I didn't comment on whether I'd approve or veto because, quite frankly, I don't know the details. However, I take exception to almost every word you posted.
1.
It's not a terrible trade. You've decided this despite your next sentence
"we are all unaware of or if any trade chats were made during the process". That's absolutely no different that condemning the trade because "I'd never do it."
2.
It's obvious that tanking or moving money or collusion is not the issue in this trade so why waste the energy be the trade police? Is it obvious? How so? What information do you have that the rest of us are missing?
3.
Let the noob learn from his mistakes. Are you implying that a n00b can only learn by making lopsided trades? Wouldn't a veto and an explanation as to why he should never do something so stupid also be a learning experience?
4.
Stop worrying about how you would do it and focus on your own team. Teams aren't made or broken in a vacuum. If you don't pay attention to your surroundings, you'll be walking down a street that you wish you hadn't before you know. This is exactly how worlds end up needing 10 teams. Owners only worrying about their team.
All in all, if you just let teams get ransacked, you end up needing owners for terrible teams. With 75 open teams, good luck selling a turd with no present and no future.
12/3/2010 4:08 PM (edited)