MiLB for MLB: Rebuilding trades

by miketrout on Jul 10, 2011 1:46 PM EDT

There has recently been a lot of commotion in my league about the validity of a trade which has recently been posted here that some in the league consider a huge ripoff asking if the guy also received "his next 100 draft picks" in return. While standing up for himself, he compared it to another trade which occurred recently. Your job is to decide which is better and maybe even discuss if either is any good to settle the debate of a whole league. Both teams were in full rebuilding modes at the time.

Trade A: Robinson Cano and Chris B. Young FOR Aroldis Chapman, Freddie Freeman, Hank Conger, Casey Kelly, and Dee Gordon

Trade B: Miguel Cabrera, Mike Adams, and Mike Bourn FOR Matt Joyce, Tyler Skaggs, Jake Odorizzi, and Jon Singleton

Poll

Which would you rather do?

Trade A (give away Cano)

59 votes

Trade B (give away Miggy)

9 votes

Trade A by a lot (give away Cano)

51 votes

Trade B by a lot (give away Miggy)

8 votes

127 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Question

When you say which trade would you rather do, which side are you referring to? If I were getting Miggy I would rather do that trade because it is obviously unfair. If I were another member of the league I would be much more inclined to allow the Cano trade to be approved by the commissioner.

Big Sexy

Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey

by King Billy Royal on Jul 10, 2011 2:36 PM EDT reply actions

clarified

Mike Trout- The Man, The NOW, The Legend

by miketrout on Jul 10, 2011 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions

that cabrera trade is just bad

I’ve got nothing to add to the comments in the other thread, but I’d just like to say that fantasy players really lose their heads over prospects sometimes.

by whichthat on Jul 10, 2011 2:39 PM EDT reply actions

The Miggy side wins trade B by a lot.

None of the guys on the other side of B have anywhere near MIggys upside, and MCabs already a top major league player. B should be vetoed.

by philiafan14364 on Jul 10, 2011 3:11 PM EDT reply actions

Honestly

neither of these trade IMO get enough for the big bats in their prime, that they are giving up. I mean they are all pretty good but nothing is really elite and what if at best half of those specs work out? That doesnt even mean they reech their ceiling… just means that have overall good value.

by hybrid on Jul 10, 2011 3:18 PM EDT reply actions

4 of the 5 in A have provided value already

Mike Trout- The Man, The NOW, The Legend

by miketrout on Jul 10, 2011 3:20 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

so...

just playing in the majors gives them value? None have really asserted themselves at all so it seems a bit mute to me in a discussion.

by hybrid on Jul 10, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions

Trade A is fine

Sure Cano is the best MLB guy, but that’s what happens when you rebuild, you often give up stars for multiple lesser value guys. I’m not completely in love with any of those pieces (Freeman is best by far imo), but Freeman and Kelly should have good value, and Gordon too with SBs. Chapman is a high upside wild card, Conger may only have value in deeper leagues. So, yes Cano is the best player obviously, but there are plenty of intriguing pieces in return. It’s certainly not a trade worth overturning.

IMO, a trade should only be overturned if there is apparent collusion, or a team is doing detriment to the competitiveness of the league, or it’s franchise.

Trade B is definitely debatable. I’d need to know more about the league system, any keeper/salary type rules, etc. Either way, Trade A is much closer than Trade B.

by killa on Jul 10, 2011 3:42 PM EDT reply actions

Both these trades are terrible.

Terrible.

www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor

by alskor on Jul 10, 2011 7:53 PM EDT reply actions

Don't know why I clicked on this

but since I did, I’ll just say it’s borderline pointless to ask a community to weigh in trades taking place in a league whose rules, structure, etc is not known to the community. How long is Cabrera under contract for? What are the rules governing service time of minor league players? Does Cabrera have a salary so heavy that it nearly negates his offensive contributions?

Tweak one or two variables in a complicated league, and a trade that looks badly slanted in one direction can suddenly make a lot of sense. Hard to understand what it is to be gained from posting trade questions on here without full, lengthy background also being described.

I will not feed trolls. I will not feed trolls. I will not feed trolls.

by siddfynch on Jul 10, 2011 10:37 PM EDT reply actions

+1

by jaroche6 on Jul 11, 2011 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions

I had the same question

Im my 20 team league these trades would be horrific, as we have limited milb keepers (10) and generous ML keeper rules (no limit on time, 25 players+ can carry players who didnt play the previous year due to injury). But in my 12 team (3 year ML keeper limit, 20 player minor league roster) both of these deals are easily justified

by ADLC on Jul 11, 2011 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions

Agree in principle...

but if its a format where trading away Cano & Young or Cabrera away for these returns makes sense… well, time to find a new format.

www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor

by alskor on Jul 11, 2011 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions

+1

by BigG'S on Jul 11, 2011 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions

It seems that you won't receive your answer.

by asyouwish33 on Jul 11, 2011 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions

I am in this league

There are no rules on contracts, service time, salaries. You can have a 50 man roster composed of 25 active players and 25 milb or MLB reserves. There is also a CI spot along with 2 DH spots.

by jays1990 on Jul 11, 2011 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions

interesting angle

I’m in a league like that and I know that quantity is sometimes as important as quality, as long as the players are productive. The Cano deal seems like one of those cases. I might not have done it, but I’m willing to write that off as a difference of opinion.

And now I can see what the Cabrera owner was thinking … Odorizzi and Singleton probably are assets of some kind in a league like that. Still, the three minor-leaguers are too far away and too uncertain for a guy of Cabrera’s caliber. I wouldn’t have done it.

by whichthat on Jul 11, 2011 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions

I wouldnt do either of them

I didnt vote because I think both of them are bad. Why trade away a stud for guys who “could” become solid? Nobody in that first trade could be as good as Cano

by coach5582 on Jul 11, 2011 8:23 AM EDT reply actions

Devil's advocate here

In trade A, wouldn’t exactly count the return for Cano as “doubtfuls”. Freeman looks to me like a major hitte at first base, he’s already productive and 21. Conger looks like at least a decent lefty part of a good Catching platoon. Kelly is a very promising arm. As much hell as i give Dee Gordon, he has at least a good shot at being a big league SS for a while and, Aroldis still has HUGE upside.

Chris Young is a solid CF but, that return is still far superior to say, what the Padres got for Adrian Gonzalez, in my opinion.

I disagree with the consensus in trade B too, though not as much. I think BOTH Odorrizzi and Skaggs will be good big league starters, and pretty soon too. Matt Joyce is a solid, all-star player this year plus, you add a very, very good young hitter in Jon Singleton. Mike Bourne is a decent talent and an ok player but, I wouldn’t let him stop me from adding young talent like THAT. This said, Miggy Cabrera is too good to give up in this deal. I jkust think it is closer than people are making it. Just my opinion.

Especially in the format you presented, 50 man rosters, I don’t think either deal is even close to being something that should be vetoed.

"It's always funny until someone gets hurt. Then it's just hilarious."
- Bill Hicks

by casejud on Jul 13, 2011 12:47 AM EDT reply actions