|
Post by bobby2z on May 24, 2022 15:02:10 GMT -5
Reds get Ke'Bryan Hayes
Cubs get Omar Narvaez, Ahmad Rosario and Jerar Encarnacion
Cubs to Confirm
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 24, 2022 22:15:55 GMT -5
Cubs Confirm
Will drop Gamel to make room
|
|
|
Post by Kris on May 25, 2022 18:04:17 GMT -5
Trade has been vetoed.
Bod cited that Hayes is much more valuable than the pieces Cubs are getting in return.
|
|
|
Post by bobby2z on May 25, 2022 20:30:04 GMT -5
Guess I'm not sure how some trades are made and some are vetoed. All we did is try to move strength for strength and, knowing Hayes is the top player involved, Jim was looking for depth in numbers and I was trying to fill a specific hole, settled on this...seemed like a win/win to us after a week + of throwing names around.
What if we add Kelly to the original deal and Jim and I can discuss Glasnow separately instead of the also vetoed trade?
|
|
|
Post by Kris on May 26, 2022 9:13:23 GMT -5
I'll ask the Bod to weigh in, but from me off the cuff kelly in the original deal is a nothing burger. He's 33,makes too much money and has been awful. He won't get saves in Chicago either.
Not withstanding, Cubs has 12m in cap left, the trade as it stands leaves roughly at that point. Kelly would bring him to 4M roughly.
His roster is mainly blue players. Once players come back from injuries he will have to start cutting them and will receive no cap relief. This deal, with or without Kelly, takes one of his highest ceiling players and doesn't bring equal value in return.
|
|
|
Post by bobby2z on May 26, 2022 10:37:38 GMT -5
Points taken….
Fact is, if the league has an issue with too many blue contracts on one roster (which I can see could become an issue), there should be a discussion about implementing a cap on the number that are allowed on a roster at one time or a certain % of cap space allocated to blue contracts but that isn’t in place now so it’s tough to police that fairly without guidance from the rule book so we all know the limits prior to it becoming an issue.
His cap situation is like a lot of teams, half the league is tight to the cap. If desired, he could move Cole for a shitload of prospects and clear cap space while reloading his roster. Chapman is a black contract that can be cleared to create space. There are creative ways to do this that we ALL use to construct our rosters. Moving resources around to make the best team within our personal baseball knowledge and the limits written into the league rules is what this is all about.
I could easily move a different reliever instead of Kelly to make it less of a cap burden ( and am willing to discuss this) to Jim but that is who he wanted. During our original trade negotiations, I had told him I would have an interest taking a risk on Glasnow and we ended up removing him from the deal and going with the one that was posted. When Chapman went down, he reached out to me seeking Kelly specifically and offered Glasnow for Kelly. When the BOD determined that the original return wasn’t enough, I made the gesture to add Kelly to the deal and we could address Glasnow later if desired.
This started with me reaching out to fill a 3B need and a place that Jim has good depth in. I tried to pry Moncada or Bohm from Jeff and Brad just made a better offer. I’ve reached out to a couple others and never heard back.
Hayes is solid but unspectacular. Good average and speed, no power. Will fill some categories for a team but not a huge difference maker. Jim is filling depth in 3 spots with this move as he is trying to put his roster together and getting a promising prospect who has taken a solid step forward and is having a great season while I’m filling a stated need. Seems like a win/win 🤷♂️
|
|
|
Post by Kris on May 26, 2022 12:22:29 GMT -5
Appreciate hearing your side and thanks for explaining.
That said, this was actually pretty unianamous from the Bod with one member falling in line with your evaluation of Hayes.
The bod said that navarez and Kelly are droppable so something else would need to be sent in place of them. One bod member said it may be a better idea to start fresh and try including India or Rodgers.
|
|
|
Post by bobby2z on May 26, 2022 16:35:43 GMT -5
Thx for the feedback.
Jim and I have agreed to table it for the holiday weekend and discuss Monday/Tuesday. Also have a team offering to come in as a 3rd party.
Totally not trying to be rude but it doesn’t matter who the BOD thinks I should include in my trades. Roster construction differs for everyone and I will source it out based on what I have to offer or it just won’t work. India and Rodgers are key components to my team and will stay that way barring a much bigger fish on the hook that a support piece like Hayes…. I do however appreciate people offering to help.
|
|