No deals per Olney

[Fairfax Bird]

Psh. Silly me. You're absolutely right. He should've lowered his asking price to around what the Pirates got for Nady/Marte to grease the wheels a little. I mean, who cares if the return isn't what we expect? At least we're doing something.

Pulling out once sentence from my post and completely ignoring the rest where I mentioned that there's been wild speculation that's been accepted as fact isn't really addressing my point very well, but hey... no problems.

If I learn for a fact that we passed on a trade that would've significantly helped us in the long run, I'll be more than happy to get upset. But we have zero, and I mean ZERO evidence to support that right now. So the whole "We were inactive on trades I made up that made sense" thing just makes no sense to me at all. Just because we on a message board look at the Dodgers and think that we can get LaRoche from them doesn't make that a gospel fact.

Didn't you hear, they put that guy out at a yard sale the other day and everyone passed. We could have gotten him for Bradford.:laughlol:

[Greg Pappas]

Manny dealt to Dodgers in three way.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3513383

[J.D.]

Well, get asked a ridiculous question......

What part of my question was ridiculous? Was it my point that you're getting all upset about things that didn't get done when you have no clue what's really been going on this week? Was it my point that just because you think players are attainable, it doesn't mean that they are? Was it my point that getting all worked up that we didn't trade players that can likely be traded in August or the off season isn't a big deal?

Actually, you know what was most ridiculous? The fact that I didn't even ask a question. I made a point. You ignored my point. Which is fine if you don't have a response to it.

[Fairfax Bird]

You seem to harp on this theme a lot. Did it ever occur to you that action at this point in time is necessary because we have several players whose value may be at an all-time high? (Huff, Sherrill etc).

I agree with this point and would have liked to have seen Sherrill moved. Huff, it doesn't seem like anyone wanted him.

[El Gordo]

Manny dealt to Dodgers in three way.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3513383

Well we won't have LaRoche to kick around here any more.:laughlol:

[Sports Guy]

Manny dealt to Dodgers in three way.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3513383

Next time someone asked when was the last 3 way deal.....

[Sports Guy]

What part of my question was ridiculous? Was it my point that you're getting all upset about things that didn't get done when you have no clue what's really been going on this week? Was it my point that just because you think players are attainable, it doesn't mean that they are? Was it my point that getting all worked up that we didn't trade players that can likely be traded in August or the off season isn't a big deal?

Actually, you know what was most ridiculous? The fact that I didn't even ask a question. I made a point. You ignored my point. Which is fine if you don't have a response to it.

No need for me to respond to something that i have continually responded to for days now.

[J.D.]

No need for me to respond to something that i have continually responded to for days now.

And we've taken the be dismissive of my point approach. That's good to know. Carry on, then.

[Sports Guy]

Manny dealt to Dodgers in three way.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3513383

Greg...Do you find it interesting that the Pirates would be targeting a third baseman in this deal, especially since they drafted Alvarez...Do you think there is anything to the rumor that Alvarez won;t get done?

[Sports Guy]

And we've taken the be dismissive of my point approach. That's good to know. Carry on, then.

No, i took the I am tired of typing the same thing approach.

I didn't ignore you.

[Hank Scorpio]

Greg...Do you find it interesting that the Pirates would be targeting a third baseman in this deal, especially since they drafted Alvarez...Do you think there is anything to the rumor that Alvarez won;t get done?

This is a MUCH better deal for Pittsburgh than Brignac & Niemann, IMO.

[J.D.]

No, i took the I am tired of typing the same thing approach.

I didn't ignore you.

Well, I haven't exactly been reading thread after thread on here the last couple of days. Mainly because I don't have the stomach for "Nothing's going to get done, so no one's doing their job" approach right now. It's a preference thing.

I clearly, in that avoidance, missed your point. I'll go ahead and try to find that and all, but I still maintain that things that have been complete speculation of possible deals, as in "We could probably get LaRoche and Hu for Sherrill," all too often turns into "I can't believe we turned down/didn't complete/didn't try to get LaRoche and Hu for Sherrill!"

That's what I'm saying. We don't know what's going on, and until we do, I'm going to remain highly critical of the "nothing got done, so that means that the FO's doing a bad job" vantage point. It's a philosophical thing, I guess.

[elsid]

I agree with this point and would have liked to have seen Sherrill moved. Huff, it doesn't seem like anyone wanted him.

No one really wanted Sherrill either. Most teams said they did, but no one came up with anything worthwhile from what I heard.

[RShack]

You seem to harp on this theme a lot. Did it ever occur to you that action at this point in time is necessary because we have several players whose value may be at an all-time high? (Huff, Sherrill etc).

If being reasonable is "harping", then fine, I'm harping.

There is nothing whatsoever about it that's "necessary" if you don't get guys you actually want.

Saying it's somehow "necessary" just proves the point about it being action for the sake of action.

Plus, I don't believe your story about Huff's value being at an all-time high has any merit whatsoever.

None. Nada. Zip. Same thing for Sherrill.

Just because people keep saying it on a message board, that doesn't mean it's true.

You have no information that tells you their actual value is particularly high right now. None.

You just think it is, that's all. That doesn't make it true.

[Lucky Jim]

You seem to harp on this theme a lot. Did it ever occur to you that action at this point in time is necessary because we have several players whose value may be at an all-time high? (Huff, Sherrill etc).

To be fair, it only matters if they're value is at an all-time high if the folks shopping right now are interested and/or accept that all-time high value.

Only certain teams are shopping now, and so there's a smaller likelihood of a team matching up well than there may (may) be in the offseason.

If Huff finishes the year strong (not like he is, but not dropping off catastrophically) it's entirely possible that - though Huff's market value is less during the offseason - that we get something better for him than right now.

If I'm selling a car and I've got an artificially specialized market of buyers, it doesn't matter that its value is higher than it will be if I try to sell it later, with more miles, unless there's someone there to meet that value.

It's entirely possible, if not likely, that exposing a less valuable car to a broader market will, in fact, result in me receiving more value for it.

Huff's actual value within this market is not solely the product of his numbers and his contract. It's also the product of both the buyers' valuation and needs.

A team that's just out-of-contention and so not buying right now may well spend more for (even a diminished) Huff than any team in this deadline market during the offseason. Especially if Huff fits its needs well.