|
|
Post by theboss1 on Feb 9, 2011 16:48:38 GMT -5
Mariners Send:
Matt Garza $2.25M (6)
$3M Adrian Beltre's 2011 Contract
$4M Adrian Beltre's 2012 Contract
I did this trade because it removes a lot of cap from Beltre's salary and I get rid of Garza who becomes a FA next year
|
|
|
|
Post by WhiteSoxGM (Michael) on Feb 9, 2011 16:49:12 GMT -5
Accept because the money doesn't mean much to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluejays on Feb 9, 2011 17:42:23 GMT -5
I would've given more than just a few mil a year for Garza....
|
|
|
|
Post by cmill78 on Feb 9, 2011 17:45:11 GMT -5
I am not certain why people are bidding on FA for ridiculous amounts if you don't feel like paying for them.
And Garza IS worth more than 7M.
Veto
|
|
|
|
Post by george on Feb 9, 2011 17:46:39 GMT -5
veto. imagine yourslef in FA. matt garza is available to be signed. how high do you go on him? 8 mil? 10 mil? this league could do 15 mil! but for an average of 3.5 mil for 2 yrs?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dodgers GM on Feb 9, 2011 18:04:08 GMT -5
Veto. Guys, it's very unlikely that we're going to approve a trade where you dump cap but give up a good player just so that you can bid an extra 10M on a star. Stop trying to get yourself cheap cap space.
|
|
|
|
Post by george on Feb 9, 2011 18:06:46 GMT -5
dodgers u just want less compettion for crawford lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Dodgers GM on Feb 9, 2011 18:13:02 GMT -5
It doesn't have anything to do with Crawford, it has to do with basically manipulating the system to trade cap space, which you can't do. If the money evens out a trade that already involves players, it's fine, but if one side is only paying money and not giving up a player, it's not acceptable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick(Cubs) on Feb 9, 2011 18:16:47 GMT -5
veto
|
|
