Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:07:16 GMT -8
Dodgers trade: Clayton Kershaw ($40,400,000), $15,500,000mil for 2017-2018, $10,000,000 for 2019
Rays trade: Blake Snell ($10,600,000), Kevin Kiermaier ($11,400,000), Brent Honeywell (Minors), Jose De Leon (Minors), Willy Adames (Minors), 1st round pick 8th overall, 5th round pick 104th overall
Dodgers agree to trade Kershaw and eat the $ involved to help speed up the rebuild. Rays are looking to compete this year and I believe he has the pieces to do it. Kershaw gives him an insane edge against other competition in the scoring format. The prospect haul and 1st round pick were highly important to me in this deal. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:11:53 GMT -8
+15 Rays. Not vetoable doesn't effect league much. Not sure Dodgers got enough but it wasn't terrible either
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:16:44 GMT -8
Going all in for the present, I feel like I've got a good squad with a chance to win the league this year. That doesn't mean it hurt any less to give up a ton of potential talent, but I get the hands down best pitcher in the game at 25M the next two years and 30M in the 3rd. Hopefully it works out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:19:39 GMT -8
You have up a lot. Less money eaten too. Deal is fair. Still rather have Kershaw in prime but it's solid worked deal guys
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 24, 2017 18:20:53 GMT -8
Hard to say, but I'll go 0 just because it's a well thought out deal that could range from -25 to +25 based on how these prospects develop. If I was the Kershaw owner I'd want more in the way of surefire top prospects, as I don't think any of these guys are higher than maybe top 20 overall prospects.
However what James couldn't find in quality he found in quantity, almost as equally valuable in a league of this depth.
Nice move on both sides, and a blockbuster the likes we probably won't see repeated for a while.
Reminder to all that only $20 MM (net) can be given/received per team. So the Dodgers cannot cover more than $4.5 MM worth of salary obligations for 2017-2018, prior to other deals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:21:44 GMT -8
10/50 for Rays
Dodgers get a ton of pieces, but Rays get Kershaw on a good contract.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:24:52 GMT -8
Hard to say, but I'll go 0 just because it's a well thought out deal that could range from -25 to +25 based on how these prospects develop. If I was the Kershaw owner I'd want more in the way of surefire top prospects, as I don't think any of these guys are higher than maybe top 20 overall prospects. However what James couldn't find in quality he found in quantity, almost as equally valuable in a league of this depth. Nice move on both sides, and a blockbuster the likes we probably won't see repeated for a while. Reminder to all that only $20 MM (net) can be given/received per team. So the Dodgers cannot cover more than $4.5 MM worth of salary obligations for 2017-2018, prior to other deals. I am already eating 4.5 in the Maeda deal. I am tapped for eating cash... Haha. |
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 24, 2017 18:44:27 GMT -8
True. If you shed salary via trade you can work against that retained salary obligation limit.
For example if you trade Grandal at 10 million for my Rajai Davis for 6 million and I cover all 6 million, you are then at 14 million net salary obligated. You could then cover up to 6 million of an outgoing players salary in a new trade.
I realize that the Constitution is a little vague in this regard, using the wording "aggregate". I will be revising this with "net" and offering a little more clarification when I get a chance
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:48:17 GMT -8
0. When I thought I was being trade happy and then this happens lol.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:51:31 GMT -8
0, well he does trade Kershaw. lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:51:46 GMT -8
0
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 18:54:50 GMT -8
0. Kershaw with salary relief should return a lot and this is a lot, so it passes muster for me. Fun trade!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2017 19:40:31 GMT -8
0 just because it's impressive he was able to trade Kershaw.
When trading a player of this magnitude figuring value will always be difficult for both sides. The strength of the Rays system is definitely pitching. His offense really doesn't take a hit, and it doesn't really negatively impact his team this year. So it's definitely makes sense for the Rays, as Adames is really the only guy I'd personally have difficulty parting with.
For the Dodgers, I'm assuming he wanted a more, but it's still a decent enough haul for one player with an enormous contract.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2017 10:12:16 GMT -8
+10 Dodgers. He gets a plethora of young talent, Snell projects to be a great 200+K starter in a year or two, DeLeon is a great prospect in his own right. Pair that with Kiermaier (15+ HR, 20+ sb), Honeywell, Adames and picks, dude got a haul.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2017 10:20:01 GMT -8
Definitely got a haul but I'd still rather have Kershaw with that roster. Coulda gotten a similar deal two years down the road but that's the price of a prime age Kershaw for sure
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2017 6:27:23 GMT -8
Trade processed
|
|
