Dodgers awarded waiver claim on Gonzo

[revo]

Agreed. Crawford's the key guy in this deal. After TJ surgery, will he turn back into the dynamic, top of order presence he used to be, or the fragile, glass player who's first name should be spelled CarDL.

Are they? Just last week Bobby V was being painted as a short-timer. How did he suddenly win the battle?

[Hornsby]

Nice Debut!

[Hornsby]

HELL YES!!!!

Three run HR in his first AB as a Dodger. Brought a tear to my eye.

Thought that you hated this deal... Yes, that's a smiley, yes, I'm kidding...kind of. LOL...

[cavebird]

From what I've read on the wires so far, it's Webster, Loney, DeJesus and two PTBNLs to the Red Sox. Anyone heard how soon the PTBNLs (who I assume will be Sands and de la Rosa) will be named?

I assume at the end of the season. They are on the 40-man and will never clear waivers, so they can't go anywhere before the season ends.

[Judge Jude]

Yes, won't happen re Sands and De La Rosa til end of season. That will complicate things in many deep NL leagues re FAAB.
We used to be sticklers, but now are more "practical."

The change in philosophy vaults me into 1st place in FAAB w/Sands, so looks like I'll have my choice of AdGonz or Beckett (I badly need both but...)

[schlesinj]

In case you had any questions make sure you get AGon. Beckett is not the same same as the last time you saw him in the NL.

[Judge Jude]

oh, I'll have a "game theory" thread soon on that.


If I decide the 3rd-place team is better than the 2nd-place in terms of being less catchable, and I believe the 2nd-place team will assume I take AdGonz, he could go all-in on 'my Beckett' and get nothing, while I get Beckett (I don't have a 5th SP and need W and K, Beckett could help).

this could be fun....

[revo]

The middle of the Dodger order -- Kemp, Hanley, Gonzo, Ethier -- is lethal now.

So in terms of blockbusters, where does this trade fall? And the fact it happened after the waiver deadline makes it all the more impressive.

[Kevin Seitzer]

Yes, won't happen re Sands and De La Rosa til end of season. That will complicate things in many deep NL leagues re FAAB.
We used to be sticklers, but now are more "practical."

The change in philosophy vaults me into 1st place in FAAB w/Sands, so looks like I'll have my choice of AdGonz or Beckett (I badly need both but...)

I'm curious what you're alluding to with your league rules. You mean that you assume that the rumors are correct as to the identity of the PTBNL and you get FAAB dollars in exchange for Sands? If that's the case, couldn't that really come back to bite you if/when the rumors are wrong? Or did I misunderstand what you were saying?

[Sharky]

I'm curious what you're alluding to with your league rules. You mean that you assume that the rumors are correct as to the identity of the PTBNL and you get FAAB dollars in exchange for Sands? If that's the case, couldn't that really come back to bite you if/when the rumors are wrong? Or did I misunderstand what you were saying?

Pretty sure that's what he's implying, Mike. And yes, it probably could. That said, it's a "spirit" vs "letter" of the law interpretation.

P.S. Please don't sign Clemens... I know it's supposed to be a gate draw somehow. But it gives that dirtbag some cover by deferring his Hall candidacy. And it tarnishes the Astros' name as an organization. If anyone is still coming now, it's because they're fans. Don't need the kind of "boost" Clemens might give (and no, it's not B-12 vitamins!).

[Judge Jude]

"If that's the case, couldn't that really come back to bite you if/when the rumors are wrong?"

Not really:
- by bidding time on Wednesday, if there still are no reports suggesting that any other players could be involved (both were sent down recently, 'coincidentally' locking in the trade), that would seem to end that concern.
- nonetheless, if one of them did not go, the player would still be released AND the team would lose that amount of FAAB next year. which at this pt, appears certain not to be in play.

[Kevin Seitzer]

"If that's the case, couldn't that really come back to bite you if/when the rumors are wrong?"

Not really:
- by bidding time on Wednesday, if there still are no reports suggesting that any other players could be involved (both were sent down recently, 'coincidentally' locking in the trade), that would seem to end that concern.
- nonetheless, if one of them did not go, the player would still be released AND the team would lose that amount of FAAB next year. which at this pt, appears certain not to be in play.

I wasn't thinking so much about this trade specifically but rather about how your rule would operate generally. I know rumors are often right, but they are also wrong at a pretty high rate. I guess usually a PTBNL is a minor leaguer (who wasn't just sent down) and wouldn't affect your FAAB one way or the other.

[YourPalChrisMal]

I wasn't thinking so much about this trade specifically but rather about how your rule would operate generally. I know rumors are often right, but they are also wrong at a pretty high rate. I guess usually a PTBNL is a minor leaguer (who wasn't just sent down) and wouldn't affect your FAAB one way or the other.

In my league Jerry Sands is still in the NL, and would not be eligible to be dropped for FAAB $$$.

[Judge Jude]

"I know rumors are often right, but they are also wrong at a pretty high rate."

I don't ever recall a "stone cold done deal" PTNBL not being the PTBNL, later. I have seen times where the news is "team will pick from between these 2 guys" or "from a handful of Class A Podunk pitchers, which would be a different story. We differentiate between apples and oranges.

We ran into this with Soler of Cubs in June - the deal was agreed to, but for technical reasons not announced for a couple of weeks. We still allowed him to be chosen in the June 15 farm draft and - surprise! - he's playing in the minors for the Cubs.

We also now allow "early activations," so that if a team announces Joe Blow is being reactivated and starting Friday night, a team can add him as of Thursday noon. We have yet to see a player wind up NOT being activated in the 6 to 8 examples of this, because we don't allow "will be activated Monday if his Saturday bullpen session goes well" activations.

I have been more in the camp of the "literally in NL today, then ignore what we know" camp. But so far it's seeming to be that our new rule is better than the old rule that I would have kept.....

[overkill94]

I asked about the same thing in my NL-only league and was told that Sands and de la Rosa are in play as part of the deal as far as compensation goes. It turns out that I get Gonzo anyway since Loney was the only major leaguer in the deal and the team with Webster was lowest in the standings (meaning he'll get Beckett) so the teams with Sands and DLR don't get anything for this year anyway.

I was a little surprised by that ruling since we're usually pretty strict about activations and such. After the draft I was only allowed to DL Chipper and not Drew since he hadn't officially been placed on the DL at that point (though it was assumed he would be out for a few more weeks). Once it became clear that Chipper was coming back first I asked if I could simply have them swap places but was told that I had to wait until Chipper officially came off the DL. We do allow early activation if there's a concrete report (like in JJ's league), but Chipper was a surprise activation one day and proceeded to go 2-4 with a HR and 3 RBI. Seems fairly minor, but I'm in a heated pennant race now and those stats could have made a difference.