JammerHammer21 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Ken Giles+ going to Toronto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Baseball seriously needs to get rid of the domestic violence trade value discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggio7 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Screw this trade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 1 minute ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Baseball seriously needs to get rid of the domestic violence trade value discount. How do you do that without simply banning anyone even accused of domestic abuse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 1 minute ago, mse326 said: How do you do that without simply banning anyone even accused of domestic abuse? You are ineligible for the postseason the year you get suspended for DV would be one way. Alternatively, the MLB could just not approve trades that season for players with a DV suspension that year. This assumes most of them are at least wrapped up enough during the offseason that there isn't a massive discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 8 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: You are ineligible for the postseason the year you get suspended for DV would be one way. Alternatively, the MLB could just not approve trades that season for players with a DV suspension that year. This assumes most of them are at least wrapped up enough during the offseason that there isn't a massive discount. I'm not sure that stops the discount. It might actually make it worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Just now, mse326 said: I'm not sure that stops the discount. It might actually make it worse. Why? My general premise here is that DV discounts are steep during and immediately after the suspension, then evaporate pretty quickly once it has been completely served and the public moves on to the next guy. The posterchild here is Aroldis Chapman. So if you stop someone from being traded during the suspension, you get rid of that initial period. Making someone inelligible for the postseason would deal with the situations like this where you have a guy who's suspension ends just before the trade deadline. Maybe if you have a DV suspension on a contender, making them inelligible for the postseason would incentivize a trade as long as the player isn't a rental, but we've seen injured players not get traded from all-in clubs before (Kyle Schwarber, and he wasn't a lock for the WS at the trade deadline), so I'm not sure why this would be different. I'm open to other ideas on this for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renndawg37 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Ken Giles? Why? I would literally rather give Osuna to the Astros. Giles is a dumpster fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renndawg37 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Can anyone tell me anything about Perez and Paulino? Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsoxsuck05 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Still doesn't reach Scumbag Cashman levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 3 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Why? My general premise here is that DV discounts are steep during and immediately after the suspension, then evaporate pretty quickly once it has been completely served and the public moves on to the next guy. The posterchild here is Aroldis Chapman. So if you stop someone from being traded during the suspension, you get rid of that initial period. Making someone inelligible for the postseason would deal with the situations like this where you have a guy who's suspension ends just before the trade deadline. Maybe if you have a DV suspension on a contender, making them inelligible for the postseason would incentivize a trade as long as the player isn't a rental, but we've seen injured players not get traded from all-in clubs before (Kyle Schwarber, and he wasn't a lock for the WS at the trade deadline), so I'm not sure why this would be different. I'm open to other ideas on this for sure. I'd be concerned with pitchers. Teams that are fighting for playoffs could go after them really cheap then. A starter can help get to the playoffs and with shorter rotations not be needed for the playoffs. A reliever you can maybe do as well and get a great reliever even if you don't need one just to help get there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Just now, mse326 said: I'd be concerned with pitchers. Teams that are fighting for playoffs could go after them really cheap then. A starter can help get to the playoffs and with shorter rotations not be needed for the playoffs. A reliever you can maybe do as well and get a great reliever even if you don't need one just to help get there. I see what you're getting at, so this would likely only apply to rental players then since anyone with a year of team control would have basically just as much value in the offseason. That kind of makes me lean towards "this player isn't getting traded this year" as the rule of thumb. They can still play, they can still collect their check, be eligible for a QO if they're that good, but we just shut off the market for contending teams buying guys with recent DV issues because they're cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 6 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: I see what you're getting at, so this would likely only apply to rental players then since anyone with a year of team control would have basically just as much value in the offseason. That kind of makes me lean towards "this player isn't getting traded this year" as the rule of thumb. They can still play, they can still collect their check, be eligible for a QO if they're that good, but we just shut off the market for contending teams buying guys with recent DV issues because they're cheaper. Does't that potentially punish the team that has him though. I mean I know that there is usually a discount but let's say there isn't. Let's say there is a team that wants to trade a Mejia for a reliever (ludicrous I know). Suspensions are to punish the player and it has an incidental effect on the team. Your proposal directly punishes the team and doesn't punish the player at all. I know why you want to do something, I just struggle to see a workable solution that doesn't hurt the team which I can't agree as being ok since they did nothing wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.