mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 May 2025 19:38 pm
New trade up:
Altuve, Munoz, and F. Cruz for McLain, Abbott, and C. Smith.
FWIW - after exploring other options, Trader offered me that deal and I accepted.
That’s an awful deal.
Altuve (4th round pick) PLUS the highest ranked closer in fantasy for sub-.200 hitting Matt McLain (6th rounder), a NON-CLOSER in Cade Smith, and a waiver wire pitcher?
1. Traded… dude, c’mon. What are you doing?
2. Full disclosure - I’ve vetoed for now.
I can’t see any justification for this trade.
Trader will have to explain his exact reasoning, but I expect part of it has to with how good Abbott (Yahoo ranks him 86th most valuable so far - 1.77 ERA, 1.16 WHIP, 4 wins, 2 QS, and 45 K in 40 2/3 IP) has been. He may possibly be figuring in that Altuve's xBA (.232) and xSLG (.354) don't necessarily bode well (McLain's are xBA .217 and xSLG .399).
He should’ve gotten more for Munoz alone.
He can only trade with whoever is willing to make a trade.
He didn't offer me Munoz. He didn't offer me anything.
As noted, we had explored other combinations. This is the combination he wanted.
I think Kris Bubic wasn't drafted. Are we going to say that he can't be traded for anyone of value?
Why would I say that?
You’re trading guys with little value for players with value. What sense does it make for him to swap Munoz for Smith?
He specifically wanted Cade Smith. IMO, on value, he's trading:
Munoz for Abbott (a RP for a SP, if you believe Abbott will continue to pitch well, that isn't crazy IMO)
Altuve for McLain (two relatively underperforming MIs, Altuve has been marginally more productive but the projections are about equal)
Cruz for C. Smith (two non-save RPs, but C. Smith is healthy while Cruz on the IL with shoulder inflammation)
Last edited by mattmitchl44 on 27 May 2025 03:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 May 2025 19:38 pm
New trade up:
Altuve, Munoz, and F. Cruz for McLain, Abbott, and C. Smith.
FWIW - after exploring other options, Trader offered me that deal and I accepted.
That’s an awful deal.
Altuve (4th round pick) PLUS the highest ranked closer in fantasy for sub-.200 hitting Matt McLain (6th rounder), a NON-CLOSER in Cade Smith, and a waiver wire pitcher?
1. Traded… dude, c’mon. What are you doing?
2. Full disclosure - I’ve vetoed for now.
I can’t see any justification for this trade.
Trader will have to explain his exact reasoning, but I expect part of it has to with how good Abbott (Yahoo ranks him 86th most valuable so far - 1.77 ERA, 1.16 WHIP, 4 wins, 2 QS, and 45 K in 40 2/3 IP) has been. He may possibly be figuring in that Altuve's xBA (.232) and xSLG (.354) don't necessarily bode well (McLain's are xBA .217 and xSLG .399).
He should’ve gotten more for Munoz alone.
He can only trade with whoever is willing to make a trade.
Is a four minute window typically the amount of time you offer and allow someone to decide something?
I probably just re-thought it if I wanted to see how other offers I had out played out first.
Then don’t send the offer in the first place. That’s what the evaluate trade button is for.
It just gives you information. You can use that to craft your own offer back to me.
I don’t think that’s normally how people make deals. Also the players were then involved in another deal immediately, so I couldn’t do that.
I’m just saying man, it’s a very weird way of operating.
Ok. I've had people offer me deals and then think better of it and cancel the offer. Again, all re-thinking and canceling the offer means, IMO, is that you can't immediately act on it. If you see the cancelled offer and it intrigues you, feel free to offer it back and/or make a slightly different offer.
The cancelled offer just means it's at least in the ballpark of something I'd consider.
Ok sorry this deal is causing problems. Fact is when I was making the offer something came up that distracted me. As a result I ask for Cade Smith instead of a different pitcher. However I made the mistake, far as Im concerned the deal stands as is. It's not a bad deal. I needed a better starting pitcher worse then I needed a relief guy.
In my opinion it's a more even trade then some that have been proposed to me. Matt if you want to cancel the trade, no hard feelings but I'm fine with it as i
If it gets vetoed by anyone, again no hard feelings. This is a better deal then some that have been sent to me.
update- Munoz for Cade, with what I've got does anyone think I was going stay high in the saves catergory? Soon as Munoz cooled off I would have dropped like a rock. This is really
Abbott for Munoz
McLain for Altuve
Cade Smith for Garcia
I think Abbott gives me a chance to pickup points in wins, Ks, and QS while losing in saves. Smith for Garcia is almost a who cares but I think Smith's numbers will be better then Garcia's by end of year. Altuve could make this a bad deal for me IF he turns it around, on the other hand McLain could be the one who turns his year around, that makes McLain for Altuve a gamble for both of us.
Again do what you think is right, if you veto it, no hard feelings.
Last edited by HorseTrader on 27 May 2025 07:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
HorseTrader wrote: ↑27 May 2025 07:40 am
Ok sorry this deal is causing problems. Fact is when I was making the offer something came up that distracted me. As a result I ask for Cade Smith instead of a different pitcher. However I made the mistake, far as Im concerned the deal stands as is. It's not a bad deal. I needed a better starting pitcher worse then I needed a relief guy.
In my opinion it's a more even trade then some that have been proposed to me. Matt if you want to cancel the trade, no hard feelings but I'm fine with it as is.
I'm fine with it.
As I've said, if you believe Abbott will continue to pitch as he has, I can perfectly well see why a SP who gives you W, QS, and K - and more weight in ERA and WHIP because of how many innings they pitch, will be more valuable to you than Munoz. It does seem like your pitching needs help in all of the categories other than SVs.
HorseTrader wrote: ↑27 May 2025 07:40 am
Ok sorry this deal is causing problems. Fact is when I was making the offer something came up that distracted me. As a result I ask for Cade Smith instead of a different pitcher. However I made the mistake, far as Im concerned the deal stands as is. It's not a bad deal. I needed a better starting pitcher worse then I needed a relief guy.
In my opinion it's a more even trade then some that have been proposed to me. Matt if you want to cancel the trade, no hard feelings but I'm fine with it as is.
I'm fine with it.
As I've said, if you believe Abbott will continue to pitch as he has, I can perfectly well see why a SP who gives you W, QS, and K - and more weight in ERA and WHIP because of how many innings they pitch, will be more valuable to you than Munoz. It does seem like your pitching needs help in all of the categories other than SVs.
It could go either way. Both are good young pitchers. Last year Abbotts wAr was 3.3 and Munoz was 2.0. I thnk both of them are flying high right now and sooner or later both will come back down to earth. In the 90s when I played this crazy game, I always just wrote saves off, never drafted one. Good luck
Matt if it gets vetoed, we'll rework it. You want Munoz and I want a starting pitcher, we can make it work. Gotta go driving to Shipswhatever Indiana
HorseTrader wrote: ↑27 May 2025 07:40 am
Altuve could make this a bad deal for me IF he turns it around, on the other hand McLain could be the one who turns his year around, that makes McLain for Altuve a gamble for both of us.
I also agree with this given that Altuve is 35 and McLain in 25. Altuve is the bigger "name" but this could be the season that he's just washed. I'm hoping that Altuve can get a lot closer to his typical numbers, but am far from certain of it.
HorseTrader wrote: ↑27 May 2025 07:40 am
Altuve could make this a bad deal for me IF he turns it around, on the other hand McLain could be the one who turns his year around, that makes McLain for Altuve a gamble for both of us.
I also agree with this given that Altuve is 35 and McLain in 25. Altuve is the bigger "name" but this could be the season that he's just washed. I'm hoping that Altuve can get a lot closer to his typical numbers, but am far from certain of it.
You’re not even accounting for McLain’s added value for being named Matt. That’s what balances the trade, I suppose.
HorseTrader wrote: ↑27 May 2025 07:40 am
Ok sorry this deal is causing problems. Fact is when I was making the offer something came up that distracted me. As a result I ask for Cade Smith instead of a different pitcher. However I made the mistake, far as Im concerned the deal stands as is. It's not a bad deal. I needed a better starting pitcher worse then I needed a relief guy.
In my opinion it's a more even trade then some that have been proposed to me. Matt if you want to cancel the trade, no hard feelings but I'm fine with it as i
If it gets vetoed by anyone, again no hard feelings. This is a better deal then some that have been sent to me.
update- Munoz for Cade, with what I've got does anyone think I was going stay high in the saves catergory? Soon as Munoz cooled off I would have dropped like a rock. This is really
Abbott for Munoz
McLain for Altuve
Cade Smith for Garcia
I think Abbott gives me a chance to pickup points in wins, Ks, and QS while losing in saves. Smith for Garcia is almost a who cares but I think Smith's numbers will be better then Garcia's by end of year. Altuve could make this a bad deal for me IF he turns it around, on the other hand McLain could be the one who turns his year around, that makes McLain for Altuve a gamble for both of us.
Again do what you think is right, if you veto it, no hard feelings.
HorseTrader wrote: ↑27 May 2025 07:40 am
Ok sorry this deal is causing problems. Fact is when I was making the offer something came up that distracted me. As a result I ask for Cade Smith instead of a different pitcher. However I made the mistake, far as Im concerned the deal stands as is. It's not a bad deal. I needed a better starting pitcher worse then I needed a relief guy.
In my opinion it's a more even trade then some that have been proposed to me. Matt if you want to cancel the trade, no hard feelings but I'm fine with it as i
If it gets vetoed by anyone, again no hard feelings. This is a better deal then some that have been sent to me.
update- Munoz for Cade, with what I've got does anyone think I was going stay high in the saves catergory? Soon as Munoz cooled off I would have dropped like a rock. This is really
Abbott for Munoz
McLain for Altuve
Cade Smith for Garcia
I think Abbott gives me a chance to pickup points in wins, Ks, and QS while losing in saves. Smith for Garcia is almost a who cares but I think Smith's numbers will be better then Garcia's by end of year. Altuve could make this a bad deal for me IF he turns it around, on the other hand McLain could be the one who turns his year around, that makes McLain for Altuve a gamble for both of us.
Again do what you think is right, if you veto it, no hard feelings.
Fernando Cruz = Garcia?
Sorry Cruz not Garcia, veto it or don't, your choice.
HorseTrader wrote: ↑27 May 2025 07:40 am
Ok sorry this deal is causing problems. Fact is when I was making the offer something came up that distracted me. As a result I ask for Cade Smith instead of a different pitcher. However I made the mistake, far as Im concerned the deal stands as is. It's not a bad deal. I needed a better starting pitcher worse then I needed a relief guy.
In my opinion it's a more even trade then some that have been proposed to me. Matt if you want to cancel the trade, no hard feelings but I'm fine with it as i
If it gets vetoed by anyone, again no hard feelings. This is a better deal then some that have been sent to me.
update- Munoz for Cade, with what I've got does anyone think I was going stay high in the saves catergory? Soon as Munoz cooled off I would have dropped like a rock. This is really
Abbott for Munoz
McLain for Altuve
Cade Smith for Garcia
I think Abbott gives me a chance to pickup points in wins, Ks, and QS while losing in saves. Smith for Garcia is almost a who cares but I think Smith's numbers will be better then Garcia's by end of year. Altuve could make this a bad deal for me IF he turns it around, on the other hand McLain could be the one who turns his year around, that makes McLain for Altuve a gamble for both of us.
Again do what you think is right, if you veto it, no hard feelings.
Fernando Cruz = Garcia?
Sorry Cruz not Garcia, veto it or don't, your choice.
It takes 5 votes to veto a trade, a number I’m starting to think should be lower. With more consideration, you might veto it yourself.
Who was the player you meant to include in your offer? You said there was a distraction…
HorseTrader wrote: ↑27 May 2025 07:40 am
Ok sorry this deal is causing problems. Fact is when I was making the offer something came up that distracted me. As a result I ask for Cade Smith instead of a different pitcher. However I made the mistake, far as Im concerned the deal stands as is. It's not a bad deal. I needed a better starting pitcher worse then I needed a relief guy.
In my opinion it's a more even trade then some that have been proposed to me. Matt if you want to cancel the trade, no hard feelings but I'm fine with it as i
If it gets vetoed by anyone, again no hard feelings. This is a better deal then some that have been sent to me.
update- Munoz for Cade, with what I've got does anyone think I was going stay high in the saves catergory? Soon as Munoz cooled off I would have dropped like a rock. This is really
Abbott for Munoz
McLain for Altuve
Cade Smith for Garcia
I think Abbott gives me a chance to pickup points in wins, Ks, and QS while losing in saves. Smith for Garcia is almost a who cares but I think Smith's numbers will be better then Garcia's by end of year. Altuve could make this a bad deal for me IF he turns it around, on the other hand McLain could be the one who turns his year around, that makes McLain for Altuve a gamble for both of us.
Again do what you think is right, if you veto it, no hard feelings.
Fernando Cruz = Garcia?
Sorry Cruz not Garcia, veto it or don't, your choice.
It takes 5 votes to veto a trade, a number I’m starting to think should be lower. With more consideration, you might veto it yourself.
Who was the player you meant to include in your offer? You said there was a distraction…
Had to have been Juan Soto and he just clicked on the wrong box with a name that starts with S.
