Angels-Diamondbacks 4/8/08

[Arizona Diamondbacks]

Angels and I have agreed on a deal.

Angels send:

Robinson Cano 2B
Phil Hughes SP
Joba Chamberlain RP


Diamondbacks send:

Ian Kinsler 2B
Josh Hamilton OF
Zach Greinke SP

Just waiting on Angels to give the okay.

[jcfree]

Approved by the Angels.

[Arizona Diamondbacks]

Is there going to be an explanation as to why this trade was vetoed? It looks pretty fair to me. Some people may say Angels win, some people may think I win, but overall I think it is very equal. We're both obviously getting something we like so who are you to tell us we can't do this trade?

Vetos are only for collusion/obvious cheating and there is no way that this can be considered collusion. I'm a little peeved here and demand an explanation.

[curvingfair]

I agree completely with Diamondbacks. This trade should never have been vetoed. This is obviously a league filled with baseball-savvy owners who should be allowed to evaluate their own player needs; vetoes should be reserved only for the most egregiously imbalanced trades -- A-Rod for Jose Vidro probably gets a veto, and not much else..

I have chatted quite a bit with D-Backs about possible trades, and he knows his baseball. From everything I've seen, Angels has come in as an active new owner and also knows his stuff. Neither one strikes me as the sort of owner who would do anything that he doesn't feel is in his own best interest; they don't need to be protected from themselves.

I don't want this to be a trigger-happy veto league. I believe that, wherever possible, teams should be encouraged to build on their weaknesses, leverage their strengths and plan for their dynasty's future through trades -- this won't happen if trades are continually shot down through perceived imbalances, real or imaginary.

Diamondbacks would seem to have had a slight edge in that trade. Cano is clearly a better second baseman than Kinsler, although Kinsler has 20/20 and possibly 30/30 upside. I personally think Josh Hamilton is something of a flavor of the month who will never live up to his 30-homer potential, but that's just my own opinion and nobody really knows the answer to that. Greinke has been red hot since the middle of last year and seems to have put his personal baggage behind him.

On the other side of the trade, Joba Chamberlain has enormous talent but will have very limited fantasy value until he either inherits Rivera's role as closer in a few years or joins the starting rotation -- maybe later this year, maybe next year, maybe never. I hear he's on a pretty limited innings count this year. Phil Hughes is another enormous talent who has pitched exactly one really good major league game -- the no-hitter he was working on last May when he hurt his arm.

Like I said, I like Diamondbacks' side of the deal, but it's not even remotely close to a veto-worthy trade.

I think Angels and D-Backs should be allowed to propose and make this same trade again. I feel strongly enough about this that I think every one of the league's other 10 owners should vote straight up or down on allowing the trade to be done over. I am on record as voting in favor. I also think any owner voting in favor of a veto should break the trade down as I just did and explain why he's voting against it.

Thanks for listening.

[jcfree]

Well let me weigh in here on my own trade. I appreciate everyone's opinion, but we all look at baseball from our own blind justice. I am a Yankees fan as has been discussed already on here, so I think I have just as good a grasp on their players as anyone. I believe Cano is a little overrated and Hughes may be good or he may be no better than Greinke in the long run, and Joba, well who really knows at this point although he strikes me as being having Joba the hut potential for weight issues.

Kinsler probably won't hit for the power of Cano, but he will probably rival him in AVG and will probably steal more. Honestly Hamilton is the center piece of this trade for me, because between what he showed in Cincy last year and the start he's had in Texas, I think it is all a little more than hype.

So I will repropose this trade as is and hopefully everyone will vote with a clear vision of what both GM's are thinking, and we will see in the long run who got the better end of it.

[Arizona Diamondbacks]

And I bet you're all just dying to hear my opinion as well, right? ...no? Well, too bad, you have to hear it anyway. As I stated before I feel this is a very even trade, obviously I hope in the long run that I will win, but I have no way of knowing.

Honestly, I believe (hope) both of us will win this deal. He could get the big bat with 40+ HR to anchor his lineup with Josh Hamilton, I dealt him because I have 4 other ultra-talented outfielders and I could afford to lose one. Also, Hamilton, although I do believe he will at least be good if not great, has a lot of question marks. He has no track record whatsoever, he played only last year and didn't even get to 300 AB's and while he is a super-talent, he has never proven he can stay healthy all year and I don't know what type of wear and tear a 162 game season and 600 AB's will have on him. Also, he is still so new to the league that pitchers don't know a lot about him yet, after he's around for a full season or two I'm curious to see how he responds to the adjustments pitchers make and see if he falls into the dreaded sophomore slump. But, I do like Greinke a lot. I was very reluctant to part with him in this deal, but Angels wouldn't do it unless I added him in. I do like Kinsler as well(I did draft him afterall), I just don't have a whole lot of faith in him. He could eventualy become a 25/25 guy, but I personally don't believe his average will ever top .300 for a full season (big uppercut swing).

For me, I love getting Cano, he may be a bit overrated but he's a guy who I believe will eventually bat 3rd in that lineup (as soon as Abreu croaks) he will be a tremendous source of average (.300+ every year with the ability to hit .340), runs, and RBI's with A-Rod in that Yankee lineup for years to come he will have all the protection he will need. I expect him, in his prime, to yearly give me .310-25-100-100 and hopefully more. From a 2B that is outstanding. Then, I'm taking a bit of a gamble on Joba and Hughes. They are both tremendous talents with ace potential, but who knows if either of them will ever reach it. I'm hoping, at worst, that Hughes will be at least as good as Greinke and Joba will either become a quality starter or elite closer. I figure with the Yankees being the Yankees, that Hughes and Joba (if he ever become a starter) will at worst be an excellent source of wins. They could both easily become 15-win locks for years to come assuming they are healthy. But, at this point in their careers, they are mostly just potential so I'm really gambling that at least one of them will reach it.

For the above stated reasons, I think this is a very even trade. I like what I'm getting, but I'm also sad to see Hamilton, Greinke, and Kinsler go. I felt that I could spare these players to get what I ultimately wanted and Angels felt he could trade his 2 stud prospects for what he got as well (mostly the other-worldly-talented Hamilton). There is no reason at all that this should even be considered being vetoed and I'm curious to hear from you guys that think this is very uneven. I'm not mad at you guys or anything, I am just genuinely curious as to what you're thinking is since we all value players differently.

[Chicago Cubs GM]

I do believe this trade is quite lopsided. I'm not going to break it down as much as the others have - but I think it's great they did. I feel Cano for Kinsler is fine, but Hughes and Joba have much higher potential than Hamilton and Greinke. I just don't think Hamilton will ever live up to the hype. Joba or Hughes are much better than Greinke. I'm fine for letting the league vote though.

[Atlanta Braves GM]

Average Draft position on ESPN boards: Cano, Hughes, Chamberlain (50, 157, 181) for an average of 129. Greinke, Hamilton, Kinsler (226, 116, 77) for an average of 140. Cano, Kinsler and Greinke are what they are as we pretty much know what they can do. Hamilton, Hughes and Chamberlain are wildcards that are complete speculation as to what they will become and therefore left up to personal opinion.

I think veto's should be reserved for blatant lopsided trades and not ones based on personal preference. I would've rather had the Kinsler, Hamilton, Greinke side of this trade, but hey, that's just my opinion. My team is stinking it up so what do I know.

[Arizona Diamondbacks]

Thank you Atlanta. I was trying to find a way to say my opinion on vetos, but I couldn't find the words for it. You said it perfectly, I couldn't have done it better myself. It is my belief that vetos cannot be used based on personal preference or potential. Potential is so overrated, there are so many guys that never reach their potential. You can't veto a trade with the speculation that player A will be, in your opinion, better than player B in 5 years. We have no way of knowing, that's what makes fantasy so much fun, the gambling.

He likes what he's getting more and believes his 3 players will be better and I feel the same way about mine, but like I said this trade seems almost perfectly even to me. I put in on the ESPN message boards, unfortunately I only got 2 real responses, but both of them actually said they liked the Hamilton, Kinsler, Greinke side just like Braves and of course Angels as well. Just because you like my side better doesn't mean I'm ripping the guy off, in fact, he may end up winning in the end. I believe that Angels side of the deal is much safer, he gets 3 guys who, for the most part, we know what they can do and although they have less overall potential, I believe all 3 will at worst be quality big-leaguers. Where as my side is much more of a gamble, I have higher reward but also higher risk, there are so many top pitching propsects that don't pan out. Even ones that flash brilliance for a year or two then disappear. Arms are much bigger gambles than bats, so to veto a trade based on potential is foolish, it'd be like vetoing this trade based on risk because I take the bigger risk.

The whole controversy seems to be based around Josh Hamilton. Some people think he can fulfill his potential and therefore think the deal in fine, but others think he will be an absolute bust and therefore think the deal in unfair. Again that's all speculation and left up the the managers making the trade to decide. Angels has stated that he's drinking the Hamilton kool-aid and believes in him. I actually think he will be a stud as well, it's just I also have Delmon Young, Justin Upton, Chris Young, and Colby Rasmus in the OF and felt I could afford to lose Hamilton to get what I wanted, young pitching prospects and an upgrade at 2B. Just because some of you have a man-crush on Joba or Hughes doesn't mean they are just automatically Cy Young or Nolan Ryan. Joba has thrown just over 30 innings and Hughes has thrown less than 80, and in Joba's case he made them all as a reliever, so we have no idea what he'll be like as a starter. Both of them are complete speculation and potential at this point, I'm buying into it but others might not. Besides, there's one thing I've learned by playing H2H for years and that is that a great hitter is always better than a great pitcher. So, even if Joba and Hughes reach their potential, Angels may still be getting the better end of the deal. But, that's the thing, nobody knows. We'll just have to wait and see.

Sorry to rant again, I'm not upset and it would appear that the trade will be allowed anyway. It's just I believe very strongly about vetos and would be defending any trade even if it wasn't my own. I've been in leagues that veto almost everything before and they absolutely suck. I just really am trying to make sure that doesn't happen here because I think we have some great guys here in this league and it could be a lot of fun as long as we let it be. I'm done preaching now, I'll get off the box.