Guy A gets Johan Santana Guy B gets Ted Lilly and Houston Street
We vetoed the trade, and Guy A is freaking out about it. I think its pretty obvious it was a bad trade. I don't know why the Guy B would have accepted it.
Maybe he accepted because he wanted a boost in saves along with a good SP (sure, not Johan caliber, but good). No veto IMO - no need to protect people from their own decisions.
nyrblue2 wrote:Maybe he accepted because he wanted a boost in saves along with a good SP (sure, not Johan caliber, but good). No veto IMO - no need to protect people from their own decisions.
No, that trade SHOULDN'T have been vetoed. Lilly's quietly putting up a strong year, and Street is a top-line closer if he's healthy. I'd be pissed if that trade got vetoed, too...
sgnilloccaz wrote:A little lop-sided but not [u]vetoable[/u], is that a word?
I have caught myself using vetoable on many occassions. Is it an actual word? Your guess is as good as mine. On the trade, considering Street is just beginning to get healthy again and Lilly is pretty decent....on the other hand you have the best pitcher in the game. As much as I'd like to veto this one, if you have two managers willing to do this deal, let it through.
I don't think this should have been vetoed either. What else do you need to trade to get Johan? I mean, a solid SP and a closer seems fair enough to me...