[USML Announce] Wood You Be My Friend?

[Brad Jansen]

Winick writes...
  Of course, Wood was turned into a $1 JJ Putz and Hughes is likely to be a
valuable member of the Yankees rotation this year, but obviously those were
circumstances that only dumb luck can explain.

Jansen responds:
   Dumb:Brad
   Luck: Jeff

But remember that Putz netted me Evan Longoria ($5) in addition to Wood
($2).  Remember those name, lads.  Not that it will mean much if we are
forced to labor under the draconian prohibition on trading any minor leaguer
at any time for any player for any reason.  Sounds great. Yippee. No matter
what, no matter how many rules you add, no matter how you tilt the field,
there's still only gonna be three teams that win silver, gold and platinum,
or whatever it is.

BLJ

On 3/29/07, jhwinick at aol.com <jhwinick at aol.com> wrote:
>
>  "Speaking of shouted down, between Brad's various rants and insults, it
> appears as if my original proposal garnered 5 votes of support and 5 votes
> opposed.  Gammons should be required to get off the fence and weigh in."
>
> -Andy
>
> Actually, I see things a little differently.  Well....alot differently.
> For once, I don't find Brad's comments insulting.  I think he pointed out a
> reasonable difference of opinion regarding the suggestion that the
> successful trading or acquisition of minor league prospects is the
> consequence of nothing other than dumb luck (I believe as it pertains to the
> particular example that is being used to illustrate the importance of the
> new rule -- the one that involved an unnamed $40 player (Arod) being traded
> for an unnamed $19 minor league prospect (Brandon Wood) and I might add, a
> $5 pitching prospect from the Yankees (Philip Hughes).  Of course, Wood was
> turned into a $1 JJ Putz and Hughes is likely to be a valuable member of
> the Yankees rotation this year, but obviously those were circumstances that
> only dumb luck can explain.  You are certainly entitled to question whether
> such a strategy is good for the league, but I think its fair to challenge
> your assertion that it doesn't involve any strategic thinking at all.
>
> And the other comment I recall is the one that identified the unintended
> consequence of preventing teams from trading one minor leaguer for another
> (say Adam Jones for Adam Miller).
>
> More importantly, I count the votes a little differently.  I see the
> Barrett rule having the support of at least five teams (Barrett, Robbins,
> Jansen, Winick and Fruit) and the likely support of Kerber.  By my count,
> that proposal will then be passed.  And at least three teams (Fruit, Jansen
> and Winick) believe that such a result would obviate the need for a vote on
> the Klein/Blocker proposal.  The fact that such a result would
> also postpone discussion on an issue that is sure to be very contentious
> appears to be lost on the sponsors of the Klein proposal.
>
> I'll ask one last time....PLEASE can we table the Klein proposal, adopt
> the Barrett proposal and get back to having fun?
>
> Jeff Winick
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
> from AOL at *AOL.com*<http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/1615326657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http://www.aol.com>
> .
>
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lyra.siteprotect.com/pipermail/announce/attachments/20070329/81aba136/attachment.htm