- Posts: 2143
- Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 5:32 am
Fri Jul 24, 2015 2:07 pm
To be kind, I'll only post one more of your terrible trade "evaluations." When the Marlins traded Andrew Heaney to LAD for Dee Gordon and Dan Haren I correctly saw it as a good deal for both teams:
You, however, misread (again) the trade:
Ouch. Not only has Dee Gordon been one of the best lead-off men in baseball with a .338/.359/.413 line and 33 steals, Haren has been very effective with a 3.46 ERA and a 1.09 Whip. You really need to realize your limits and stop making trade evaluations; you don't want to keep making yourself look silly.
l.strether wrote:I like the trade for the Dodgers, as I like most of Friedman's trades. However, it wasn't a "fleecing." Dee Gordon is a young, blazing middle infielder who hit .289, stole 64 bases, and has--how do you say it?--"handled it in the bigs."
You, however, misread (again) the trade:
teamnasty wrote:Andrew Friedman absolutely fleeced Miami by sending them Haren and his $10M salary + Dee Gordon for top prospect Andrew Heaney and 3 minor leaguers. Slots Heaney right into Haren's spot resulting in no downgrade, maybe even an upgrade, with 5 years of cost control. Slots Guerrero into 2b replacing Gordon's speed with much more power. Gordon will likely revert to an on base cipher going forward, or, at best, be a 2-3 win player until his speed declines in a couple years.
The trade goes from bad to worse if Haren reverses his retirement threat and decides to play for Miami in 2015.
Ouch. Not only has Dee Gordon been one of the best lead-off men in baseball with a .338/.359/.413 line and 33 steals, Haren has been very effective with a 3.46 ERA and a 1.09 Whip. You really need to realize your limits and stop making trade evaluations; you don't want to keep making yourself look silly.
