11/21/24
July 31, 2002
Fraud!:
"The trade of Floyd [from Montreal to Boston] also tells us something we already knew: MLB's top management is not to be trusted, and needs to be overhauled." Joe Sheehan explains why things look corrupt and fraudulent in MLB because of this trade. From my point of view, this trade is dirtier than a Pete Rose game-worn jersey.
Naaaaaaaaaaah... I disagree. Great trade for the Spos!
posted by djacobs at 05:32 PM on July 31, 2002
I mean, Floyd was not going to stay, and the Expos aren't going to win it this year.
posted by djacobs at 05:43 PM on July 31, 2002
I don't see the ripoff Sheehan's complaining about. Maybe I'm alittle disappointed it's not the trade Gammons claimed it was on Baseball Tonight last night (Song and The Corpse of Rolando Arrojo for Floyd), but I think the Expos got two decent young arms for a guy they weren't keeping next year. The fact that Floyd is now the Sox "home run leader" is misleading. Even with is 913 OPS, he's only second on the Sox. Floyd may be their HR leader, but he's no more than their third-best position player. Not bad, but if they don't sign him (and the Fellowship of the Miserable around here has already given up on the new Sox owners pockets) next year, it's a questionable trade.
posted by yerfatma at 05:56 PM on July 31, 2002
I think the problem is what Sheehan pointed out: MLB has said that the Expos are going to be contracted. Therefore, there is NO reason to trade for players that won't play this year. Instead, this trade ends up helping the Red Sox and doing nothing for the Expos (based on this fact). The fact that Selig and Henry (Red Sox owner) are best buds makes this an even uglier deal.
posted by grum@work at 07:54 PM on July 31, 2002
I'd wager that if this trade is indicative of anything other than the 'Spos seem to have thrown in the towel in the wild card race, it is that they will not be contracted next year but rather sold to a new ownership group in DC. My logic: As the article points out, trading for prospects makes no sense if the team is on life support. But it makes eminent sense if Selig and his friends want to shore up the 'Spos net value for eventual sale. The Expos sale looks more likely if there is a labour stoppage as MLB will need to recoup lost revenue. Sigh.
posted by Cap'n Swing at 10:42 AM on August 01, 2002
I mean, please, think straight: There is NO WAY contraction is going to happen. Find the false statement below: Who has public support? The players. Who has legal precedent? The players. Who has won ever labor showdown in the last 40+ years? The players. Who wants to give away 7% of their industry's jobs? The players.
posted by djacobs at 01:28 PM on August 01, 2002
My main problem with this theory (and I should note that I'm a Sox fan) is that Floyd is *not* what we "desperately need" as Sheehan puts it. The Sox are second only to the Yankees in most batting categories. We benefit from Floyd's addition only a little more than any team would. If this trade were rigged, we would have gotten Colon too (by adding Fossum and/or Nixon, perhaps), as what we clearly need is a starting pitcher. Why didn't Selig hook *that* up if he was putting in the fix for us?
posted by banky edwards at 01:28 AM on August 02, 2002
you beat me to it... I don't know how active any of the front office is in running the expos, but let's just say that while I am inclined to bet against it, I wouldn't be surprised if I was wrong... the deal definitely sounds fishy... the Sox just got a guy who leads their team in HRs without giving up a major league player. I'd be interested in knowing if the Marlins and Sox had any talks at all while Floyd was still in Florida... maybe they wouldn't deal with Boston but the Expos decided to help things along... as an expos fan, they ended up nearly even, 2 for 2 in the young pitchers department, but this sucks because it seems like they're giving up... not that they really had a chance anyway though.