a trade was done in my league. it was johan santana and dan haren for hanley ramirez and tim hudson. plus the one guy added hudson a week earlier. isn't this trade unfair?
2007-05-09 08:17:52 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Fantasy Sports
Depends on the needs of the teams. If the team getting Ramirez doesn't like what he/she is getting from their SS, the trade makes a lot more sense. Alternatively, they could just think that Hudson pitching out of the NL is a better bet for ERA and WHIP than Santana over the rest of the season. I think Haren is a bit of a non-factor in the trade, and you should look at it as Ramirez and Hudson for Santana. The Twins wouldn't take it, but fantasy leagues are different than real baseball, right?
As for the adding a week earlier, that makes it annoying, but it shows you how value can increase quickly. It also doesn't mean that the team who used to have Santana wouldn't have wanted Hudson - maybe they just didn't have a pitcher they would drop for him, but the chance of getting Ramirez as well (plus his SBs, a big factor) was enough to pry Santana away.
All in all, a pretty silly trade, but not completely unfair if the context is right. I wouldn't veto out of frustration for someone getting Santana at what seems like a discount.
2007-05-09 08:31:26 · answer #1 · answered by Danny A 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Evaluate each guys roster and see if they have needs at the positions. Does the guy with Santana also have a lot of other very good pitchers and forgot to draft good hitting? Does his current SS suck or does he badly need SB? Essentially the trade comes down to Santana for Ramirez...the other 2 are a fantasy wash, neither is much of an upgrade over the other either currently or historically. Personally i would trade just about any pitcher that can only help every 5th day (provided he doesnt get rocked...then he kills you for a moment) for a dominating everyday player. Ramirez is just such a player, as SS goes he is clearly top 5 material. Looks to me like 2 guys recognizing needs and filling them, if you want a top player to fill a hole you have to give up quality in return. As for just adding a player, I picked up Griffey a week ago and he has hit 4 HRs since I got him...he is currently trade bait. He was better than what I had on my bench but to a team currently needing HR he would be someone they may want and I am looking for an additional closer (not a top one...just a guy who can pick up an occasional save and not have a high ERA). I fill a hole, he fills a hole...that is what constitutes a fair trade as long as quality is given up on both sides. If each guys roster suggests it is reasonable based on need versus position depth then it is a fair trade. If the guy wanting Ramirez already has someone like Reyes at SS then it likely is a fixed deal and you should veto, otherwise let it go through.
2007-05-09 18:39:48 · answer #2 · answered by viphockey4 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, this trade is not unfair. First of all, Hudson should never have been in free agency in the first place. He is pitching very well. If the one guy is looking for a position player, Hanley is a great pickup. He hits for power, and steals around 50 bags. This is a fair trade.
2007-05-09 19:08:54 · answer #3 · answered by cubkiller85 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
listen................. i don't know at this point, we've got a month of baseball in the books and i think it's okay to start judging your players by what they're doing for you now, and not what they're ranked on yahoo for pre-season drafting. You've got to be bold sometimes to get drastic results in your favor. Hudson's got an ERA of under 2.00 and a WHIP under 1.00.. Johan has lost at home twice and has an ERA over 3.00, which is worth adding a player of hanley ramirez calibur to the Hudson side on the deal. Haren probably shouldnt be in the deal however.
2007-05-09 15:45:59 · answer #4 · answered by Betrayed King 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hudson is having a good year, and Ramirez is going to be productive all year too. It might not be as unfair as it appears.
2007-05-09 16:43:28 · answer #5 · answered by jh361 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In everyones eyes yes. But the guy geting ramiez may need alot of steals and is willing to give up santana for him. or the guy giving up santana may not think he is going to have a good season. I think its a good enough trade to go thru
2007-05-09 15:38:12 · answer #6 · answered by tamparav 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As far as I know, unless the statistics of the given players aren't relatively similar causing enough owners to object then it will be allowed to go through as a fair trade. Usually you have to own a player for at least one game before the player can be traded.
2007-05-09 15:40:27 · answer #7 · answered by Jeffrey W 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think this trade is fair based on each players 2007 stats. Would i trade Santana? NO WAY.
2007-05-09 15:52:29 · answer #8 · answered by Kevin 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it was pretty good seeing as ramirez is one of the best shortstops out there right now. plus pitchers help every 5 days while others help every day.
2007-05-09 16:11:58 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yeah. santana is worth way more than all those players put together
2007-05-09 15:24:44 · answer #10 · answered by im emo, who cares 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋