OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

MrWorkrate · 03-29-2003, 02:10 AM

Any trade that involves prospects for proven players is going to end up with two possible outcomes: either the trade is considered to be a great move by the proven player aquiring team, because the prospects fizzle out, or the trade is a horrible move by the proven player aquiring team, because the proven player ends up mediocre/leaving via free agency/not living up to expectations, while the prospects bloom.

Prospects are never guaranteed, no matter how much they're hyped. It may take several trips to the majors before they become ready, or they may never be ready at all. Sammy Sosa wasn't looking great when he was traded to the Cubs: averages of .233 and .203 in major league ball the previous two seasons, with a strikeout every 3.4 times to bat. Jay Buhner was batting .188 when he was traded to Seattle. Paul Konerko was batting .215. Randy Johnson was pulling a 6.67 ERA with a 1:1 BB/K ratio with Montreal. GMs are under pressure to win, so they do what they need to do in order to win today, and usually that means getting rid of something with possible great upside for something that's good today. It's like playing the stock market. If you buy a hundred dollars worth of stock, and it goes to $200, sell it now and make a nice amount of money, or keep it, and see if you can make more?

It's easy to rip on the trades where the prospects turned out great. But how many trades involving established players for prospects turned out way better for the team that got the established player? You never hear about those.

03-29-2003, 02:10 AM	#25
MrWorkrate All Star Starter Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 1,262	Any trade that involves prospects for proven players is going to end up with two possible outcomes: either the trade is considered to be a great move by the proven player aquiring team, because the prospects fizzle out, or the trade is a horrible move by the proven player aquiring team, because the proven player ends up mediocre/leaving via free agency/not living up to expectations, while the prospects bloom. Prospects are never guaranteed, no matter how much they're hyped. It may take several trips to the majors before they become ready, or they may never be ready at all. Sammy Sosa wasn't looking great when he was traded to the Cubs: averages of .233 and .203 in major league ball the previous two seasons, with a strikeout every 3.4 times to bat. Jay Buhner was batting .188 when he was traded to Seattle. Paul Konerko was batting .215. Randy Johnson was pulling a 6.67 ERA with a 1:1 BB/K ratio with Montreal. GMs are under pressure to win, so they do what they need to do in order to win today, and usually that means getting rid of something with possible great upside for something that's good today. It's like playing the stock market. If you buy a hundred dollars worth of stock, and it goes to $200, sell it now and make a nice amount of money, or keep it, and see if you can make more? It's easy to rip on the trades where the prospects turned out great. But how many trades involving established players for prospects turned out way better for the team that got the established player? You never hear about those. __________________ I used to come here a lot. Now, not so much.