Mastersball Fantasy Forum

Change "One dumb owner" to "One Dumb GM". Soriano gets two years and $24 mil!!! Storen and Clippard are now??? And a team that has bulit through the draft gives up its 2013 top pick and the money that goes with it??? This stuff between Rizzo and Boras don't look too good from the outside.

Edit: My mistake - $28m ...wow

Curious indeed ... BUT the Nationals are apparently still not confident about Storen closing - they haven't been since drafting him. But with Storen and Clippard setting up for Soriano it IS a better bullpen and GM foolishness or not, they ARE competing for the WS after they take down the NL East AND have extra dollars


sort of like what an owner without any closers or potential closers would do in a 4X4 auction - beauty is in the eye of the beholder

I wonder if this puts the kibosh on Vazquez?

I think it also caps Strasburg at 210 IP -- there was a report that said they want 200, but were vague about the limit.

Gio and Zimm should be good for 7

Haren could use 3 innings of shut down relief

I like the go-for-it mentality and its Monopoly money.

I am a huge advocate of shortening games. i think it's a great concept. I was even very much for it when Soriano was traded to Atlanta from Seattle. That rotation had some older arms in it and it made sense for those guys to only have to put in 6 innings. But he wasn't traded to be the closer there at the time of the deal and you can't find an old arm anywhere in the Nats starting rotation - unless Strasburg, Gio and Zimmerman are going to become 6 and out.. Washington has been a team committed to building through youth and getting the best out of what they had on hand. Soriano has a rep of not playing well with others when things don't go his way. You just have to wonder if Davey is wondering how much we really need this guy ...unless, of course, Storen's ticket out of town has already been punched. It just may be the dawning of a new day in D.C. ...seemingly contrary to the business plan that got them there. Would seem they now have two valuable trade commodities.

While I dont agree with the move due to the loss of pick & draft $$, I understand it. It's been stated before that the owner of the team is of an advanced age and has stated his desire for a championship before he passes. I think the Nats are going for it and figure this just gives them a 2 way advantage. Either way they have just made their bullpen stronger or have given themselves the flexability to swing a deal if an injuries occurs in season.

What I don't understand is why more teams don't look to swing a sign and trade to get around this. I would have been calling a team like Clev and and offering something to make this happen. I would think this would be a win win for both teams coonsidering if Clev signs anyone they are only losing a 3rd Rd pick. For the Nats as bad as losing a 1st Rd pick is the worst part is losing the $$ associated with the pick which can be split up and given to other picks.

There have been a lot or stuff written on sign and trades. The one I saw says you can't trade a free agent until July and a pre-agreed upon deal is collusion. Or maybe that was on the radio, I forget.

From Bill Madden, NY Daily News, 1/5/13 on this subject of sign and trade;

Except that the Nationals pick is at the back end of the first round and the associated money is less so they felt they could forego that pick in favor of strengthening their bullpen - can't really argue that.

In addition the way Soriano's contract is written he is only being paid $7 million this year and next and the other seven million for each year if deferred payments years down the road.

Bottom line? The Nats have an aging owner that wants to win and doesn't give a rat's ass about sample size, all he knows is his closer cost him the playoffs and he wipes his butt with twenties so the money is no problem.

Found this on MLB.com. Sign and trades ARE allowed however the report talks more about the player re signing with his original team and then being traded and does not address being signed by a new team and then traded. However having read the article there does not seem to be anything right now preventing it so long as the player is in agreement to this happening.


"part of the Basic Agreement could be utilized so that some of the remaining Type A free agents on the market can join new teams without draft-pick compensation going to their old teams, a top Major League Baseball official told MLB.com on Tuesday.
The sign-and-trade rule allows a free agent to waive a no-trade period in the agreement if he consents to the deal in writing.

Thus, a Type A free agent could work out contract details with a new team but re-sign with his former team, which would then trade him to the other team in question.

Teams can't normally trade a newly signed free agent until after June 15 of the following season, unless the player gives written consent.

"We do think it's possible to effectuate a sign-and-trade consistent with the Basic Agreement," said Rob Manfred, MLB's executive vice president of labor relations and human resources. "The player would have to give an advance waiver of the right not to be traded.

From MLB.com