|
Post by geostorm on Aug 6, 2016 11:23:32 GMT -5
Gammons tweeted earlier today that Pomeranz is the 3rd instance of the Padres not disclosing injury information. Ries is another recent example and perhaps Kimbrell could be the 3rd one. Why wouldn't the Red Sox pursue compensation as they gave up a lot of top tier prospects to acquire former Padres' players? ...with it being announced late yesterday, that Rea is now scheduled for TJ surgery.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Aug 6, 2016 11:42:28 GMT -5
"I'm unaware of what's behind the report. I look at the guy that walks to the mound and is probably going to give you six innings as it stands right now," Farrell said.
Uh is this guy serious right now?
|
|
|
Post by chud on Aug 6, 2016 12:19:50 GMT -5
Why the hell aren't they seeking a remedy... Because DD is awful at his job. He needs to push to get both trades reversed. I'm pretty sure the Padres knew Kimbrel was damaged goods. Same with Pomeranz. I get the outrage, and that this is the internet which is where everyone comes to vent...But it would seem to me a couple things are actually more realistic here: 1) DD is a very good, thorough, and experienced GM. If he/Sox aren't asking for a remedy I'm guessing that their analysis was that whatever the issue/"injury" concern w/ Pomeranz is (if there is one), it's not one likely to result in any substantial difference in the trading of assets...therefor not worth the time, and potential damage to any relationships throughout the game as possibly being labeled someone pushing an insignificant issue when engaging in a trade... 2) Nevertheless, if it's true that the Sox made some report to MLB, that would be their remedy...reporting the issue...and ensuring that the Padres either change their practices, mlb holds them accountable in a way that would far out weigh any benefit the Sox would see in seeking a specific "remedy" for the Sox themselves, or making the Padres prove their integrity on the issue...I'd argue those are all in fact actual remedies 3) DD, being very tied in to the other teams hierarchies, may sense the feeling among the baseball community is that the Padres have some shady practices, and is doing his part to have them addresses...again, big picture being just playing a role to have MLB examine the issue...vs. thinking he's actually going to get anything out of it for the Sox 4) In addition to the above, DD and the front office personnel may also believe they got the better end of this deal (and i'd say the odds are in their favor on that if true)...and since it was a 1 for 1, don't want to take any risks on it being totally undone as the remedy...vs. the possibility (if it even existed, which i'm guessing it doesn't) of the Sox getting some other asset out of this deal... Wherever the truth lies, I think the last thing we have to worry about is DD's/Sox front office ability to manage issues like these...
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Aug 6, 2016 12:35:02 GMT -5
Thanks for the post. A few of these points crossed my mind. To some extent, FO relations are self-policing. Screw other teams over and over and you won't be getting your paycheck for all that long. Reporting the possibility of an unacknowledged injury is one way to surface that for other GMs. It isn't that big of a community, and the word will get around quickly.
|
|
|
Post by sammo420 on Aug 6, 2016 16:05:20 GMT -5
Yeah, this thread is about what I thought it would be.
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Aug 6, 2016 16:34:46 GMT -5
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,700
|
Post by nomar on Aug 6, 2016 16:47:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Aug 6, 2016 17:58:11 GMT -5
Yeah, this thread is about what I thought it would be. Is this (belated) tribute to Coach Green?
|
|
|
Post by sammo420 on Aug 6, 2016 19:42:22 GMT -5
Yeah, this thread is about what I thought it would be. Is this (belated) tribute to Coach Green? Nope. Actually I never thought about that. Is was more that I anticipated and feared some of the reactions that I'd read in here and you guys didn't let me down. I did at least see somebody above who actually sees things for what they acualy are.
|
|
|
Post by sdiaz1 on Aug 6, 2016 22:18:13 GMT -5
I get the outrage, and that this is the internet which is where everyone comes to vent...But it would seem to me a couple things are actually more realistic here:
1) DD is a very good, thorough, and experienced GM. If he/Sox aren't asking for a remedy I'm guessing that their analysis was that whatever the issue/"injury" concern w/ Pomeranz is (if there is one), it's not one likely to result in any substantial difference in the trading of assets...therefor not worth the time, and potential damage to any relationships throughout the game as possibly being labeled someone pushing an insignificant issue when engaging in a trade...
2) Nevertheless, if it's true that the Sox made some report to MLB, that would be their remedy...reporting the issue...and ensuring that the Padres either change their practices, mlb holds them accountable in a way that would far out weigh any benefit the Sox would see in seeking a specific "remedy" for the Sox themselves, or making the Padres prove their integrity on the issue...I'd argue those are all in fact actual remedies
3) DD, being very tied in to the other teams hierarchies, may sense the feeling among the baseball community is that the Padres have some shady practices, and is doing his part to have them addresses...again, big picture being just playing a role to have MLB examine the issue...vs. thinking he's actually going to get anything out of it for the Sox
4) In addition to the above, DD and the front office personnel may also believe they got the better end of this deal (and i'd say the odds are in their favor on that if true)...and since it was a 1 for 1, don't want to take any risks on it being totally undone as the remedy...vs. the possibility (if it even existed, which i'm guessing it doesn't) of the Sox getting some other asset out of this deal...
Wherever the truth lies, I think the last thing we have to worry about is DD's/Sox front office ability to manage issues like these... [/quote]
All valid, well reasoned points. I hope that you don't mind that I am going to ignore them as I hold on to my fantasy of being able to watch Espinoza next season when the Sea Dogs visit Bowie.....
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Aug 7, 2016 9:25:18 GMT -5
Even the Yankees executives are overrated. Padres hired him away from them. Preller was assistant GM for the Rangers before San Diego hired him. He has never worked for the Yankees as far as I know. You may be thinking of Billy Eppler?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 7, 2016 14:11:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 22, 2016 23:23:16 GMT -5
Rumor confirmed by Henry: Henry became the first to acknowledge publicly that Major League Baseball is looking into the July 14 trade the Red Sox made with the San Diego Padres for Pomeranz in exchange for top pitching prospect Anderson Espinoza. An earlier ESPN report cited anonymous sources who said MLB was investigating that trade and another the Padres made with the Marlins because of concerns from both teams that San Diego had not passed along all relevant medical information.
Henry confirmed there is an ongoing inquiry.
“This is being investigated by MLB, so it would be inappropriate for me to comment,” Henry said.www.bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox/2016/08/john_henry_mixes_concern_with_optimism_praiseAlso this on the International sanctions: Henry said it appears to him the Red Sox “were singled out” for violating international signing rules last year, but he also admitted the team was “guilty of a practice that is against the rules. Therefore, you have to take responsibility and cooperate as much as possible. And we did. The result was a very severe penalty despite our cooperation.” As a penalty, the Red Sox cannot sign any international amateurs in 2016-17 and could not retain 2015 signees.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Aug 23, 2016 8:23:40 GMT -5
Woof!
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Aug 23, 2016 16:07:24 GMT -5
I like the Henry remarks re our international dealings as they are forthright and accept responsibility. Kudos particularly as that is so rare today.
I am surprised that nothing has come out re non-disclosure on Pomeranz.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Aug 24, 2016 17:21:28 GMT -5
Even the Yankees executives are overrated. Padres hired him away from them. Preller was assistant GM for the Rangers before San Diego hired him. He has never worked for the Yankees as far as I know. You may be thinking of Billy Eppler? Thanks for pointing that out, I really got them confused.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Aug 24, 2016 18:27:44 GMT -5
Every time I see this thread updated I'm hoping it's a rumor about MLB considering returning Espinoza to the Sox
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 24, 2016 18:34:09 GMT -5
Every time I see this thread updated I'm hoping it's a rumor about MLB considering returning Espinoza to the Sox That would be like a Christmas morning as an 8 year old feeling, but I wouldn't hold your breath.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Aug 25, 2016 4:03:59 GMT -5
Every time I see this thread updated I'm hoping it's a rumor about MLB considering returning Espinoza to the Sox That would be like a Christmas morning as an 8 year old feeling, but I wouldn't hold your breath. Why on earth would we want him back? We made a great trade and got Pomeranz for him.
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Aug 25, 2016 9:45:17 GMT -5
Yeah, one of the top prospects in all of baseball? Yuck, count me out! I want no part of him.
|
|
|
Post by quintanariffic on Aug 25, 2016 10:18:35 GMT -5
Yeah, one of the top prospects in all of baseball? Yuck, count me out! I want no part of him. A potential pennant this year and next? Yuck, count me out! I want no part of that.
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Aug 25, 2016 11:18:57 GMT -5
not sure how those things are mutually exclusive, but okay.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 25, 2016 11:25:10 GMT -5
Yeah, one of the top prospects in all of baseball? Yuck, count me out! I want no part of him. A potential pennant this year and next? Yuck, count me out! I want no part of that. Let's just end this silliness right now. The hope was not that the trade was undone, it was that the cost would be lessened. In this case, we'd get Espinoza back and trade a lesser prospect or two. I give it about a 0.0 chance of happening.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Aug 25, 2016 13:26:12 GMT -5
I'd be happy with their 2nd round pick as compensation for their obfuscation.
|
|
|
Post by quintanariffic on Aug 26, 2016 11:55:02 GMT -5
not sure how those things are mutually exclusive, but okay. Wait - are you living in the fantasy world where we get Espinoza back while keeping Pomeranz and send SD a lesser package instead? I see the the problem them.
|
|