KC / LAD

[Deleted]

KC receives:
Dee Gordon 2B,SS,CF/SEA 2 years @ $7.00

LAD receives:
Corey Dickerson LF/PIT 1 year @ $0.80

I accept, nice CF upgrade and gives a little more depth in the middle infield.

Note - Commish said we could just post it now and it'll process Jan 2nd per league calendar.

[LA Dodgers]

I agree.

Losing Gordon's SB ability could hurt. But I'm deep at 2B & CF. Plus this opens up some much needed cap room for free agency.

[Deleted]

Theoretically, could one of you guys reneg on the deal as long as it's before Jan 2?

If not, then what's the difference between this and just having the trading deadline moved up?

[Deleted]

Dec 9, 2018 22:00:28 GMT -5 @braves said:

Theoretically, could one of you guys reneg on the deal as long as it's before Jan 2?

If not, then what's the difference between this and just having the trading deadline moved up?

I'd defer to the commish for an "official" answer, but if you'd like my 2 cents:

Once a trade is posted, I'd expect both parties to honor it.  The difference between posting these early vs. moving up the trade window is that these trades won't get approved with minimal votes.  During the year we see some trades get approved 4-0 on voting, but that won't happen with these since the voting should remain open until after trading reopens.

Another of my leagues will still process trades that received a majority of approves (11 in our league), but I have no expectations of that being done here although I would certainly support doing so.

Again, just my 2 cents but it didn't look like anyone was answering you so wanted to put something out there

[Deleted]

Dec 12, 2018 10:33:06 GMT -5 @tampabay said:

Dec 9, 2018 22:00:28 GMT -5 @braves said:

Theoretically, could one of you guys reneg on the deal as long as it's before Jan 2?

If not, then what's the difference between this and just having the trading deadline moved up?

I'd defer to the commish for an "official" answer, but if you'd like my 2 cents:

Once a trade is posted, I'd expect both parties to honor it.  The difference between posting these early vs. moving up the trade window is that these trades won't get approved with minimal votes.  During the year we see some trades get approved 4-0 on voting, but that won't happen with these since the voting should remain open until after trading reopens.

Another of my leagues will still process trades that received a majority of approves (11 in our league), but I have no expectations of that being done here although I would certainly support doing so.

Again, just my 2 cents but it didn't look like anyone was answering you so wanted to put something out there

Interesting.  Makes sense, although I could also see an argument for it not being binding (other than integrity/honor).  @oakland ?

[Oakland Athletics]

Although I don’t think we have any specific wording for this in the rules I would think any trade posted and agreed upon by all parties then the trade is binding.

[LA Dodgers]

You will NEVER see me "reneg" on any trade I confirm!  Not cool!

[Deleted]

Dec 12, 2018 15:21:55 GMT -5 Oakland Athletics said:

Although I don’t think we have any specific wording for this in the rules I would think any trade posted and agreed upon by all parties then the trade is binding.

In this case may as well push the trade deadline back and just say it takes places during the old trade deadline?

Or, at the very least I would put something like this in the rules, such as "players may agree to trades even when trading is not allowed; they are binding and go into effect as soon as trading officially opens up"

Not sure

[Oakland Athletics]

I will add some wording to account for this confusion.

[LA Dodgers]

Trade passed