OnlyBucs

707971606E140 wrote: NHs statement is a clear lie, btw.  I'm skeptical the claiming team will leak who they were because that's not the way business is done, but there's a chance we will find out.



Not to mention he was claimed just a few days into August. No doubt about that.  Which makes NH look like a bigger idiot.   



When you wait until after July 31st, you can have a team put a claim in without any intention to give you much.  To "block" you, as he said it.   



Just like we did with Kontos, for instance.  We put a claim in before 20 other teams got a shot...and we sat on it.  Offered absolutely nothing.   They somewhat surprisingly didn't revoke and let it go through.



Once it breaks who the team was, how early in August it was , NH is going to look even dumber.   Although it will be said that the leak is BS and the leaker has an axe to grind...goes with the territory.



He had no value though...ROFL.   I mean, people are paying subscription fees to have writers peddle that nonsense to them.   Whatever.




This situation doesn't even remotely make Huntington look like an idiot. All evidence points to the fact that players like Nicasio were not getting significant returns. The fact that someone claimed him isn't surprising. That doesn't mean he had any real trade value. If he had trade value that was meaningful, he would have been traded.



The one curious thing about his statement, though, is that all lower standings teams passed on Nicasio initially but the Phillies then claimed him the second time. My gut is telling me Huntington knew the Phillies were going to take him but doesn't want to acknowledge it because it looks like the team is crapping on Nicasio over $600,000.



So, while I don't think Huntington made a dumb move, I think the move is another in a series of moves motivated solely by money without regard for players or fans.

456073667A717A7B7E76120 wrote: NHs statement is a clear lie, btw.  I'm skeptical the claiming team will leak who they were because that's not the way business is done, but there's a chance we will find out.



Not to mention he was claimed just a few days into August. No doubt about that.  Which makes NH look like a bigger idiot.   



When you wait until after July 31st, you can have a team put a claim in without any intention to give you much.  To "block" you, as he said it.   



Just like we did with Kontos, for instance.  We put a claim in before 20 other teams got a shot...and we sat on it.  Offered absolutely nothing.   They somewhat surprisingly didn't revoke and let it go through.



Once it breaks who the team was, how early in August it was , NH is going to look even dumber.   Although it will be said that the leak is BS and the leaker has an axe to grind...goes with the territory.



He had no value though...ROFL.   I mean, people are paying subscription fees to have writers peddle that nonsense to them.   Whatever.




This situation doesn't even remotely make Huntington look like an idiot.  All evidence points to the fact that players like Nicasio were not getting significant returns.  The fact that someone claimed him isn't surprising.  That doesn't mean he had any real trade value. If he had trade value that was meaningful, he would have been traded.



The one curious thing about his statement, though, is that all lower standings teams passed on Nicasio initially but the Phillies then claimed him the second time.  My gut is telling me Huntington knew the Phillies were going to take him but doesn't want to acknowledge it because it looks like the team is crapping on Nicasio over $600,000.



So, while I don't think Huntington made a dumb move, I think the move is another in a series of moves motivated solely by money without regard for players or fans.


No.  That's not what happened.   It's not even what he's saying happened (which is very likely to not be true anyway).   It's has to do with how revokable waivers work. 



I already provided a list of RH relievers that were traded. So no. No evidence points to the "fact" that relivers had no real trade value.



If you're opinion is still based on the idea that nobody claimed him the first time through, that's the whole problem

37120114080308090C04600 wrote:

So, while I don't think Huntington made a dumb move, I think the move is another in a series of moves motivated solely by money without regard for players or fans.
I think you nailed it.

So --- Why not waive Jaso and sign Brock Stassi?



My guess is that there is no limit on the number of players who are 1st baseman - semi-outfielder types who can't hit well.



Jaso is another sunk cost, but why not try to save another $500 K or so? Then again, no one may claim him, similar to what appears will occur with LeBlanc.

4C60686F6443746272010 wrote: So --- Why not waive Jaso and sign Brock Stassi?



My guess is that there is no limit on the number of players who are 1st baseman - semi-outfielder types who can't hit well.



Jaso is another sunk cost, but why not try to save another $500 K or so? Then again, no one may claim him, similar to what appears will occur with LeBlanc.
Nicasio and LeBlanc were the ones who were leaked. Most likely they waived Jaso and others. Nothing to lose. Great if they get claimed. If not, well, it didn't hurt to try.

If Phils wanted to be first in the draft, they should have left Hoskins in the minors for entire season



Kid has a great swing and Cozens is a masher too but not hitting for any average in AAA. Has 26 HR, 71 RBI though with a .210 average. Kingery will hold down 2B for years.

434A42535D270 wrote: NHs statement is a clear lie, btw.  I'm skeptical the claiming team will leak who they were because that's not the way business is done, but there's a chance we will find out.



Not to mention he was claimed just a few days into August. No doubt about that.  Which makes NH look like a bigger idiot.   



When you wait until after July 31st, you can have a team put a claim in without any intention to give you much.  To "block" you, as he said it.   



Just like we did with Kontos, for instance.  We put a claim in before 20 other teams got a shot...and we sat on it.  Offered absolutely nothing.   They somewhat surprisingly didn't revoke and let it go through.



Once it breaks who the team was, how early in August it was , NH is going to look even dumber.   Although it will be said that the leak is BS and the leaker has an axe to grind...goes with the territory.



He had no value though...ROFL.   I mean, people are paying subscription fees to have writers peddle that nonsense to them.   Whatever.


Huntington said he wasn't traded before the July 31st deadline because the Pirates weren't giving up on the season.



I assume (assumption) after they lost more games in August, Nicasio was put on waivers. Yes, he was claimed as a team was blocking other contenders. Huntington didn't like the return and was told the offer wasn't going to get better. So, no deal was made. Huntington decided to keep him instead.



Then it got to the point to see if they can dump his salary. They were as he was claimed.



I wonder if we will find out what team was claiming him to block other teams? That happens a lot. The Yankees and Red Sox have been doing that to each other for years. If it was an American League team, maybe that is why Huntington said he hopes he gets to an AL team. I didn't really get that comment as I would think the Rockies or Cardinals (before Leake trade) would claim him in the NL for sure.



Overall, this moves means nothing to me. The Pirates weren't winning with Nicasio, so they decided to save money. They look cheap, but they always look cheap. I do think Huntington was doing Nicasio a favor to see if a contender would pick him up. It was a weird move for the worst team in baseball to add a player at this point. The Phillies have to have someone who can through ten innings or so to finish the year. The rosters do expand on Sept 1st.

Alright Dog. You win as always.. the move means nothing to you.



When you find out nicasio was claimed on August 2nd and we revoked because we were blocked only 2-3 days after we had the ability to trade him at the deadline, would that do anything to change your feelings?

454E464A4F4E551016615840494E4E0F424E210 wrote: NHs statement is a clear lie, btw.  I'm skeptical the claiming team will leak who they were because that's not the way business is done, but there's a chance we will find out.



Not to mention he was claimed just a few days into August. No doubt about that.  Which makes NH look like a bigger idiot.   



When you wait until after July 31st, you can have a team put a claim in without any intention to give you much.  To "block" you, as he said it.   



Just like we did with Kontos, for instance.  We put a claim in before 20 other teams got a shot...and we sat on it.  Offered absolutely nothing.   They somewhat surprisingly didn't revoke and let it go through.



Once it breaks who the team was, how early in August it was , NH is going to look even dumber.   Although it will be said that the leak is BS and the leaker has an axe to grind...goes with the territory.



He had no value though...ROFL.   I mean, people are paying subscription fees to have writers peddle that nonsense to them.   Whatever.


Huntington said he wasn't traded before the July 31st deadline because the Pirates weren't giving up on the season.



I assume (assumption) after they lost more games in August, Nicasio was put on waivers. Yes, he was claimed as a team was blocking other contenders. Huntington didn't like the return and was told the offer wasn't going to get better.  So, no deal was made. Huntington decided to keep him instead.



Then it got to the point to see if they can dump his salary. They were as he was claimed.



I wonder if we will find out what team was claiming him to block other teams?  That happens a lot. The Yankees and Red Sox have been doing that to each other for years. If it was an American League team, maybe that is why Huntington said he hopes he gets to an AL team. I didn't really get that comment as I would think the Rockies or Cardinals (before Leake trade) would claim him in the NL for sure.



Overall, this moves means nothing to me.  The Pirates weren't winning with Nicasio, so they decided to save money. They look cheap, but they always look cheap. I do think Huntington was doing Nicasio a favor to see if a contender would pick him up. It was a weird move for the worst team in baseball to add a player at this point. The Phillies have to have someone who can through ten innings or so to finish the year. The rosters do expand on Sept 1st.




UMMM ... they did give up on the season at the TDL.  Hate to tell NH and you that.  They traded Watson for two pieces that won't help.  They got a garbage arm from Philly that has been horrid and didn't get any other pieces to speak of.  Without bringing in a quality piece that could help, like another starter, or a quality 4th outfielder, the season was given up on.  He can say that didn't give up, but people with brains know they did and weren't contenders at that point.



Your constant defense of this FO is mind boggling. It's beyond belief. No, the team wasn't going anywhere with Nicascio. It wasn't going anywhere with Watson either, but he was traded for assets at the TDL and he was pitching worse than Nicascio. A minimal return is better than nothing. What constitutes a minimal return in this instance though. Something that he didn't feel was enough? So, he gives away a pretty good reliever for nothing to save 600K. Your defense is laughable.

7F767E6F611B0 wrote: NHs statement is a clear lie, btw.  I'm skeptical the claiming team will leak who they were because that's not the way business is done, but there's a chance we will find out.



Not to mention he was claimed just a few days into August. No doubt about that.  Which makes NH look like a bigger idiot.   



When you wait until after July 31st, you can have a team put a claim in without any intention to give you much.  To "block" you, as he said it.   



Just like we did with Kontos, for instance.  We put a claim in before 20 other teams got a shot...and we sat on it.  Offered absolutely nothing.   They somewhat surprisingly didn't revoke and let it go through.



Once it breaks who the team was, how early in August it was , NH is going to look even dumber.   Although it will be said that the leak is BS and the leaker has an axe to grind...goes with the territory.



He had no value though...ROFL.   I mean, people are paying subscription fees to have writers peddle that nonsense to them.   Whatever.




This situation doesn't even remotely make Huntington look like an idiot.  All evidence points to the fact that players like Nicasio were not getting significant returns.  The fact that someone claimed him isn't surprising.  That doesn't mean he had any real trade value. If he had trade value that was meaningful, he would have been traded.



The one curious thing about his statement, though, is that all lower standings teams passed on Nicasio initially but the Phillies then claimed him the second time.  My gut is telling me Huntington knew the Phillies were going to take him but doesn't want to acknowledge it because it looks like the team is crapping on Nicasio over $600,000.



So, while I don't think Huntington made a dumb move, I think the move is another in a series of moves motivated solely by money without regard for players or fans.


No.  That's not what happened.   It's not even what he's saying happened (which is very likely to not be true anyway).   It's has to do with how revokable waivers work. 



I already provided a list of RH relievers that were traded.   So no.  No evidence points to the "fact" that relivers had no real trade value. 



If you're opinion is still based on the idea that nobody claimed him the first time through, that's the whole problem




You're exhausting. I never once said nobody claimed him. And your list did nothing to establish any value for Nicasio. The returns were all garbage for his quality. But I'm just going to let you talk to yourself so more trying to figure out if you really know more than Neal Huntington...