Report: Twins Willing to Back Out on Blockbuster Deal

[Riverbrian]

 

I agree with Gleeman: what could they have possibly seen on the medicals that changes Graterol's value so much that they're asking for another top 10 pick...yet they still want Graterol in the deal? T

 

That is the part that sums it up for me.

 

It makes me question either the reports or question the competency of the current Red Sox power structure. 

 

I am inclined to question the competency of the current Red Sox power structure at this moment. 

 

 

[jorgenswest]

I am concerned about what needs to be added here. I am expecting that they will give up add a 40 or maybe even 45 prospect and get in return an organizational minor leaguer to make it look like both sides added.

[saviking]

You can never make a good trade (in any business) unless you are willing to walk away. 

[wildwildwest]

Our front office can grind with the best of them.   My fingers are crossed

[Nine of twelve]

 

Why give lots of prospects and pay $$$$ when could sign a comparable FA.

Because the desired comparable FA may not want to sign with your team.

[wabene]

LEN3 has got his finger on the pulse baby! We're in good hands!

[notoriousgod71]

 

MLB Trade Rumors is reporting that the Dodgers/ Twins part of the deal is set. Dodgers get Graterol, Twins get Maeda and "slightly more". If true, FO. comes out looking pretty good. Stay tuned.

Slightly more turns out to be cash in true Twins fashion.

[wabene]

Looks like it's a done deal. Wishing Brusdar luck I would've enjoyed watching him. I am reluctantly in on the deal and our rotation depth and flexibility. If Maeda is a bullpen weapon in the playoffs for us that means Hill and the rotation are dealing. Could be fun.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I agree with Gleeman: what could they have possibly seen on the medicals that changes Graterol's value so much that they're asking for another top 10 pick...yet they still want Graterol in the deal? That's the bit that makes no sense about this whole "medicals" bit. The reality is, the Red Sox got cold feet (probably because they've been getting hammered on this deal by almost everyone) and are using "medicals" as the excuse to try and redo the deal.

I suspect Boston wanted a pitcher, and Graterol was still the best one available to them. That's why they still wanted him in the deal, even at reduced value.

 

Now that the Betts trade is going through, does the "Boston has cold feet" thing really make sense anymore?

[Squirrel]

I suspect Boston wanted a pitcher, and Graterol was still the best one available to them. That's why they still wanted him in the deal, even at reduced value.

 

Now that the Betts trade is going through, does the "Boston has cold feet" thing really make sense anymore?

Can’t answer the cold feet thing, because that wasn’t my claim. But I do think it was all handled poorly, even upon conclusion of both deals.

[howieramone2]

Call it cold feet, call it meddlesome owner. Spin it anyway you like. All's well that ends well. I counted only 2 members unhappy with the trade. That sets a new board record.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Can’t answer the cold feet thing, because that wasn’t my claim. But I do think it was all handled poorly, even upon conclusion of both deals.

I'm curious, how exactly do you think it was handled poorly?

 

If it's about the timing (agreement in principle before medical review), that's just standard procedure in MLB.

 

If it's that the trade agreement leaked in general, it's pretty unrealistic to expect otherwise for a trade of this magnitude. (And there's no evidence that suggests the Red Sox were the primary leakers of that, or any of the later developments.)

 

And if you're referring to Graterol's privacy, I thought what leaked about him was pretty generic and respectful. (The Red Sox were actually criticized by many because their reported concerns weren't specific enough, and as I said above, it's not even clear that the Red Sox were responsible for that particular leak.)

 

I'm not sure what folks expected the Red Sox or anyone in this trade to do otherwise.

[Squirrel]

I'm curious, how exactly do you think it was handled poorly?

 

If it's about the timing (agreement in principle before medical review), that's just standard procedure in MLB.

 

If it's that the trade agreement leaked in general, it's pretty unrealistic to expect otherwise for a trade of this magnitude. (And there's no evidence that suggests the Red Sox were the primary leakers of that, or any of the later developments.)

 

And if you're referring to Graterol's privacy, I thought what leaked about him was pretty generic and respectful. (The Red Sox were actually criticized by many because their reported concerns weren't specific enough, and as I said above, it's not even clear that the Red Sox were responsible for that particular leak.)

 

I'm not sure what folks expected the Red Sox or anyone in this trade to do otherwise.

Yes, the leaked medicals and how it was characterized is on them. Of course, the press is going to have their say, but to the extent the press went at it was Boston up and down. And then they walked it back a bit with a statement saying ‘They didn’t think he could be a starter based on his medicals’ but that was still too much to say publicly as it just fueled it all even more. They could have left much of that quiet, and didn’t. Graterol didn’t need to be called ‘damaged goods’ ... while that characteristic was media generated, it got its start from how Boston handled the halt of the trade. They could have and should have handled it differently, imo. But then still wanting him along with another top 10 from our system? Seriously? That was laughable.

 

You can defend them all you want and we will remain in disagreement. I don’t think it was cold feet, just poorly managed. I couldn’t say exactly by whom, because I don’t know what exactly was happening internally.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Yes, the leaked medicals and how it was characterized is on them. Of course, the press is going to have their say, but to the extent the press went at it was Boston up and down. And then they walked it back a bit with a statement saying ‘They didn’t think he could be a starter based on his medicals’ but that was still too much to say publicly as it just fueled it all even more. They could have left much of that quiet, and didn’t. Graterol didn’t need to be called ‘damaged goods’ ... while that characteristic was media generated, it got its start from how Boston handled the halt of the trade.

I'm curious -- do you have a link for whatever was attributed to Boston that they allegedly walked back with the starting workload thing? I may have missed something, but to me, it seemed like the starting workload thing was the only reason ever given. And Boston got ripped for it because it was too vague (the whole "that's obvious, they should have already known that" argument).

 

Beyond that, I'm not sure why we're attributing the leaks to Boston. They didn't help Boston. Heyman was definitely citing sources outside of Boston in his reporting, and that was where most of the updates were coming from. The whole "Boston is leaking this" assumption seems to have its roots in the "Boston has cold feet" / "Boston is making this up to rip us off" takes.

 

 

But then still wanting him along with another top 10 from our system? Seriously? That was laughable.

That was definitely coming from sources outside Boston, and I'm not sure how accurate it was. There were also reports that Boston asked about Balazovic in place of Graterol, and it wouldn't surprise me if lines were crossed by that point. Boston ultimately did not require two top 10 prospects from the Dodgers the very next day, for what it's worth.

 

How much control do you think Boston had over the process here? There were at least 3 teams involved (probably 4 if you count the Angels and their related trade, whose owner became pretty vocal about it). National media. The biggest agent in sports and his favorite media member. The idea that there could be any kind of delay in this blockbuster trade, and Boston alone could make sure the whole process was handled like any random HIPAA records issue, seems to be an unfair assumption.

[Squirrel]

I'm curious -- do you have a link for whatever was attributed to Boston that they allegedly walked back with the starting workload thing? I may have missed something, but to me, it seemed like the starting workload thing was the only reason ever given. And Boston got ripped for it because it was too vague (the whole "that's obvious, they should have already known that" argument).

 

Beyond that, I'm not sure why we're attributing the leaks to Boston. They didn't help Boston. Heyman was definitely citing sources outside of Boston in his reporting, and that was where most of the updates were coming from. The whole "Boston is leaking this" assumption seems to have its roots in the "Boston has cold feet" / "Boston is making this up to rip us off" takes.

 

 

 

That was definitely coming from sources outside Boston, and I'm not sure how accurate it was. There were also reports that Boston asked about Balazovic in place of Graterol, and it wouldn't surprise me if lines were crossed by that point. Boston ultimately did not require two top 10 prospects from the Dodgers the very next day, for what it's worth.

 

How much control do you think Boston had over the process here? There were at least 3 teams involved (probably 4 if you count the Angels and their related trade, whose owner became pretty vocal about it). National media. The biggest agent in sports and his favorite media member. The idea that there could be any kind of delay in this blockbuster trade, and Boston alone could make sure the whole process was handled like any random HIPAA records issue, seems to be an unfair assumption.

As I said, we’ll have to disagree here.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

As I said, we’ll have to disagree here.

I honestly would like to know if there was a report I missed, attributing another reason to Boston for the hold-up beyond the starting workload thing.

[Riverbrian]

 

I honestly would like to know if there was a report I missed, attributing another reason to Boston for the hold-up beyond the starting workload thing.

 

[h2oface]

 

From what I hear on Dodger Talk out here, the Dodgers really aren't interested in Graterol. They would like to make room for their wealth of young pitchers that are MLB ready, and Maeda is taking up space. 

 

Well I certainly called that wrong. Damn. Watch him be the next Kenley Jansen. For Maeda. Damn. I hate this trade.