Jays Received Trade Offers for Rios Before Deadline

mini · Post #1 » by **mini** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:52 pm

Apparently the Jays had received at least 2 trade offers for Rios before the waiver deadline. One offer was from the Cards the other an AL team. A lot of details obviously aren't given but apparently he could have been moved for something more than nothing.

"We made a good offer for him. It wasn't what we offered for Roy Halladay, but it was maybe half of that," said an AL scout. "Then they give him away and get zero players in return. How does that work?

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Columnists/Elliott/2009/08/22/10562701-sun.html

Mods, feel free to merge with the other Rios thread if you feel it appropriate.

Post #2 » by **Nolan** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:16 pm

Wow this makes that move look even worse. Even if the offer(s) were not much they were still better than nothing.

Garmfay · Post #3 » by **Garmfay** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:56 pm

Probably because they wanted the Jays to take part of his salary

youngLion · Post #4 » by **youngLion** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 3:34 pm

I'm not surprised in the least. Everyone involved in this debacle should be ashamed.

Post #5 » by **Nolan** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 3:56 pm

Garmfay wrote:Probably because they wanted the Jays to take part of his salary

Ya your probably right, that would be the only reason I could think of them not to trade him.

mini · Post #6 » by **mini** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 3:59 pm

Garmfay wrote:Probably because they wanted the Jays to take part of his salary

I assume that there would be some sort of salary coming back to the Jays, but if you read the article, there is this quote

"We would have given them players (for Rios) AND taken on his contract."

which makes it seem as if teams were willing to give an asset or two and still assume the majority of the contract.

SCF99 · Post #7 » by **SCF99** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 8:26 pm

This still goes back to the same thiing, no matter how the jays handled the situation they will be blamed for not doing the right thing by someone...hind site is the greatest thing. If they would have known a head of time that it would it would have come down to dumping his salary no strings attatched or trading for a few prospects,(which chances are if they would have done at the time they would have been bashed), for sure they would have picked the prospects, but when they were to late for that and the no strings attatched deal came up it was in there best intrest to take it. I of course think this ONLY if they can turn the Rios salary money into some other type of player whether it be through free agency or trading up were they can absorb some more salary,,,,if not I am with everyone else and think they are a bunch of bone heads lol.

If the Jays or JP had this great power to go back in time and take a better deal, I am sure Vernon wells would be gone

Modern_epic · Post #8 » by **Modern_epic** » Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:19 am

If JP had the power to go back in time, the exact same thing would have happened with Wells: Paul Godfrey would have signed him to a ridiculous contract.

Post #9 » by **J.Kim** » Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:04 am

mini wrote:
Garmfay wrote:Probably because they wanted the Jays to take part of his salary

I assume that there would be some sort of salary coming back to the Jays, but if you read the article, there is this quote

"We would have given them players (for Rios) AND taken on his contract."

which makes it seem as if teams were willing to give an asset or two and still assume the majority of the contract.

Probably takes on salary then, with the players coming back in return.

Throwback24 · Post #10 » by **Throwback24** » Mon Aug 24, 2009 11:02 pm

I believe in the Jays FO.

LBJSeizedMyID · Post #11 » by **LBJSeizedMyID** » Tue Aug 25, 2009 7:28 pm

mini wrote:
"We would have given them players (for Rios) AND taken on his contract."

which makes it seem as if teams were willing to give an asset or two and still assume the majority of the contract.

...had they known he was available. As much as I'm not a fan of JP anymore, I don't even think he's that out of it.

blizzah · Post #12 » by **blizzah** » Wed Aug 26, 2009 4:27 pm

It's not JPS FAULT.

Its Rogers. They are ordering him to cut salary, the easiest way to do that is to dump him and not get anyone back.

Mak · Post #13 » by **Mak** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 1:51 pm

Anybody checked Rios' stats in Chicago? He is doing a lot worse than here. More strike outs than hits, hitting .204. I think they might have done better if they did not pick him up.

Attonitus · Post #14 » by **Attonitus** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 6:39 am

blizzah wrote:It's not JPS FAULT.

Its Rogers. They are ordering him to cut salary, the easiest way to do that is to dump him and not get anyone back.

It's JP's fault because he gave Rios the contract in the first place, not to mention all the other ridiculas moves he has made.

I have no problem with us getting rid of Rios, but for a moderate amount of money paid into Rios' salary we probably could have gotten at least a decent prospect or every day player. Instead, we got nothing, Rogers faves money, and Riccardi is a lame duck.

The_Hater · Post #15 » by **The_Hater** » Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:08 pm

I have no problem in moving Rios, but here's a guy that had enormous trade value in the spring of 2008 and 18 months later he's suddenly worth nothing.

This move pretty much defines the problem entire JP era. Buy high and sell low.