Public Poll on the Tribe trade for Ubaldo

• BR1986FB

  Footwedge;869388 wrote:BRF....I'm supposedly the bad guy here because Ubaldo has been simply awful. My new national league team is the Colorado Rockies.

  
  I agree with you on Jimenez. Was against this trade from the start. Saw the guy as nothing more than Fausto Carmona (headcase) with a no-hitter to his credit. Hope I'm wrong and he turns into another Verlander but I don't see it.
  
  Can't say I'll jump ship for the Rockies though. CLEVELAND for life! GO BROWNS !!!
• BR1986FB

  Crimson streak;869410 wrote:I have no problem with people not liking the trade. But you take it to the extreme to only show up when the tribe are losing..

  
  In all fairness to Footwedge, except for that one anomaly, that's pretty much all the Tribe has done (losing ball games) when Ubaldo has taken the mound. I know he's had some defensive "gaffes" behind him but a true "ace" is getting the 'W" when his team puts 5 runs on the board.
• BRF

  

  See now that's better! Have a civil argument. And I get where Crimson is coming from on "showing up". Crimson, btw, you never voted on the poll!
• Crimson streak

  

  I use tapatalk on my phone so I don't get the option of voting lol but I'm for it.
• like_that

  

  Footwedge;869388 wrote:BRF....I'm supposedly the bad guy here because Ubaldo has been simply awful. My new national league team is the Colorado Rockies.

  
  Im with you on Ubaldo, but if you are going to jump ship to a new team, then you can GTFO.
• Footwedge

  like_that;869544 wrote:Im with you on Ubaldo, but if you are going to jump ship to a new team, then you can GTFO.

  I said my new national league team"....not my new team. Geeeezuz.
• Footwedge

  Crimson streak;869410 wrote:I have no problem with people not liking the trade. But you take it to the extreme to only show up when the tribe are losing. I didn't like the trade at first but it grew on me bc it meant the front office was actually doing something and trying to win. They gave up unproven players for a guy who was a cy young candidate that is locked up 2 more years and is relatively young.

  
  I show up no matter how they're doing. You make shit up as you go. BRF and many others know this. Sorry that you don't.
• Commander of Awesome

  

  Footwedge;869657 wrote:I said my new national league team"....not my new team. Geeeezuz.

  
  You dont get a national league team. You get one, period. End of discussion. Otherwise why not an AL East team then too?
• wes_mantooth

  

  I really think that Ubaldo is nothing more than a number 3 starter, but that doesn't mean this will end up being a bad trade. I mean, to call this trade the worst ever....is silly. Those two prospects haven't done anything yet, so the jury will be out for some time. I think it was a bad trade, but I don't KNOW that it was.
• royal_k

  

  The trade looks like shit right now. Hopefully things change. I was against it from the beginning, but am willing to give it a chance. Right now he's not even a number 3 in our rotation.
• hoops23

  

  I'm still for it, but I'm getting closer to the fence on the issue...
  
  I thought we did give up a lot, but in the end, they were prospects... Ubaldo has some great stuff, but his command has been erratic. I think some coaching could do him wonders.
• like_that

  

  The best part of not trading for Ubaldo is the fact he would not be pitching any games for the tribe.
• Heretic

  

  Footwedge;869319 wrote:A prospect is someone who has never pitched in the majors. Ubaldo's future looks to be in Columbus...where he belongs. This was a horrible trade....period.

  
  Technically, according to those who rate/judge prospects (particularly Baseball Prospectus, whose site I got this from), the same criteria is used to determine if a player is still a prospect as the one that determines if they're eligible for rookie of the year. Which is:
  
  1. Fewer than 130 MLB at bats for offensive players.
  2. Fewer than 50 MLB innings pitched for pitchers.
  3. Fewer than 45 days spent on a MLB roster, not counting DL time and time spent after rosters expand to 40.
  
  I don't know if White would be a prospect anyway, but simply pitching in the majors doesn't take away his prospect status.
• BR1986FB

  Heretic;870008 wrote:Technically, according to those who rate/judge prospects (particularly Baseball Prospectus, whose site I got this from), the same criteria is used to determine if a player is still a prospect as the one that determines if they're eligible for rookie of the year. Which is:
  
  1. Fewer than 130 MLB at bats for offensive players.
  2. Fewer than 50 MLB innings pitched for pitchers.
  3. Fewer than 45 days spent on a MLB roster, not counting DL time and time spent after rosters expand to 40.
  
  I don't know if White would be a prospect anyway, but simply pitching in the majors doesn't take away his prospect status.

  
  There's always a smartass in the crowd. Thanks a lot, Cliff Clavin.
• Heretic

  

  BR1986FB;870013 wrote:There's always a smartass in the crowd. Thanks a lot, Cliff Clavin.

  
  lol
  
  
• wes_mantooth

  

  Heretic;870026 wrote:lol
  
  

  
  One of my favorite episodes if cheers....lots of lulz
• Bigdogg

  Too early to tell.