Maybe I should clarify on the reason that I feel that this deal is very poor from my perspective. I'll grant that the previous posting is probably a bit unfair; I felt it shed some light on whether or not this gentleman in question was 'guilty' of collusion of some type; just from this experience, I would have to lean to the side saying that he probably didn't. But I still think its a baaad offer from my perspective and here is why.

1) The team that I took over last year won it all; and obviously sold a bit of its future to do so. I acquired the team with a bare 27 players, after a rookie draft in which the team had no farm picks. The free agent picks that it had were 4-5-6-7-7-8-8-8. Nothing to build with for the future starting right now. But more than enough talent to make the playoffs. I have ace calibre starters in Schilling, Smoltz and Clemens; future aces in Pavano, D'Amico, and Millwood. The offense is strong, with Barry Bonds, Bernie Williams, Magglio Ordonez, Rafael Palmiero, Eric Young, and Jeff Cirillo providing a balanced attack. I should be able to make the playoffs (baring bad management) and stated on the team page "GM Deakin is a trader, who is always willing to listen to offers; however, with an expectation of repeating hanging over the club, few deals above improving the current squad rate to be made." I think that effectively states that I am playing for this year. So the offer that I received, to my mind, is
exactly counter to what my stated purpose is.

2) I agree that the players received have value for the future; but I think you are selling at a discount. Colon is a great pitcher; I wouldn't try to argue that point. I would expect that level of talent to come in return for 2 of the best pitchers numerically from last year. It's the extras that bother me. Tatis has had 1 good year, the majority of which occurred in his first pass through the NL. Elarton has potential; however, he went from a pitchers park to a hitters park, and watched his ERA go up 1.33 runs per 9 innings in the transition. He's only 24 with a great upside; Radke has potential as well, but a career ERA of 4.32; I don't see value from until Schilling & Clemens retire. Let me reiterate - I'M NOT PLAYING FOR NEXT YEAR.

3) After this trade, in which he acquires Aurilla as his 3rd starting SS from me with nothing in return, I am required to play Craig Grebeck, a 36 year old career .265 hitter and Craig Paquette, a 31 year old career .239 hitter and I still may not have enough ABs to fill the position. These I'm supposed to build around? Thanks, I pass. If I'm rebuilding, I need a solid SS who is young. Why in God's name would I ever trade Aurillia?

4) If my goal for making such a deal was to build for the future, why would I have interest in a 36 year old Mike Fetters? He has never been more than a middle reliever his entire career; these guys were a dime a dozen in the free agent draft this year. (not that my former owner left me any picks; however...) Pote also kinda fits that bill; as a 28 year old rookie, he doesn't seem to have the kind of upside that one builds a franchise around....

5) While reducing the age of a particular position might be one way of rebuilding, why would I trade a player like Cirilo, who is only 31, and has just begun playing in that offensive paradise of Coors? Cirillo rates to have 6, 7, or 8 productive years ahead of him; Tatis is younger, but has only had 1 good year, and has a career batting average .035 below Cirillo's. Not sure I would make that trade straight up; I can rebuild around Cirillo.

6) The age argument weighs in on Schilling as well. I can somewhat understand trading Clemens to 'rebuild;' He's 38 (Yet, 5 Cy Youngs, reasonable conditioning, Ryan pitched until he was 46; not definitely buying the argument). Schilling is<