I think what THART is concerned about is that the managed team got less than fair value.

On the face of it that would seem ok.

However, the managed team only won 51 games last year and the unmanaged team won 70 games...if this is the trade I think it is.

Ideally Mike would have taken that into consideration and suggested to the manager offering the trade that he didn't need to give up quite so much.

Probably Mike only looked at managed vs unmanaged and whether the unmanaged team was improved. It was...so he approved the trade and you can't really expect him to have looked into it much further than that.

I've been surprised by the trades made with unmanaged teams in that in some (maybe most?) cases it almost seems like the managed teams are going out of their way to improve the unmanaged teams. In most cases that would seem a good thing as it makes the unmanaged teams more attractive to new owners. Maybe it isn't true for this trade. Altruism at work?