Read my comments.

Jon wanted an opinion. In this case I've said I think Guillien is worth more. That I'd expect to get more (not that I would for sure) for him. Think he should probably get a better pitcher (not that he would for sure) with better long term use for him.

You made you the statement of "fact" that this is silly, that Guillen is replacement level, that he is only equivalent to a 2nd round FA. You've made much more specfic "omniscient" statements about his future than I have, more statements of "fact" like he is always injured, equivalent to Jack Wilson, etc.

That I disagree on those points doesn't mean I'm the one trying to force my opinion down your throat. You've made the decision to attack those who aren't in agreement with you; to try to discredit my position by claiming I'm not familiar enough with the situation to have a valid opinion or that I'm making statements here and there that I say are facts when I've done no such thing. That's not calling someone on something inaccurate, that's dismissing someone's opinion out of hand.

I stand by my overall thoughts here. I think Guillen is worth more. I don't think its an outlandish trade, but I do think it should be tweaked given our system that is in place. I think situations do allow for less than perfectly even trades, but that alone isn't enough justification for any deal to be allowed, nor is manager experience. In this case I'm not sure its enough to make up the imbalance in the deal as I see it.

I didn't expect to change your mind on this, but in this case I see Mike's reasoning. That's all. I too am an "experienced" owner, maybe it isn't as cut and dried as you believe.

Just my opinion of course.