Well, Powers isn't a better version fo Fox. If you take away the name, the more physical part isn't there. He throws a hit nearly every 3 games. When you trade Fox, you're not getting a better Fox. You're getting assets for the future with potential, or you're getting a mix of assets plus something sustainable/good now, but you aren't getting Fox. It just doesn't work that way. Nobody trades better players/players heading in that direction for a player making more money. So who is the better player we're trading for?
I understand your logic in getting rid of players while they have top value, although I don't always agree with that because you're just trying to avoid the harsh reality that you eventually have to trade away players later on for less value. Trading them early doesn't mean what you're getting back is going to be better than if you kept that player until a trade had to be done.
enuf here to deserve a like
para 1:
a) Fox should go where that is best in totality of the circumstances
so far, not final, open to suggestions, that seems to be to VAN so we can unload Zib + get back good stuff
re: Power specifically, the benefit is longer term structural cap relief [at least temporarily] and
a better physical specimen who can ultimately surpass Fox
we should ask if Power is a buy low opportunity to acquire a potential Sanderson.
para 2
we have a fundamental disagree, to a certain extent
on the underline, you are saying
"because you're just trying to avoid the harsh
reality that you eventually
have to trade away players later on for less value."
At some point, in some cases, sure you are correct.
But otherwise no
Mgmt decides when to move for top value or not
so the equation is value of keeping vs value of moving
in both cases you look at not only the immediate now, but how you set up for the future
If sell high candidates have value, they CAN BE moved THEN
there is no must eventually
whether or not sell high should take place varies situation to situation, case by case
