So not having to pay for a player we already have is infuriating? We should trade pesce and then use most of the futures gained to trade for another RHD that has never played in the system just so we can say we did something at the deadline? Seems like odd gymnastics to check a box.This whole concept of "own-rental" is completely infuriating to me. It is just a series of mental gymnastics and rationalization to justify doing nothing at the trade deadline. The team is what it is going in to the year. If you don't add to it, fine, but just say so. Don't be like "Oh, wait, wait- we have an own-rental so its all good"
I mean, unless we're getting a legit top line quality player for him I see no move we could make involving him that wouldn't make the team worse than currently constructed. Bank cap heading towards the playoffs and actually do a rental this year, we're very much in a position to do that effectively.This whole concept of "own-rental" is completely infuriating to me. It is just a series of mental gymnastics and rationalization to justify doing nothing at the trade deadline. The team is what it is going in to the year. If you don't add to it, fine, but just say so. Don't be like "Oh, wait, wait- we have an own-rental so its all good"
Relax.This whole concept of "own-rental" is completely infuriating to me. It is just a series of mental gymnastics and rationalization to justify doing nothing at the trade deadline. The team is what it is going in to the year. If you don't add to it, fine, but just say so. Don't be like "Oh, wait, wait- we have an own-rental so its all good"
Frankie?Relax.
I don’t think the concept of “own-rental” has anything to do with the deadline though, it’s just highlighting the decision to keep a player who will walk for what they offer you that year rather than getting something for him in a trade so he doesn’t walk for nothing. Letting players walk for nothing isn’t good in the mid/long term but can be beneficial in the short term. That needs to be balanced and there is no easy or correct answer. Personally I like how the borg has walked that line of now vs future.This whole concept of "own-rental" is completely infuriating to me. It is just a series of mental gymnastics and rationalization to justify doing nothing at the trade deadline. The team is what it is going in to the year. If you don't add to it, fine, but just say so. Don't be like "Oh, wait, wait- we have an own-rental so its all good"
I think "own rental" is conjecture to that if the player was traded at the TDL for a pick/prospect he would be rental to that other team.More broadly, "own rental" is now used pretty much for anyone you might lose to UFA in the off-season even though that guy isn't really a 'rental' in the sense that most people call guys picked up at the deadline a rental. For example, even though Pesce has been with Carolina for 8 straight seasons (thus not really a "rental"), some call him an "own rental" simply because he might leave as a UFA at the end of the season. Possibly losing him for nothing is the reason he's called an "own rental".
Own rental has become team-speak for "we aren't signing this guy at the end of the year, and we likely aren't going to trade him now, either"I don't mind the term "own rental", but I think "own rental" has kind of gone from one thing to a broader meaning of "own rental". Originally, I viewed an "own rental" as a guy that was injured/not available, but coming back later in the season/near the deadline. So instead to trading for a true rental at the deadline, you are adding this player that is coming back from injury that you already have on your roster, thus "own rental". I've heard RBA use "own rental" that way a few times in the past and probably what Negan is referring to with his objection to the term "own rental".
More broadly, "own rental" is now used pretty much for anyone you might lose to UFA in the off-season even though that guy isn't really a 'rental' in the sense that most people call guys picked up at the deadline a rental. For example, even though Pesce has been with Carolina for 8 straight seasons (thus not really a "rental"), some call him an "own rental" simply because he might leave as a UFA at the end of the season. Possibly losing him for nothing is the reason he's called an "own rental".
What's the point of this post about "own rentals"? Maybe it's just to see how many times I can use the term "own rental" in a post.
Is he being resigned? What is the hold up? I assume he wants 6 mil but does het not deserve it?
I'd love for the Canucks to land the big fish but I'm assuming most every team would like that.
Just curious what the rumors are out of Raleigh.
I guess you need to "relax" tooI've always hated the term own rental. It's just always annoyed me for some reason. But as far as keeping a guy like Pesce and then letting him walk next summer, it makes sense if we can't get a trade that makes sense.
I completely agree with that. I'm just saying- if there is no suitable deal to be had, people shouldn't think that his remaining on the team until his UFA is some kind of bonus. It's like when people are all thrilled when they get a tax refund at the end of the year.I mean, unless we're getting a legit top line quality player for him I see no move we could make involving him that wouldn't make the team worse than currently constructed. Bank cap heading towards the playoffs and actually do a rental this year, we're very much in a position to do that effectively.