Well, if it works, it's a good strategy. Get a couple of teams bidding, and then when you've almost got a deal ready with each one of very good and nearly equal value, tell each of them, "No deal unless you add Player X." Hopefully one of them will bite.

Apparently it has not worked so far for the Marlins, however. No tears lost for me...

I remember in 2006 when the Yankees were trying to find outfield help after the injuries to Sheffield and Matsui. They called the Royals about Reggie Sanders, and the Royals asked for Phil Hughes. End of discussion.

Sometimes if you ask for too much, you get nothing.

Sometimes if you ask for too much, you get nothing.

and sometimes you get Scott Kazmir

The Marlins announced their Opening Day game at Dolphin Stadium against the New York Mets has been moved up one day to March 31 at 4:10 p.m. The season opener had been planned for April 1.

But with two spring training games scheduled at Dolphin Stadium against the New York Yankees on March 28 and 29, the Marlins did not want to sit around without baseball for two days before opening the regular season.

I didn't know teams could just move game days. I hope the Mets were at least consulted. Why not play your AAA team if you want a baseball game?

I remember in 2006 when the Yankees were trying to find outfield help after the injuries to Sheffield and Matsui. They called the Royals about Reggie Sanders, and the Royals asked for Phil Hughes. End of discussion.

Sometimes if you ask for too much, you get nothing.

Yea, but sometimes you get Scott Kazmir for Victor Zambrano.

Edit: JPWF get outta my head!

I remember in 2006 when the Yankees were trying to find outfield help after the injuries to Sheffield and Matsui. They called the Royals about Reggie Sanders, and the Royals asked for Phil Hughes. End of discussion.

Sometimes if you ask for too much, you get nothing.

I'm always surprised at how much you guys take the Yankees side of the story as gospel. This was the same story with Gagne: the Rangers would only accept Joba or Hughes, but ended up settling for far less. Why does that pass your smell test?

And let's assume that this anecdote is true. Why was it end of discussion? Why didn't the Yankees make a counteroffer to see what the Royals would accept?

I'm always surprised at how much you guys take the Yankees side of the story as gospel. This was the same story with Gagne: the Rangers would only accept Joba or Hughes, but ended up settling for far less. Why does that pass your smell test?

No, the rumor was Kennedy and Melky.

his was the same story with Gagne: the Rangers would only accept Joba or Hughes, but ended up settling for far less. Why does that pass your smell test?

That was never the story. The Rangers were demanding Melky or Kennedy for Gagne.

I'm not sure why the Yankees would find the need to lie to the press about the Royals demands for Reggie Sanders.

Because every time they fail to make a trade their story is "They asked for XXX, which is just crazy!" I don't know why it's so important to them that every non-trade be a case of the other team being unreasonable, but it seems to be. And many of the otherwise very savvy Yankees fans on this site simply accept it as gospel.

Also, I could swear that the story that I heard ad nauseum from Yankees mouthpiece Michael Kay was "The Rangers wanted Joba or Hughes (or Kennedy?), and the Yankees said no way."

As one who trades somewhat illiquid assets for a living, I say it's a terrible strategy.

Don't be afraid to ask a rich price. It's your right, particularly when you hold a fine asset like Cabrera. But when your counterparty comes back to lift a rich offering it is insane to then dun them for more (as well as extremely offensive & counterproductive).

Start high, you can always cut the price a bit -- that lets you show you are a fair dealer. But what the M's are described as doing is absolutely insane.

‘’We felt we had a deal with them twice,’’ Angels owner Arte Moreno said at a news conference to introduce outfielder Torii Hunter and pitcher Jon Garland. ``They came back and asked for more. They’re doing it to everybody.’’

Sounds like the Marlins are looking to get Kendrick, Wood and Adenhart in the same package. At some point soon, the Angels should take a half-step back and start asking themselves how much talent it would take to go get Santana instead.

Because every time they fail to make a trade their story is "They asked for XXX, which is just crazy!" I don't know why it's so important to them that every non-trade be a case of the other team being unreasonable, but it seems to be. And many of the otherwise very savvy Yankees fans on this site simply accept it as gospel.

What enterprising young investigative reporter will blow the lid off the Yankees' mendacity?

I agree with Darren - who cares that the Yankees were offered something ridiculous? Shrug it off and move on. If you don't ask for a lot, you won't get a lot. Is the moral of Larry's story that the Royals ended up getting burned by not being able to trade Reggie Sanders for Colter Bean? I think they'll survive.

I can only think of Reggie Sanders and Curt Schilling examples as them saying the other team was being unreasonable.

I can kind of understand them lying to explain not getting Schilling, but I don't think there's any reason at all to lie about Sanders.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think Cashman was saying the Rangers' demands were unreasonable, just that the Yankees weren't willing to match them. Considering the Rangers got two useful players and a prospect with a ton of upside I wouldn't classify their demands as unreasonable.

Are there other times this has happened?

I also agree with td that first saying "we'll do a deal for X and Y" but later saying "only if you include Z as well" is very poor negotiating, almost comically bad. The fact that Moreno says it happened twice to the Angels *and* to the Dodgers make me doubt very much that he's describing exactly what went down.

More likely is that the Marlins said, "don't even talk unless you're offering Adenhart and Kendrick," whereupon the Angels offered both and the Marlins said, "okay, but we'd need Wood too." Somewhat devious, perhaps, but not at all what the author believes.

To me, the key phrase is "Colleti thought he had a deal, too." From that, I infer that Colleti thought the package he was offering was enough to get the deal done, but it turned out not to be. That's not the same thing as "Colleti said he had a deal, but they backed out."

Maybe my example's not the best, largely because it appears that I didn't get the particulars right. Whatever the specifics were, though, my point is that I'm surprised that Yankees fans here tend to take what the NY FO says as close to gospel. Didn't get Gagne--it's because they wanted our top young prospects. Didn't get Pedro--it's because there Beattie had personal vendetta against the Yankees. I'd think people would be a bit more skeptical is all.

Damn, I was 10 1/2 when the Red Sox got Pedro.

I've heard that about Beattie, but I usually heard Yankees fans complaining that they sent the Red Sox Armas Jr., since he was apparently highly coveted by the Expos.

Hughes is a poor man's Ben Sheets.

I'm always surprised at how much you guys take the Yankees side of the story as gospel.

And I'm kind of surprised at Darren's lack of skepticism about Moreno's comments here. It sure as hell sounds like spin designed to placate his fan base and distract attention from his failure to land the big bat the team needs.

I think Cabrera improves the Angels more than Santana.

Its the law of diminishing marginal utility. Cabrera would improve their underproductive lineup more than a Santana would improve an already pretty good rotation...

Plus with Cabera's age, that adds another dimension to the equation.

Why not ask for the moon and the stars if youre shopping Cabrera?

You have an elite, elite hitter doing things no one does at his age, you have him under control for a couple more years, and you have plenty of suitors.

I can't believe that how some people are saying some of the proposed prospect packages are TOO MUCH for him, if anything it is the opposite. Hes a HOF hitter

Its the law of diminishing marginal utility. Cabrera would improve their underproductive lineup more than a Santana would improve an already pretty good rotation...

Oh, I agree. The asking price for Cabrera may simply be too much for the Angels, though. Perhaps a similar deal might net Santana, and I'm sure Tejada would come at a cheaper price that either.

If I were the Marlins, I'd demand as much as possible, too.

One thing though that the Marlins have going against themselves is that the whole world knows they eventually will have to trade Cabrera. Thats how they operated in the past and thats how they continue to operate as long as they play in Pro Player Stadium and/or Loria is their owner.

9 - Completely agree, as someone else with trading experience. But I tend to agree with 14's analysis, as Beinfest has a trading record which shows he will make a move.

13 - You lie to the fans because they always say "why didn't you trade for X to improve the team?!" "We tried, they were unreasonable is a much better answer than we're cheap", and sometimes more desirable than "we wanted to give the young guys a shot". I take this as Moreno basically justifying not trading for Miguel Cabrera to his fans.

22 - I don't understand why everyone assumes the Marlins will trade Cabrera. He hasn't publicly made a demand, and even if he has, so? (Look at Kobe). It's not like he's incredibly expensive, or he's blocking a key player. Suitors for Cabrera aren't going to go away, and while getting draft picks is a worse haul than what they'd get in a trade, they'd also get two years of Miguel Cabrera at a below market price.

No, the rumor was Kennedy and Melky.

Well, the Yankee spin was that was the request at some point, at least. We don't really have much reason to think that was the final one, though.

Well, the Yankee spin was that was the request at some point, at least. We don't really have much reason to think that was the final one, though.

Well, Texas basically ended up taking a poor man's Kennedy (Gabbard) and Melky (Murphy), which the Yankees didn't really have to offer. So I don't see anything unreasonable about this story from any view, Texas asked--as they should--for quality players, the Yankees--as they should--turned them down because Gagne wasn't worth it to the 2007 Yankees, let alone the 2008 and on Yankees, so Texas settled for lesser players.

EDIT: I'm sure when Texas first started talking to the Sox they asked for Ellsbury and Buchholz and Theo rightly turned them down. The Red Sox were able to make the trade because had lower level prospects who still had value. Good for them.

"Also, I could swear that the story that I heard ad nauseum from Yankees mouthpiece Michael Kay was 'The Rangers wanted Joba or Hughes (or Kennedy?), and the Yankees said no way.'"

What, exactly, leads you to believe that Michael "A Little Payback From Jeter!" Kay had the story right?

And I'm kind of surprised at Darren's lack of skepticism about Moreno's comments here. It sure as hell sounds like spin designed to placate his fan base and distract attention from his failure to land the big bat the team needs.

When did Darren ever say anything about Moreno's comments?

I'm kind of surprised that Yankees fans believe their front office too. I certainly don't believe most of what the Red Sox FO says.

What, exactly, leads you to believe that Michael "A Little Payback From Jeter!" Kay had the story right?

No, see, I'm saying he had the story WRONG. I'm saying that he was being a mouthpiece for the Yankees, spinning the story in their favor.