Chavez just says no
It's interesting to look at the teams in Chavez' no-trade clause
: Cleveland, Florida, Milwaukee, Minnesota, Montreal, New York Mets, Tampa Bay and Toronto. Let's break it down:
- Toronto - taxes too high, too cold, same division as Yanks & Sox. But at least it's clean, eh?
- Montreal - taxes too high, too much travel, no one knows what the f$%# is going on over there.
- Milwaukee - come on, would YOU want to play for them?
- Cleveland - rebuilding phase, lots of young players, who knows when they'll be good again (but it shouldn't be too long)
- Tampa Bay - would YOU want to play for them?
- Minnesota - cheap bastard owner, bad stadium and no relief in sight.
- Florida - at first thought I thought, "huh? they just won the World Series!" then I thought, oh yeah, look who owns the team - it'll be dismantled in 2 years.
- Mets - not really too sure about this one. Perhaps he didn't want to play second fiddle to the Yankees. Perhaps he's not too impressed with ownership and management and personnel choices over the last few years.
Any other thoughts?
- Addendum -
Well, I for one would probably have put the Pirates on my list - talk about a directionless, mismanaged team, and you're talking about the Pirates. Maybe San Diego, but then again it's always sunny there and they DO have a new stadium. Oh yeah, and Texas, too, would be on my no-trade list. Detroit anyone? At least they're headed in the right direction, not that they have any other direction to go, and you WOULD be playing for Alan Trammell, who has always been one of my favorites.
posted by shawn
: 3/21/2004 12:31:00 AM -