The Nature of Perception and Causality in the Transfer Market
Strange how the apparent order of things can affect perception. Consider...
1) United wants to acquire Cannon. 2) Perkins will go to Europe. 3) D gets annoyed.
1) Perkins will go to Europe. 2) United wants to acquire Cannon. 3) D is complacent.
Same facts, different order, and a different story. United wanting to move Troy Perkins to get Joe Cannon struck me as irresponsible. But selling Perkins and getting Cannon as a replacement, that at least makes some sense. If the deal was, as reported, Boswell and cash out, Cannon in... Well, you can debate the merits of that deal. It's dead now, so it doesn't matter. Still, the motivation of the front office becomes at least intelligible. Deciding to ditch Perkins for Cannon was ridiculous (again, this is about salary cap management and choosing the most bang for your buck, not simply picking the top player at a position.) Deciding to get Cannon because Perkins wants to go overseas? Well, it's not so much an elective choice ("How do I upgrade?") as a choice of necessity ("Wow, who should we get now that our #1 keeper is gone?"). And while you can debate the merits of Cannon, as a one or two year replacement of necessity there's a lot of compelling logic there.
Which bring us to... well, it bring us to another post later on.