Your approach pisses people off. Maybe not everyone, but definitely a large percentage. You're wasting their time. That's entirely untrue, especially considering MLB GM's are involved in negotations in pretty every aspect of what they do. I'm not saying you offer Sogard for Machado. That was an extreme example that someone else came up with. Obviously you should make at least a decent offer. From a housing perspective, if a house is listed at $200k, I'm not talking about offering $20k or even $80k. Maybe the max you are willing to pay is $180k, so you start at $165k or $170k and see what happens. Maybe that house is a hot item and goes for $250k in a bidding war(in which case the $165k offer gets balked at), or maybe your offer is good enough to entice them and you get it at $175k because they are worried the value will go down in a year. That example can surely be translated into prospects to some degree, though that translation is a bit more tricky because every player/prospect is valued differently by every mlb team. My main point, there's a massive gap between an insultingly low offer and a decent offer that can be added to to get a deal done. I don't think Burnes + Peralta as headliners in a Degrom deal is insultingly low. Maybe the Mets demand Hiura and you replace him with one of the pitchers. Or maybe the headliners are good enough but they need a couple good secondary prospects(Ray). Or maybe the Mets don't even bother talking to us because we don't have 5 top 50 prospects and that's the only way to start a conversation for either pitcher. This is a reasonable post. Except for the ridiculous non sequitur at the end.