 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Baseball League Forums » Speed Leagues » Cy Young League » John Smoltz League » Fire sale
Alpo
Fire sale
December 21, 2011 at 02:36AM View BBCode
Just traded most of my players, but the rest are available fairly cheap. Time to rebuild and get to grips with this new format...
Alpo
It clearly stated in the post about the trade vote system that the vote system is:
"
IMPORTANT: Please remember that not all trades are equal, and not all inequal trades should be overturned. A trade should only be overturned if there is bad faith on the part of one or both of the teams involved.
* Obviously not, both veteran owners - no collusion
If both teams get something they need out of the trade and neither party is taking advantage of an unaware trading partner, the trade should stand. Overturning a trade may not be used as a strategic option.
* Again, both veterans. I think we both understand the game. Please pay attention to the second part of that. If 10 (TEN!!) owners in this league cannot understand something this basic then we are truly censored . Cancelling this was clearly strategic.
If either of the two owners involved in this deal would like to comment on the deal, please post a private note in Support and I will attach your comments to this thread. "
December 22, 2011 at 10:39PM View BBCode
Absolutely no idea why the last trade got overturned. Was I the one that was supposed to have gotten the better of it or him? Is there a jury on non-biased, non-childish owners now speaking out of their own interest/bitterness that can review this? Complete joke.It clearly stated in the post about the trade vote system that the vote system is:
"
IMPORTANT: Please remember that not all trades are equal, and not all inequal trades should be overturned. A trade should only be overturned if there is bad faith on the part of one or both of the teams involved.
* Obviously not, both veteran owners - no collusion
If both teams get something they need out of the trade and neither party is taking advantage of an unaware trading partner, the trade should stand. Overturning a trade may not be used as a strategic option.
* Again, both veterans. I think we both understand the game. Please pay attention to the second part of that. If 10 (TEN!!) owners in this league cannot understand something this basic then we are truly censored . Cancelling this was clearly strategic.
If either of the two owners involved in this deal would like to comment on the deal, please post a private note in Support and I will attach your comments to this thread. "
Alpo
December 22, 2011 at 10:43PM View BBCode
Frankly too pissed off to even continue but I am paid up until June so I will stay in and hopefully screw over some of you people voting 'no' and steal some championships before then.
mjlee555
December 23, 2011 at 02:16AM View BBCode
I am surprised, too, and don't think it is right. But, you are a great owner, so I hope you can get over it and stay long term.
Alpo
December 23, 2011 at 02:28AM View BBCode
Yeah we'll see. By the guidelines and precedent by this verdict the league becomes almost unplayable. I have now heard from a couple of owners who agree that it is wrong, so by process of elimination I can assume the rest voted 'yes'. At least I know who they are I suppose even if they don't sack up and defend it. Shouldn't have traded after.
nydru18
December 23, 2011 at 03:26AM View BBCode
yea, im shocked myself. cant wait until my last couple trades are protested for some crappy reason. I am one of the few risk takers left, not all trades are totally even, but u gotta go for it sometimes. Thanks to those of you who understand, and good luck!!
evetsgurk
These 2 owners are seasoned veterans........and in my opinion, the Smashers were getting the better end of the deal but I believe that both teams would have made out well with the results.
Now.....while I respect everyones right to protest a trade and overturn it (especially when its 10 votes)...I think moving forward, these points should be considered.....especially because the trade the D-Bags eventually ended up with could be argued, wasnt much better, if at all.
Steve K
December 23, 2011 at 03:53AM View BBCode
There are alot of trades that I personally would never agree too......but I try to abide by the rules of free trade. As long as no two owners are in kahootz tryin to cheat or a newbie getting totally taken advantage of, I am ok with a semi-lopsided trade (should it occur).These 2 owners are seasoned veterans........and in my opinion, the Smashers were getting the better end of the deal but I believe that both teams would have made out well with the results.
Now.....while I respect everyones right to protest a trade and overturn it (especially when its 10 votes)...I think moving forward, these points should be considered.....especially because the trade the D-Bags eventually ended up with could be argued, wasnt much better, if at all.
Steve K
Alpo
End result is that I am happy though; I wanted rid of everything and get something going for the new minor league system. I can do that now. I won't need to trade again for a decade so you can all have at it.
[Edited on 12-23-2011 by Alpo]
December 23, 2011 at 04:06AM View BBCode
I have no idea who was supposed to have gotten the better end of the original deal; if as you say people think I was making a mistake/getting screwed they can kiss my 84 site-wide rings and then come back to me and tell what i am doing wrong. If they think NY were getting screwed then I guess mission accomplished as the new trades gives him slightly less in my book - most annoying bit about the new trades is that a "yes" vote benefitted as I see it so the 'strategic' voting worked. That was my bad I suppose.End result is that I am happy though; I wanted rid of everything and get something going for the new minor league system. I can do that now. I won't need to trade again for a decade so you can all have at it.
[Edited on 12-23-2011 by Alpo]
Bdevil86c
I didn't read your biography to make my decision, I looked at the trades on the board and decided. As for your assertion that it was strategic on my part, you are in my division... I would prefer that you lose 125 games, but that just reeks of tanking, which I think is more damaging to the integrity of the league.
OK... I've said my peace... i'm not sure any of the other NO votes will speak up, but since you seem intent on trying to screw us, clearly its time to bail... so, if you wish, arrange for a transfer of my credit and you can find another "seasoned" owner to take my place.
David- Wolfpack
December 23, 2011 at 03:58PM View BBCode
if you can arrange for my credit to be transferred to another league. I will gladly leave. And yes, I voted to overturn it. Why even have the voting on trades if this is the result? In my opinion, which by the way, was well before all the other trades were made... was that the second trade was completely unbalanced and to the same team as the first trade you made... it reeked of Charlie Finley to me, and he was a seasoned veteran too.I didn't read your biography to make my decision, I looked at the trades on the board and decided. As for your assertion that it was strategic on my part, you are in my division... I would prefer that you lose 125 games, but that just reeks of tanking, which I think is more damaging to the integrity of the league.
OK... I've said my peace... i'm not sure any of the other NO votes will speak up, but since you seem intent on trying to screw us, clearly its time to bail... so, if you wish, arrange for a transfer of my credit and you can find another "seasoned" owner to take my place.
David- Wolfpack
nydru18
December 23, 2011 at 04:50PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
Lets not all go overboard...for my part, all I was trying to say is, i thought we should reserve our veto power for really fishy moves that might seem like collusion.....in no way do I or Alpo have any such plans, in fact, we have many times tried to make deals, and never agreed....we simply are active, and speaking for myself, I often make trades that get questioned, because I am not the type of guy to watch my team middle around for years, i like to go for it when i see the chance, and I like to break it down when im clearly not going to win. Not all guys run their franchises in similar fashion. Anyways, i take vetoed deals in stride now, so my feelings are not dented, and i respect ur rights to veto, i just think we should be more cautious in using the veto power. Not everyone has to like the deal, and often deals are one-sided in real life too, atleast on paper, but often they do not turn out that way. Anyways, happy holiday to all, and David, i certainly was not trying to call anyone out...i just hope you all know that i am a fair owner, and definitely am never trying to pull one over on anyone. Good luck, and holiday wishes to all.
Alpo
December 23, 2011 at 05:13PM View BBCode
Just so we are clear at least Bdevil; who gained a significant advantage in the trade? Me or nydru? Nobody has told me yet.
SDP272
I don't have an issue with you as an owner at all Alpo and I tend to look at each trade as its own seperate entity, regardless of which league anyone is in or their record. Be angry if you want, I was only one vote.
But i stand by it.
December 23, 2011 at 06:37PM View BBCode
I voted no. I thought Karl Santovenia was worth at least what NY was offering you, plus you were giving up two other A players, one being a starting pitcher who is os 30. It is my right to Veto and I thought the trade was visciously lopsided for NY.I don't have an issue with you as an owner at all Alpo and I tend to look at each trade as its own seperate entity, regardless of which league anyone is in or their record. Be angry if you want, I was only one vote.
But i stand by it.
Alpo
* I believe the right to veto should be reserved for truly unequal deals where one owner is either a rookie or unaware or situations where two teams are colluding. It is not there so you can veto trades that are inconvenient to you in terms of making a run for the title, having your own offer rejected or just overall disagreeing with the strategy of the team trading. Making trades that benefit both teams involved equally is hard enough, if we have to make trades that benefit the rest of the league as well it gets really tough.
* I think people may not appreciate fully how player/draft pick values will change with the new minor league system. Within the next 5-10 years I promise you there will be a lot more quality players in the league and the average skill level of squads will be higher. I accepted the trades allowing for this (I have played in a couple of leagues with this new minor league system and done very well in them), I think a few owners vetoed thinking of the old system. Bottom line is that before I would be trading my best draft picks for quality players as often as possible, that will no longer be the case. Good luck getting a 1st round pick off me in the future! I have 6 1sts and 5 2nds in the next two drafts, would have been useless in the past but I promise you all that they are not now and you will be seeing some of these names on the allstars page 10 years from now.
* While I clearly was upset and threw my toys out of the pram it was also because of the timing; It was overturned just before the offseason leaving me fairly screwed in terms of this years draft and getting trades done. As it turns out, vultures were ready and I managed to get the trades done anyway - thanks to the league being fairly active. I am happy with the new trades so no problem there. Don't worry about me retaliating and vetoing your trades on equally silly grounds, I will continue to play the game the same way. With the new minor league system I will be making far fewer trades anyway, so the precedent set will not bother me that much.
* I received several good offers originally for the players I traded. It was really close as to which I accepted, but as I said my evaluation of draft picks have changed completely with the new minor league system. For that reason I chose the trade that I did. At the old system I would probably have chosen a different option.
* If the Smashers go on to win a title or two in the next few years and I manage to go on a run 10 years from now it does not mean we colluded, it means we made a good trade that worked for us both. Inconvenient as it may be to the rest of you, that is the way to trade. Being as willing to trade as nydru is rare but it is an option open to anyone. I have had a million negotiations with the guy in the past in this league and others and they have been both fruitful, frustrating, useless, drawn out and hilarious but they have never been collusion. I think he will tell you that I drive a hard bargain in general.
Bottom line; I love where my franchise is at right now. If I got screwed in that deal I will bend over more. I appreciate that you were all looking out for me and overturning a trade where I clearly didn't know what I was doing, I feel the love.
December 24, 2011 at 02:44AM View BBCode
I will make my last comment on the subject I guess. A few people have expressed why here and privately so that is nice. It seems the consensus that I was the one getting screwed in the deal and that made people vote to veto it - I really wanted that clarified as I didn't know. To finish it all off I will make these points.* I believe the right to veto should be reserved for truly unequal deals where one owner is either a rookie or unaware or situations where two teams are colluding. It is not there so you can veto trades that are inconvenient to you in terms of making a run for the title, having your own offer rejected or just overall disagreeing with the strategy of the team trading. Making trades that benefit both teams involved equally is hard enough, if we have to make trades that benefit the rest of the league as well it gets really tough.
* I think people may not appreciate fully how player/draft pick values will change with the new minor league system. Within the next 5-10 years I promise you there will be a lot more quality players in the league and the average skill level of squads will be higher. I accepted the trades allowing for this (I have played in a couple of leagues with this new minor league system and done very well in them), I think a few owners vetoed thinking of the old system. Bottom line is that before I would be trading my best draft picks for quality players as often as possible, that will no longer be the case. Good luck getting a 1st round pick off me in the future! I have 6 1sts and 5 2nds in the next two drafts, would have been useless in the past but I promise you all that they are not now and you will be seeing some of these names on the allstars page 10 years from now.
* While I clearly was upset and threw my toys out of the pram it was also because of the timing; It was overturned just before the offseason leaving me fairly screwed in terms of this years draft and getting trades done. As it turns out, vultures were ready and I managed to get the trades done anyway - thanks to the league being fairly active. I am happy with the new trades so no problem there. Don't worry about me retaliating and vetoing your trades on equally silly grounds, I will continue to play the game the same way. With the new minor league system I will be making far fewer trades anyway, so the precedent set will not bother me that much.
* I received several good offers originally for the players I traded. It was really close as to which I accepted, but as I said my evaluation of draft picks have changed completely with the new minor league system. For that reason I chose the trade that I did. At the old system I would probably have chosen a different option.
* If the Smashers go on to win a title or two in the next few years and I manage to go on a run 10 years from now it does not mean we colluded, it means we made a good trade that worked for us both. Inconvenient as it may be to the rest of you, that is the way to trade. Being as willing to trade as nydru is rare but it is an option open to anyone. I have had a million negotiations with the guy in the past in this league and others and they have been both fruitful, frustrating, useless, drawn out and hilarious but they have never been collusion. I think he will tell you that I drive a hard bargain in general.
Bottom line; I love where my franchise is at right now. If I got screwed in that deal I will bend over more. I appreciate that you were all looking out for me and overturning a trade where I clearly didn't know what I was doing, I feel the love.
glideasy4
I don't like vetoing trades and doubt I do it again any time soon.
December 24, 2011 at 05:23AM View BBCode
This was the first time I have ever voted to veto a trade in any league. I did it because I knew I had made an offer for just one of the players involved that was at least as good as what was traded for all three players. I thought the only logical reason for this had to be that something was up. I smelled a rat and voted accordingly. Another factor was that the team getting by far the better of the trade was in my division and I did not feel like getting screwed. If I was wrong about the rat, I apologize. But I still think it was an unfair trade to the other 7 owners in our division.I don't like vetoing trades and doubt I do it again any time soon.
Pages: 1