Trade Options

[mcoulter2008]

What a heated strand. Sorry I joined the fray a bit later than most...but manning a two-year-old and prepping for the arrival of another spawn (perhaps earlier than anticipated) tends to takes its toll.

It is my belief that this league is experiencing a wide gap between a cache of long-time owners that rightly feel a proprietary role to protect the league as they have crafted it, a group of owners that have been around slightly less time but have become ultra-competitive and a still smaller group of owners that are building their franchises from the ground up as a result of three teams being cast aside and redrawn from the scraps of somewhat less-than-desirable parts.

These three distinct groups are almost certain to have varying levels of disagreement and employ varying strategies to meet their desired ends.

When the Candy Colored Clowns entered this league, I took a very very long-term approach in building my roster. This was by design. Entering a long-standing league with experienced members with already-stacked rosters is much like entering your first boxing match against a seasoned Mike Tyson (pre-ear biting). I needed to keep my wits, spar a bit, feel out each of the other owners and learn learn learn.

That is what my motives were entering the dispersal draft, where I took what I believed were marketable players or contracts so that I could swap them out for the talent I truly wanted. I took a wait-and-see approach during auction day, resulting in a quick-study in the process, but leaving my team the last to roster a player. And I entered the season with hopes of being somewhat competitive while learning still more about my competition and their likes/dislikes.

Like most owners, I posted a lengthy list of players on my "trade block" and then was underwhelmed by the deafening silence. I sat pat for awhile, saw that my team was listing a bit on offense, and when Smoltz went down for the year, I realized that I needed to once again maintain my long-term approach to things.

That involved a hard look at my roster and who I would want to keep moving forward. And who I thought I could net via the trade market.

As in real baseball, sometimes in roto you have teams that build through spending on vets (like the Yanks and Red Sox) and some that build through development of youth and shrewd trades (like the Marlins and Twins). Lacking any real expensive talent, I chose the latter.

That led to the trade that has brought me onto the fringe of this discussion. On the surface, my deal with Matt may seem horribly lopsided. And I was aware that it would to most. But a look inside my thought process might change that perception.

My thinking was that of the four players I sent packing, only Zambrano would have been a holdover. Saito, in my opinion, was aging and his use in Japan and here with the Dodgers was destined to catch up with him and make him worth significantly less than the .21 I had him at through 2009. Cordero was on the last legs of his roto contract, expensive, closing for a middling team in a ballpark ill-suited to his skillset. And The Big Unit was one back injury away from retirement.

When Zambrano became injured (which happened prior to the deal), I felt compelled to move with a bit more haste. As a result, Matt netted a closer who eventually went on the DL with possibly season ending elbow woes, a closer who has been mediocre since the deal and will be lost at season's end to an expiring contract, an aging vet at an affordable price, and Zambrano, a true keeper at a mid-priced contract.

What I received was an inexpensive power corner bat keeper, and two consensus top-10 minor league talents, all keepers. When I made the trade, I did consider league ethics and felt in my honest opinion that the deal would not sway the race. In the end, one of that deal's sharpest critics even privately admitted that this was the case.

So in half a season, I have made a lot of trades and now "boast" a roster that features 9 players (Martinez, Bruce, Towles, Volstad, Perez, Parker, Kershaw, Morales, Schafer) who rank either first or second in their organizations as prospects according to Baseball America, and four others (Sinkbeil, DeWitt, Gamel, Hernandez) who rank in the top 5 of their respective organizations. That is 13 young, talented, cheap players to build a base around. All with contracts that should allow me to be quite a shopper in next year's auction.

Add to that a couple of finds (Doumit, Volquez) a few players acquired in trades (K.Johnson, Phillips, Reynolds and Drew) and I am pretty happy with my roster considering from whence I came.

That was my thinking. And my point. Every owner has a motive for their moves, be it the auction price they pay, the free agents they sign or the trades they make. As long as that motive is to better their franchise -- and not undermine another team or the title chase -- then I do not have a problem with it.

I cannot and will not speak to the deal that brought this topic to life. Because I cannot climb inside of the minds of those owners and ascertain what their motives were. And I certainly wasn't around last season when this acrimony was born.

My only hope is that, unlike our country at times, we don't try to kill a fly with a bazooka. Over-legislating is rarely a good thing. A complete ban or earlier deadline on trades would likely curb morale and interest, not only in our teams but in getting to know each other. Even in deals and trade emails that I have sent that netted nothing but polite "no thanks," I have gotten to know a little about my fellow owners. With this league a largely electronic one, save for auction and banquet days, those emailed trade offers serve as much more than just a way to upgrade your team.

If a trade review committee is what some feel this league needs, I ask only that the committee be balanced between older experienced owners and some of the new blood. And that there be a system in place for each of the owners of the trade that is under siege to explain themselves openly and fairly. And that there be no "anonymous" torch bearers waiting to tar and feather people. Meaning an open forum for those who question the trade to explain why they find it so egregious. We're all adults here. Until this is opened up completely, with no fear of retribution and only an honest discourse at stake, the league will likely dissolve into this forum-board name-calling and witch hunts.

My two-cents. Sorry it came so late.
M.Coulter
GM-CCC

[davidsruffins (archived)]

Dozers, Clowns, and Stones, thanks for the posts and insights. They’re much appreciated. It’s great to see Steve back, at least for the moment, in the conversation. And Kenn, your generosity in arguing against my being sent to Gitmo means a lot to me. To think that a fellow owner would proclaim that I should not, in fact, be tortured…well, it’s more than most who know me would be willing to say. Thanks.

I’m glad that owners involved in some of the trades we’ve been referencing have shared their thought processes. Your explanations have been clear and thoroughly convincing. Moreover, I think it quite likely that you’ve improved your teams in ’09 and beyond.

I write to focus our attention on, at least what I think, is the core issue we should be debating, which tends to get lost in justifications for individual trades. I’ll (try) to be brief. (Cue raucous applause.) None of the owners who have expressed concern with these trades have argued that you’ve done your teams wrong. Our argument is that we may have to institute more oversight to ensure that the league isn’t done wrong in a given year.

The core of my argument is the following, which has probably gotten lost in my blizzard of words. (I’m an academic. It’s what we do. ) Our constitution is meaningful. It outlines, not just the rules we have to follow, but also the responsibilities we owe to each other. Our constitution says that owners must incorporate the integrity of the league in our deliberations. We have responsibilities to our teams (we keep on top of things, we try to make our teams better), to our competitors (we don’t intentionally misrepresent ourselves in trade discussions), and to our league (we don’t make vastly unbalanced this-year-for-future deals).

Those taking issue with these trades could have made a reasonably compelling argument that trading a handful of currently producing major league players for a handful of young, high-potential players and prospects isn’t a particularly good strategy. After all, the major league scrapheap is littered with former top-ten prospects, many – maybe most – of whom are young, fire-balling pitchers who either don’t survive the promotion to AA or their first (or second, or third) labrum tear.

But we didn’t make that argument. We are willing to accept, without justification, that the dumpers have improved their teams’ futures. Thus, the here’s-what-I-was-thinking defenses of these trades are valuable, but a little beside the point. Again, we want owners who are constantly thinking about improving their teams. And we are willing to grant that you have.

Therefore, our debate really shouldn’t be about whether the teams involved have made good trades for the team’s involved. They probably have. Our debate should be about whether and how to regulate dump trades. If owners don’t have a problem with heavily unbalanced dump trades, then we need to eliminate the “integrity-of-the-league” clause in the constitution. We’re the Wild West. An owner has no larger responsibility to the current CFCL pennant race if he's not in it. We become, essentially, less of a long-term keeper league and more of a league in which the bottom and top halves of the standings trade places from year to year. I wrote in the blog post that this is not the kind of league for which I signed up. That wasn't a threat, just a fact. If a supermajority want to change the constitution to allow uber-dump trades, and I'm in the superminority, I'll have a decision to make. But that fact should be neither here nor there if most want that change.

On the other hand, if we decide that dump trades need to be more tightly regulated, we need to decide how. I, like Michael, don't want to go too far in changing the rules. However, unlike my last post indicated, I’m becoming more amenable to a committee. Maybe by simply creating one we impose a deterrent effect on ourselves, since we’d know that trades would receive another level of scrutiny before becoming official.

I imagine the Coppers have been lurking, waiting for things to shake out a bit before jumping in with specific thoughts, but, Dave, as CFCL Grand Poobah, I’d love to hear what your take is on potential rules changes. I'd also like to hear what others have to say. I'm gonna shut up for a bit.

P.S. Btw, can we cuss on this thing now? I noticed on my last post that “bastard” got through without being toned down to “love child” or “other side of the sheets.”

[mcoulter2008]

I am in agreement with much of what David has stated in his above (or is it below now?) post. I, too, do not want to be part of a "Wild West" league. But I also really want no part of an Orwellian league that enforces overly stringent rules to sublimate an owner's trading or managing style, either. And that should not be construed as a threat to leave, because I am not going anywhere...I have Jay Bruce! lol

Lacking 25 years experience in this league, I can only draw from the experiences I have had thus far. So in my earlier post, I used my moves as examples because that is what I could speak to...not as a way or means to be defensive in any way.

In some respects, myself, Moore Better and ... to a lesser extent the Revenge, are in a rather unique position this season. We are attempting to sculpt a roster from the dregs of three teams that were ... through apathy or other means ... abandoned. I think this accounts for the moves that I have made this season, in an attempt to build a competitive team from the dregs.

And it is my opinion that each owner building a competitive team is at least as important as maintaining the integrity of the auction and the title chase. It likely was mismanagement and disinterest that led this league to seek out three new owners this past offseason. So not building competitive teams through any means possible (including not just the auction, but free agency and trades) can be just as detrimental to a league as eroding the importance of the auction, which admittedly is the most fun part of each season. In my mind, these issues are not mutually exclusive. Therefore, any ruling that unduly hinders one of these activities could end up undermining the league's integrity as well.

I also believe that in the case of the Clowns, Moore Better, and (again to a lesser extent) the Revenge, these types of prospecting deals should have been somewhat expected given the teams' expansion-like status, and should not serve as a portend of a torrent of future "dump" trades.

As for expounding on my deal with Matt and its (much less public) flogging by fellow owners, I did so not to defend the deal so much as to show how each owner has their own mindset when it comes to fairness and what might undermine the league's integrity. And at the heart of this heated discussion is, how can that be legislated?

I did due diligence on my deal with Matt. As a former STATS, Inc. employee, I am prone to projections. And after weighing the numbers, I felt that our trade would in no way unfairly tip the balance of the title chase. Though it certainly is not over, in hindsight that has shown to be the case thus far, regardless of the Stones/Line deal.

Did my wanting to make sure I didn't tip the balance become the overwhelming factor in making that deal? Of course not. Improving my club was the presiding factor. But knowing after looking at things that, while perhaps lopsided, my deal would not be a "king maker" helped me ride out the derisive snipes of others.

Did other owners making trades have this in their thought process as well as the goal of improving their team? I can't say. But it would be nice to think so.

I know in light of the Stones/Line deal, the RedHots contacted me in an effort to make a counter-move to hopefully remain in the same zip code as the Stones. I made the deal as much because it netted me a keeper I liked as for the possibility that the players I sent along might help keep the race tight. I also sent along players to the Revenge in an effort to help keep them afloat in the race for a prize spot, if not the title.

I add these to show that so-called "dump" trades do not have to undermine the integrity of the auction or the title chase, if they are executed properly.

That makes my 4 cents now....one more post and I might be out a nickel!
M.Coulter
GM-CCC

[stones]

OK, I've taken the suggested "steps back" and a more than a few "deep breaths". And while I am still offended by many of the uncalled for personal remarks and aspersions made in this thread, I will hang in there until the end of this season. I am not prepared to make any longer term commitments at this time. I do, however, agree with comments made last season (not the way they were made necessarily) regarding vacant teams and absentee owners. So with the integrity of the league at heart I will manage the Stones to my best abilities, tainted championship potential and all!

I've also decided that in order for me to offer much of value regarding the the topic matter at hand, I am still not able to post without adding a heavy dose of my own personal venom and anger. So I will wait a little longer.

What I will say I enjoyed reading Michael Coulter's responses and think he might be a solid voice of reason.

[MGrage]

Good morning from the Magic Kingdom,

Well, I was going to use this spare hour I have waiting for everyone to get ready to go to Hollywood Studios, but I finally read through this thread today. I guess I wouldn't have been shocked by Rich's Doctrine if I had read his thoughts here. The hour's almost gone and I don't have enough time to put all my thoughts here, especially with the kids now up and showering.

First, while we don't see eye to eye much when it comes to player evaluation, I don't want Steve to leave. I think you're a very good player and the league would be worse off if you left. Plus somebody has to be the Devil's Advocate and be the token Brewer's fan here.

Secondly, I feel that equating this years ludicrous deal with last year's was a logical fallacy. There were 10 deals made before this year's version so bringing up the fact that last years dump was a first just cloudies the picture for no good reason. Plus, saying that nobody else could match the haul you got from Steve was completely and utterly wrong. I could have matched that offer with ridiculous ease. I was never given the chance. I have more cheap keepers than Steve did plus a better prospect in Rasmus than any of the ones you got.

That said, I would never had agreed to make that deal anyways. Since the Reservoir Dog fiasco, I don't want to do anything that would undermine the league again. That's why I'm really surprised at the venom Rich had for my trade. Apparently, others felt the same way. I don't have much time left but I'll try to explain briefly.

Reynolds is a top rate 3B and other than Cantu is the biggest and best bargain on the hot corner. I also don't value pitchers as highly as everyday hitters so it took every part of that deal for me to give him up. We were about to announce the trade the night that Carlos' arm got hurt. We almost called it off. But after a day of thinking it over and the addition of the draft pick, I agreed to the deal. As the proud owner of 99% of Mark Prior's career and listening to the Cubs' spin all his "slight arm troubles", I was deathly afraid this was deja vu all over again. Randy Johnson had just given up 3, 4, 7 and 7 earned runs in his previous four starts and had just 5 QS all year in 13 starts. I bought low on both granted, but he who has not, cast the first stone. BTW, Randy is still not the Johnson of old. He's more and more like Jamie Moyer with every start.

The was solely intended to net me a few ratio points and help me get out of the basement of the Hd+Sv category. In the former goal, the deal has been an utter failure. I've only picked up 5 pitching points in the month and a half since the deal. Another reason I devalue pitchers is the innate fragility of pitchers in general. This deal proves since Saito went on the DL.

Lastly, I don't think the trade deadline should be moved up. A committee might be ok, I'm not sure. One remedy I would propose is maybe a player cap. No more 16 player blockbusters. The size of my deal is more than half the size of the Stones/Dozer deals so any injury has a more than double effect of any injury the winning side of their deals have. Maybe making an NBA-like salary matching thing could work too.

Well, the kids are ready so I have to jump in the shower. Gotta go

[Copperfields]

Jul 27, 2008 15:34:49 GMT -5 stones said:

I will hang in there until the end of this season. I am not prepared to make any longer term commitments at this time.

Steve,
I'm very glad to read this. A commitment through the end of the season is all anyone could expect at this point ... from anyone. It appears we have much discussing to do, then once the smoke clears and we (hopefully) come to some resolution on handling or not handling dump trades I imagine everyone will have some deciding to do about their future.

I realize that you've got some additional issues to consider in terms of how you feel you've been treated, but hopefully that can be patched up and overcome.

David

[Nick's Picts (archived)]

Coming out from underneath what seems to be the annual May - August dumping ground that seems my lot in life, seeing this post this late in the day is eye-opening. All of that to say two things: (1) this is probably my last season in the CFCL. Life changes have made it too difficult to find the time it takes to properly manage a team in this league. I almost left two seasons ago but continued on hoping things would change. They haven't. (2) I've not been responsive to various trade inquiries because of (1) and I'm still a bit snake-bitten from my own role in deciding a championship a few years back. I do not want to play king maker. I also think that by not acting one way or the other I'll be leaving my replacement with enough toys to decide for him/her self which strategy to pursue going forward.

That aside, I don't want to make this thread about me. I do, on the other hand, want to fulfill some semblance of my duties as an EC person by laying out my observations and fill my time while I wait for this interminable visual studio sp1 install to finish. I also want to state that I'll do a much better job of roster management from here on out this year.

First, as mea culpas seem to be raining down, I need to make clear that I have at least two regrettable trades in my short CFCL career. The first being a dump trade in April that ultimately stemmed from the hangover that accompanies price enforcing the most fragile NL player in the early aughties--Ken Griffey, Jr. Not wanting him in the first place certainly soured my attitude when he DL'ed himself in a season-ending way before the threat of frost on Wrigley ivy entirely disappeared. I think I hold the record for earliest punt unless you include the Headless Horsemen in this category.

Continuing on, if you watch Trading the Gator with even half an eye for detail, you'll notice there's a heavy undercurrent of disdain for a particular owner who changed the face of a race via dumping that various members no longer with us were adversely affected by. The object of their disdain: me.

In the same vein there was the year I traded a very horse-like Curt Schilling, a pre-meltdown Shawn Green, and other useful pieces for what another owner no longer with us termed "a hand full of magic beans." While it was quite possible that the beneficiary of my lust for a certain 3B prospect in the Astro's system would have won that year anyway, it completely crippled the hopes of a long-time owner who had just sold his future for the current year not but a few days earlier.

All these trades seemed justifiable to me at the time. I certainly defended them with a great deal of verve. OTOH, none of them paid off particularly well. There is a lot of regret looking back. The last trade mentioned ruined what was likely a money finish for me that year, I was just so focused on winning outright that I lost sight of the better interests of the league and my obligation in that regard. Not to mention, the one salvageable year power-ranking-wise was turned into another season on the dreck heap that is my CFCL career.

Getting on then with my useful observations. In my brief interval here I've noticed that the eventual champion is always the owner who positioned themselves well coming out of the draft and then made one lopsided or maybe a couple shrewd trades and FAAB pickups that put them over the top. I don't recall there ever being a case where someone came out of the draft and dominated the season on that roster. I really only recall one instance of shrewd trade + FAAB pickup, a move showing great stones if you catch my drift. Every other season has come down to which teams make the blockbuster trade at the deadline. The catch is having enough front-line talent to put yourself in a position to contend and enough spare parts to swing a blockbuster at the deadline. This is a trick I've never mastered.

I used to be a pretty free swinger with trades, always trying to amass enough cheap players to cash in at the draft and still have enough left over to dangle as trade bait. After a few years of this and the accompanying undercurrent of disapproval I've stopped (more or less) with the dump trades. My issue is that there isn't much in the way of precedent for non-dump trades in this league. My perception is that unless you're willing to play the part of "Next Year" to someone else's "This Year" you're not going anywhere. Because unclaimed talent is hard to find in this league, owners are extremely cautious when it comes to talent for talent trades. If you blow it, the repercussions can be felt for seasons because the margins are so small. Again, all of this is my perception. I don't have the memory for me to state any of this strongly or inclination to do actual research right now. I know that the past few seasons I've tried making sensible trades for my B contracts but the expectation (borne out by the market) is that headlining B contract players can be had 1:1 for a ML player with good press.

Maundering on in this stream of consciousness post, I'd hate to see an oversight committee put in place. That is an engraved invitation for hard feelings IMO. If the league wants to go that route, best to make it a committee of the whole and let owners vote anonymously on trades. Since the salary cap hasn't seemed to curb the dumping I don't see how the idea can be further massaged to address everyone's legitimate concerns and still be an effect anti-dumping measure. I also think that valuation-based trade restrictions are too arbitrary in that valuation is at least partly subjective. As imperfect as it is, I don't see any better way forward than what currently exists. Perhaps, and I think this is sort of the point of my previous paragraphs, the league needs to collectively realize that winning the CFCL isn't solely (or even significantly) about who does the best scouting or who wins the draft but about who can run a roster over the course of the season.

Maybe the way forward is to figure out a way to emphasize season-over-season success over winning a given year. Incorporate owner power-rankings into how the pot is divided at year's end? Let the reigning power ranking holder wear a title belt a la WWF on draft day? I don't know. What I do know is that the current system emphasizes who sits on top of the standings at the end of a given season. I hate "let the market decide" rhetorical punting, but there is some truth to it. The reward for winning a given season so far outweighs any other consideration. Why is it so surprising that this guides an individual owner's actions in any actual situation where other questions come in to play? The rationalization is too easy and the counterweight too nebulous.

In my opinion.

[stones]

OK, I think I am ready to give this a try once again. But, I know I can’t do it without a little divine intervention and sage like wisdom. Therefore, I am calling on advice from my new life coach, Frank Costanza, for guidence. Yes, that Frank Costanza. Frank, in his commonsense approach to life, once said...well I'll let his words speak for themselves:

Frank Costanza (yelling): Serenity now! Serenity now!

George Costanza: What is that?

Frank: The doctor gave me a relaxation cassette. When my blood pressure gets too high, the man on the tape tells me to say “serenity now!"

George: Are you supposed to yell it?

Frank Costanza: The man on the tape wasn't specific.

So, Serenity Now!

I read Rich’s Monroe Doctrine from today and actually chuckled. All I will add is, I wish, and then leave it at that!

Rich, thank you once again for the unnecessary apology, which I reluctantly accept! I say reluctantly, not because I am owed one, but because if I accept it, maybe you will stop offering it! I have tried, apparently unsuccessfully, to write that your comments were not the sole cause of my reaction. Did I react to them, of course I did; but not in a fit of rage that I think my simple short and to the point follow-up post may have conveyed. Timing is everything! It always is. What you might not know is that I had just posted a lengthy response to some of the previous comments made by you and others regarding the trade(s) in question, mostly in effort to correct the many incorrect and sometimes offensive conclusions and comments, including those made by Mr. Unanimous. I mean Mr. Magnanimous. Or, was it Mr. Anonymous? In any case, he’s been a real bug up my booty for a long time!

However, I digress!

Once I read your splenectomy, I decided that given the amount of spewing in the post and the previous posts you had written, as well as the posts and comments of others, there really wasn’t much point in attempting to reason with such closed minds. Kenn and I were going to be wrong no matter what our response or justification of the trade(s). We were guilty, plain and simple, and therefore, we were likely to be the subjects of further spleen letting. “You smelly varmints sure look like horse thieves, whether ya ever stole a horse or not, so we’re gonna have ourselves an old fashion hang’n tonight. Ye Haw!” It felt a lot like what it must’ve been like to be an innocent man attempting to convince Judge Roy Bean that he had the wrong guy (to carry on the Wild West connotation of an earlier poster).

Until tonight, I wasn’t convinced that minds had opened (including my own) enough to facilitate a fruitful discussion toward resolution of the many issues at play. Nor did it seem likely that would change anytime soon. However, after reading Nick’s comments, and those of a few of the more recent posts, maybe there is reason to hope!

As an important aside, I am sorry to hear, Nick, that you're thinking of dropping out! I hope you, too, will reconsider! You're a good man and life can be tough at times. But good things happen to good people and I am certain your fortunes are soon to change for the better!

Any who, it is with renewed hope that I will try to make some sense. Someone please grant me Serenity Now! Hey big Frank, I am talking to you.

Now, back to the point, sort of! I could spend the next hour typing various justifications for my trades with Kenn. However, to use the words of another sage-like cultural icon, Brett Favre, who not so very long ago said, “I could play, but I just don’t think want to”. I could try, but I just don’t think want to! And, we see where a change of heart has gotten Favre! By the way, for those of you who are all baseball all the time, Brett Favre is a former (I think) professional football player in the National Football League!

I can certainly understand how people found this trade unsettling, and when lumped with last year’s trade, how they might conclude Kenn and I have some untoward pact or pre-arranged “buddy” agreement. However, neither is correct and, in fact, far from it. The sheer number of emails Kenn and I exchanged over the first four months of the season would more than support this statement. Add to that the number of inquires I placed on other "Big Thumper 1B", including Teixeira, Helton and Nick Johnson (thank goodness for the trades you don't make sometimes) would also support this.

I will say I did enjoy one overly optimistic owner’s recent post stating emphatically that his trade was “nothing like” mine. Color me convinced by his objective analysis! And, I further enjoyed the part about him having the goods to offer more than me if he had been given the chance, though he wouldn't have made that trade because of some potential clash of conscience! Outrage is a funny thing! In addition, it was an interesting choice word to describe the outrage he felt...ludicrous. I think I have seen this word used to describe these trades before! I think it was someone who remains anonymous to this very day!

However, I digress, yet again.

Now that I have vented, just a little, I am prepared to move forward and focus on the “how to fix this” question. However, that will need to wait until tomorrow, the next day, or the next!

Now I need to weep!

Have I mentioned how much I hate the Brewers?

Serenity Now! SERENITY NOW! Frank wasn’t to clear on that yelling point, either!

[Nick's Picts (archived)]

Jul 31, 2008 0:22:22 GMT -5 stones said:

Have I mentioned how much I hate the Brewers?

That's okay, Steve. We hate the Brewers too.

;D

[davidsruffins (archived)]

That's okay, Steve. We hate the Brewers too.

Wow, 9-1. Fuku just went deep. I told Heather that if the Cubs got a split in this series, I'd run down the street singing "Go Cubs Go" at the top of my voice. I would have been happy to do it despite the fact that it's such a godawful song. Luckily, I made no similar promises for a clean sweep, which I guess would have been worth running naked down the street, or maybe overturning and setting the neighbor's car on fire. Color me surprised.

So, is that other Chicago team planning on trotting Junior out to center? Hmmmm. Why not completely throw caution to the wind and acquire and throw Adam Dunn out there? Big uptick in offense, and only a slight hit to the defense vis a vis the ghost of Junior's glove circa 1997. Plus we'd have the fun of seeing Quentin and Dye nervously checking Dunn's location on all gappers, lest they lose track of him and get killed. I'd recommend they put a bell around his neck.

[Demreb]

Correction Nick.

I think there are a number of us that LOVE the Brewers!

[stones]

Of all the potential comments I made in my recent post, all you knobs jump on the one at the end!

You'll get yours. It may not be from mine, but you'll get yours!

Talk to me in Septmeber! @#**%(#^(@())_!_+_*$_*@)^(O(weeds!

I'll be the one wearing a Blue and Organge Favre jersey! *%^&@(&^$(*&^@^$()&*A

What a poopy day to be a Wisconsin Sports fan!

[stones]

As Rich noted I did bid my entire remaining FAAB budget on Manny. I did struggle with this decision, in that if I leave, I have likely screwed someone who takes my team next year. I also decided that if I am truly trying to effectively manage a team then I would have made this very move. And if I stay, which I am hoping will be the case at this point, then I will take the burden and pray he goes back to the AL.

Any way, after thinking a little more and finally having a reliable internet provider, I like the idea of having a trade committee of the whole. I think that if a trade is considered over the top, and outside the bounds of the integrity clause, then any owner should come out in the open and ask for a league wide vote. I would suggest that a super majority of teams needs to vote against it to over turn it. That Super majority number could be more than half of the non-involved owners. So in the case of Kenn and me, the remaining 10 owners would need to get 6 votes to over turn it.

I would also suggest that the trade has to be voted upon within 24 to 48 hours after it is posted. This time allows each owner to heck in post their feeling and reasons why it should not be allowed but still allows for the trade to have fairly quick benefit to each owner.

We all value players differently. I happen to think there is only one way to build a team and that is through quality prospects, coupled with an effective Auction.

Just some quick thoughts.

And by the way did anyone else notice the fricking Brewers scored 9 runs tonight beating the Braves 9-0! WTF! Where was that for the last 5 game slide? But then again, that would've have only tied yesterday's game. Gosh did the Brewers get thier butts handed to them. Maybe it is the Scrubs year!

[Demreb]

We seem to have lost a little steam on this post, which may not be a bad thing.

There seems to be a common theme among the owners involved in the trades in question. A few (or all, I haven't taken time to go back through each post) have specifically said that their trade improved their team.

That wasn't the complaint by the owners voicing their concerns over the trades. I don't think any of us said that any of the teams that "dumped" didn't pick up useful and good players that should help their future. It was the decidedly (maybe perceived) lopsided amount of talent that switched sides that was called into question.

My concern in both the Stones/Line and Bulls/Clowns trade is that the players received by the Line and Clowns could have been had for less talent than they gave up. Clearly that's my opinion, but it seems like it's shared (in some part) by other owners in the league.

Also, the thought I had when reading that the owners in the trades said they improved their teams is "I would hope so. Why make the trade if you're not going to improve your team?" So the Team Improvement comment/angle wasn't solving the issue and seemed to be justifying something that wasn't called into question.

So let's work on the solution. Some of the following options have been discussed, but there are others that have been floated in conversations that haven't been posted. Feel free to voice opinions on the following (or the above part of the post for that matter if you disagree with anything I've written).

Possible Solutions:

1) Do nothing - this is a blip on the radar and the issue will resolve itself.

2) Move up the trade deadline to something like May 15th - that will give teams time to identify weaknesses by should be early enough in the year that no one will feel out of the race.

3) Prohibit in season trading - no trading means no dumping.

4) Establish a Trade Committee - an objective panel could look at trades in a fair light.

5) Reduce the in season salary cap - with less cap room, taking on large salaries (usually occuring in "dump" trades) would prove to be less effective.

There may be other options or variations on the above five.

[MGrage]

Well, now that Steve's greatest fear has been avoided and Favre will be wearing a different shade of Green this year, I guess I can add two more cents worth. BTW, the reason why the Brewers waited until the Atlanta series to score 9 runs is that Marquis didn't pitch and we have much better pitching than the Braves ....

Firstly, I'm also sorry to see the Picts head off into the sunset. You've always been alot of fun at the Draft and you'll be missed. Plus who will I run to for Firefox help? I'm still avoiding 3.0 for the foreseeable future ... But seriously, I've also made a trade that I regret. The one that Dave obliquely refers to in my latest deal with the Hots. I've also made other bad deals as well, but I don't beat myself up about them because hindsight is 20/20 and at the time, they all looked like good deals. Personally, I feel that my most lopsided trade this year was my deal with the Ruffins. I'm sure Dave will agree that he'd much rather have Reynolds than Hill. That's a trade that looked perfectly fair when it was made, but Dave still ended up with a handful of magic beans.

OK, back on point. I think a reduction in the salary cap would go a long way to eliminating any further outlandish deals. That would probably be the most painless way and one that wouldn't engender harsh feelings if a trade is overturned. BTW, stop picking on May 15th. It's my favorite day of the year, being my birthday and all. The next best option, to me, would be to do nothing.

I share Nick's feelings in that I don't want to play king maker ever again. It's why I couldn't do anything close to Steve & Kenny's trades the last two years. Just because you can do something, it doesn't mean you should do it. Can you even argue, Steve, that that one deal cast a pall on the trade market this year? I've never seen a year like this one where only 2 trade deadline deals were made.

Anyways, Steve's sarcasm aside, my deal with the Clowns is completely different from yours Steve. Whereas yours guaranteed points in all 10 categories, mine was limited to 4 (I was going nowhere in QS with Matt stubbornly ahead of me). Your "one stop shopping spree" trade instantly netted you a dozen points in a week and mine has been a one or two point dribble. The sheer size of your trade made you immune to any injury concerns. My deal was crippled by just one. I'm still in last place in Hd+Sv so, to me, that trade was a bust. You didn't have to make another trade to solidify your chances afterwards. I was still out there busting my booty to try to pick up more Hd+Sv and steals. All your needs were filled and I still had more work to do. So in essence, your deals are the height of laziness. Why try to deal with 3-4 owners when you can have all your dreams come true with your fellow king maker Kenny?

Well, I've rambled on long enough. This has been by far the most trying season yet for me. The trouble I caused previously didn't happen until the offseason. I've been fighting injuries all year long but I was still hanging around primed for a run at the top when your deal KO'ed me like a suckerpunch. And Rich's glee about Saito's injury still stings. Thankfully, training camps have opened so now I can shift most of my attention to football and going to Cubs games. There's little left to do in the CFCL so take care guys and see you at the banquet. Mahalo

Matt

PS. I'm looking forward to the Brewers next dugout brawl too.