Beernoser's Daily Auction Forum Topic

Beernoser
Posts: 4631 (0)
Hall of Famer
181 53
Rookie
The trade would be Cabrera and $ 50 to the other owner for something.

The other owner would be responsible for his salary.
10/26/2012 10:59 AM
jrnyfan01
Posts: 1836 (0)
Hall of Famer
217 48 8 4 93 26 133
Prospect
Posted by Beernoser on 10/26/2012 10:59:00 AM (view original):
The trade would be Cabrera and $ 50 to the other owner for something.

The other owner would be responsible for his salary.
Or, it could be Cabrera and $50 for nothing, correct?
10/26/2012 11:57 AM
grayfoxx
Posts: 6279 (1)
Hall of Famer
248 61 83
Prospect
We can pass money from one owner to another owner??

Thus I get Cabrera(for his salary) and I get to add $50 to my cap - making my cap $1050 and his cap $950?????????
10/26/2012 12:10 PM
DodgerDon
Posts: 21039 (8)
Hall of Famer
531 166 84 37 56 1
Pro
I thought we had a hard cap of $1000. You can't be $ $1050.
10/26/2012 12:24 PM
toddleduc
Posts: 8434 (0)
Hall of Famer
588 4
Rookie
Posted by Beernoser on 10/26/2012 10:19:00 AM (view original):
His auction price remains his salary whether traded or not.
I'm trying to deal Darvish who I paid $163 for to free up some cash-
Coudn't I trade him to someone for $119 and just eat the $44 on my end of my team's 2012 salary cap?
If that owner wanted to re-sign him next year I understand that it would be at the $163 + raise rate or he could let him become a Free Agent.

I know you're travelling today- but If we could get a ruling on this soon- it would help both of us out.
If I'm stuck, I'm stuck & I'll just try to cobble together an offense.
Thanks again, Beernoser & have a good weekend all !

-todd

10/26/2012 12:40 PM
parking31
Posts: 1262 (0)
Hall of Famer
357 19 1
Prospect
my 2 cents is that the cap has to be a hard cap, otherwise down-the-road (I know it wasn't your intent here) you're going to have owners working together to build one guys team for one future season, and the second owners team for a separate season.   I think part of the fun of this league -  is that you may have to trade a better player for a worse player because of that hit on your cap - just like the currently do in the NBA.  To just add to one guy's cap space would defeat the whole purpose of the league.
10/26/2012 3:04 PM
Ox
Posts: 1169 (0)
Hall of Famer
89 3 3
Prospect
Posted by toddleduc on 10/26/2012 12:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Beernoser on 10/26/2012 10:19:00 AM (view original):
His auction price remains his salary whether traded or not.
I'm trying to deal Darvish who I paid $163 for to free up some cash-
Coudn't I trade him to someone for $119 and just eat the $44 on my end of my team's 2012 salary cap?
If that owner wanted to re-sign him next year I understand that it would be at the $163 + raise rate or he could let him become a Free Agent.

I know you're travelling today- but If we could get a ruling on this soon- it would help both of us out.
If I'm stuck, I'm stuck & I'll just try to cobble together an offense.
Thanks again, Beernoser & have a good weekend all !

-todd

I would think you could trade Darvish and $44, so his salary for the year is effectively $119
10/26/2012 6:33 PM
rejay
Posts: 1103 (0)
Hall of Famer
57 4 56
Rookie
Posted by DodgerDon on 10/26/2012 12:24:00 PM (view original):
I thought we had a hard cap of $1000. You can't be $ $1050.
Yea, if we have a hard cap, you can't trade a player and eat some of his salary. Cabrera went for $250, trade him it's $250 on the salary of his new team.
10/26/2012 7:37 PM
benfc
Posts: 2271 (0)
Hall of Famer
341 1 2 21 8
Prospect

I agree with rejay.  The cap should remain hard and trades and/or compensation must be made for equal amounts.
Here is my take on a sample transaction -
Team 1 could  trade Player A with a salary of $100 to Team 2 for a player worth $100 or for a player worth $50 and $50 cash.
Likewise Team 1 could trade a player worth $200 + $50 cash to Team 2 for players worth $250 and/or players + cash equal to $250.  
Everything is done within the $1000 cap and no one gains a financial advantage with the trade.
Does this make sense?

10/26/2012 8:03 PM
rejay
Posts: 1103 (0)
Hall of Famer
57 4 56
Rookie
Posted by benfc on 10/26/2012 8:03:00 PM (view original):

I agree with rejay.  The cap should remain hard and trades and/or compensation must be made for equal amounts.
Here is my take on a sample transaction -
Team 1 could  trade Player A with a salary of $100 to Team 2 for a player worth $100 or for a player worth $50 and $50 cash.
Likewise Team 1 could trade a player worth $200 + $50 cash to Team 2 for players worth $250 and/or players + cash equal to $250.  
Everything is done within the $1000 cap and no one gains a financial advantage with the trade.
Does this make sense?

Makes sense to me.

10/26/2012 8:17 PM
Oli35
Posts: 679 (0)
Hall of Famer
353 26 35 9 35
Prospect
I don't believe there should be any trading permitted until the conclusion of the draft. Everyone starts out with $1000. You build your team within your budget and afterwards trade to your heart's content.
10/26/2012 8:40 PM
grayfoxx
Posts: 6279 (1)
Hall of Famer
248 61 83
Prospect
** trades and/or compensation must be made for equal amounts. **

Not neccessarily - team A can trade a $200 player to team B for a $50 player as long as both teams will still be under $1000.
10/26/2012 8:48 PM
jrnyfan01
Posts: 1836 (0)
Hall of Famer
217 48 8 4 93 26 133
Prospect
Posted by Oli35 on 10/26/2012 8:40:00 PM (view original):
I don't believe there should be any trading permitted until the conclusion of the draft. Everyone starts out with $1000. You build your team within your budget and afterwards trade to your heart's content.
This would, in effect, unintentionally harm an owner who bid $100+ on pitcher A and $100+ on pitcher B, expecting to maybe get one... but gets both through no fault of their own (except for the fact that they showed up in the auction on the same day). They should have the ability to trade one of these two big arms, yes?

I am trying not to over-extend myself this way, but I can have pity for those who did not anticipate winning both due to circumstance.

JRNY
10/27/2012 1:29 AM
toddleduc
Posts: 8434 (0)
Hall of Famer
588 4
Rookie
Agreed.  I agree without a doubt that a team only has $1,000 to spend.
But if a team wants to trade a player & eat some of him contract, that should be allowed within the rules like real life.

If A-Rod were to be traded to Miami for example, the Yankees would eat say $20 mil of his salary.
If I want to trade Darvish to someone who wants him for say $119- I agree to eat the $44 of the difference.

Long term deals- same thing.  If Darvish say was owed $175 for 5 years & I had to eat $64 a season for 5 years from my $1000-
that would still be better than not having any cash for bats. *And with excell- it's pretty easy to keep track of our $1,000.
10/27/2012 2:15 AM
Beernoser
Posts: 4631 (0)
Hall of Famer
181 53
Rookie
I just got in and will start working on postings, Will probably take about an hour.

I won't be able to catch up on trade talk until tomorrow.
10/27/2012 2:20 AM
◂ Prev 1...3|4|5|6|7...19 Next ▸
Beernoser's Daily Auction Forum Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.