To me, the answer is no.  He stayed 5 seasons...and even though the team looks to be weaker, I think he doesn't deserve the WoS.  It would have been nice if more notice had been given and he hadn't traded away his draft choices, but it was his team.  About a month ago, I informed a commish that wouldn't be back at the 120 game mark.  I felt bad about waiting that long to give him my notice...but that should be plenty of time.

If this person has a spotty reputation or has been to do this in the past, I might be inclined to change my mind...but just by the info given, I say no to the WoS.

My answer (as the opposing World Series manager) is yes.  You don't leave behind a crappy situation for someone else.  A crappy roster, ok.  But trading away 1st and 2nd round picks and any future roster.  That's pretty low.

the only thing that smells is trading away picks, then bailing-otherwise, he just had some other stuff to deal with-some people have a hard time coming up with the scratch for multiple teams, and as commish, his first responsibility is to the league he runs

But his excuse is he had to "pony up" for that abandoned team in his other league --which to me implies it's a money issue.  But he hasn't lost money in his 5 years with the team he's bailing on -- in fact, he'll be up a few bucks if he wins his WS this week.

If it's not money and simply a case of he doesn't have time to manage this team with his extra responsibilities in his own league, then I think he should hand the commish a free team to lure a new owner with.  He got 5 great seasons out of this team -- now he's leaving right when the team's going downhill AND without its first 2 picks in the next draft?

In any event, he's responded to my posts in our league forum and said he'll come back if he wins the World Series -- and not if he doesn't.  I don't know what to make of that, but for now I won't post his name.

I don't see how you can complain about a guy staying 5 years & managing the team well. I imagine he said he'd stay if the team wins the WS because that gives a free team.

I feel pretty confident in stating that most commissioners would be happy if every person who took over a team stayed for five years and did a good job running it. I certainly would be.

Yeah, he inherited a good team, did a good running it for 5 years --in fact mortgaged the future to make those 5 years even better -- and now he's leaving the team in bad shape for the next owner.  Who will probably not be a new owner, but someone in the league who will take on a second team.  Sorry, I don't see that as a great deal for our league. 

In the same league, I had a 7 year playoff run that ended this season -- I won 40 something games this season.  I knew going in we'd be terrible.  I could have left that mess for someone else, but I'd have felt like a douchebag.  But now you're saying I could have left and felt good that I ran the team well for 7 seasons?

Compare that to the owner I am trying to replace right now:

A) He NEVER made picks on time,
B) He was ALWAYS the last to get his keeper list in,
C) He was ALWAYS the last to enter his team
D) I had to buy him a team one time just to get him to enter the league (I'll never be reimbursed for that one),
E) He didn't even log on for about 6+ weeks of last season,
F) He left when the team had ~ 600 IP every year into the future, and was down to one or zero SP within two years.
G) He had something like 4 3B and zero catchers, DH, 1B, and half an OF when he left
H) He "left" by simply disappearing for the nth time, in the middle of a draft.

etc etc

Even with that crappy run, however, I do not think his name deserves to be mentioned here. Why? I don't think he was malicious during his terribly negligent run as an owner. He was very enthusiastic about the league, but for whatever reason, was profoundly irresponsible regarding his duties as a progressive league owner.

Compare that to a guy who plays well for 5 years... which one would you rather have?

Well, I guess my guy -- but in the same way I'd rather have Rosie O'Donnell over Madeleine Albright!

Posted by crazystengel on 2/9/2011 4:17:00 PM (view original):
How about this one: Wall of Shame or not?  I'll hold off on the name of the owner until the votes are cast.

Anyway, owner joins a prog in progress, taking over a powerhouse team.  Over 5 seasons he wins over 500 games, accumulating a .625 winning percentage and winning a World Series.  During the playoffs of the 5th season he posts this in the league's message forum:

I just sent a s/mail to [redacted: commish's name], that I will not be returning to defend the AL West pennant again. Had an owner quit in rd 15 of my new league and no replacement has been found. Translation, I have to pony up for a 2nd team.

That's it, no further explanation.  With his 5 playoff appearances in 5 seasons, including a possible 2nd WS coming up this week (his team's in the finals), he's basically played for free in this league.  Yet he's using the excuse of someone leaving a league that he commishes to say he can no longer play in this prog.

And oh yeah, he traded his #1 and 2 picks in the upcoming draft to strengthen his lineup for this, his final season.

His team had a salary of 99M this season (most in the league).  His 19 keepers (which he posted before he left) come to 61M. 

Wall of Shame?

I would have kicked him out just for using the word "pennant" incorrectly.  

Seriously, leaving a team in bad shape and no 1st  round pick is not cool.  However, I think this whole Wall of Shame thing is silly so I wouldn't post his name ;)

the only thing I see wrong about it is the draft picks.  You don'y leave a team after trading away the picks.  No owner wants to take on a rebuilding project without the pieces to rebuild. 

ink, isn't the point of a Wall of Shame more to avoid letting these people into future progs than to truly shame them?  This guy took a great franchise and completely mortgaged their future and is now quitting right as they're getting bad.  In my book, if you deal away a team's draft picks for immediate help, then leave, you are a bad owner. 

I guess all I'm trying to say is that I think you should take people at their word until it is impossible to no longer do so.

The owner in question gave a reason for their departure--money concerns. I don't even think it's necessary to give a reason for leaving, but at least the owner did that. He also offered to stay another year if the team won the WS, presumably in response to raised eyebrows.

Suppose that he had started his other draft one season earlier, and had an owner quit, or that the team he is leaving is good for one more season. If he quit due to the same reason (money concerns) in either of those scenarios, I strongly doubt that any eyebrows would have been raised, or that the situation would have been posted here. I think he should be believed, and see it as an unfortunate occurence, rather than an owner being an *******.

Like it or not, prog teams go in cycles--they are good for awhile, and then they suck for awhile. Trading picks for talent is common, and often necessary when trying to win. I just replaced an owner who had traded his next 1st rounder away when he left... his reason for leaving was diminishing interest, which I fully believe. He did a great job during his seven years, and overlooking that for the simple fact that he left when the next 1st-rounder had been traded is foolish, in my opinion. I did not have much difficulty replacing that owner, even though the team in question is not particularly good in upcoming seasons.

I think this situation would be worse if the guy just said, "I quit," and nothing else. However, I strongly feel that he should be believed, and given the benefit of the doubt. Five seasons is a pretty long time--that's what, a calendar year, more or less? Discounting that because he has traded a couple of picks is dumb, in my personal opinion. It's not like the team is an unusual position--it needs to be rebuilt. Rebuilding does take a while, but it's something every team must do.

Is it a great situation? No, obviously not. However, I don't think you should completely discount what he did do--manage a team well for like a year or so. Compare that to the plethora of idiotic owners one encounters in progressive leagues... there are much worse things an owner can do.

Posted by rooskie on 11/17/2010 3:19:00 PM (view original):
ronblood recently did it in XYZ and will go on the beware and forewarned board. He was always late posting keepers and finally didn't even reply to sheller and vanished.

meh. ronblood did me right, he gave plenty of notice before he left, and his team was way over .500

cain a guy have some fun, move from league to league, like going through girlfriends

You should not move from prog to prog.  If you join a prog, you join it through 2011 (and beyond)