"Eating a contract" Topic

jtrinsey
Posts: 237 (0)
All Star
1 4 2 30
Rookie
philo,

With regards to your incredibly long-winded example, it would depend on how you went about proposing the deal. I have no problem with wanting to dump salary (although "dumping" an MVP-caliber player is baffling to me), but if so, it needs to be posted clearly in the World Chat and can't be rushed. If I see a trade went down sending an MVP-caliber 3B being dealt for 2 bench players I would veto that in a heartbeat and freak out in the WC. If you posted in the World Chat that you were looking to move that guy and, after 3 days, that was the best deal you could get, then I wouldn't veto.

But in any reasonable league, that would not be the best you could get.

It's funny, because I was part of a very similar trade in Happy Jack. I acquired a guy who was a former MVP-caliber 3B on the 4th year of a 5 @ 20M/per deal. He's still very good (~.900 OPS with good but not outstanding 3B defensive ratings), but not quite the MVP-quality player he once was. He's also in decline and next year his once excellent range will be in the low 60s and his once-93 power will probably be in the mid-70s. The owner posted the guy in World Chat for a while and the deal that got hammered out sent a solid ML starter (LF with 72/66 range/glove and career .810 OPS) who was in his first arb year and a prospect who will be good defensive 2B (borderline CF) with a somewhat weak bat. I would call the first guy a definite ML starter and the second a borderline starter or bench guy.

Your trade is not totally ridiculous, but should get vetoed if it came out of nowhere. It would probably (and should, IMO) pass if you posted him in the World Chat for a couple of days and that was the best offer you get.
10/25/2010 4:07 PM
deathinahole
Posts: 4139 (0)
Hall of Famer
76 2 1 42 1 75
Prospect
Hell, the low stam relief pitcher you got from me earlier this season was a mild version of this.
10/25/2010 4:17 PM
jtrinsey
Posts: 237 (0)
All Star
1 4 2 30
Rookie
Yeah. And he has a 6.5 ERA this year. Bastard.
10/25/2010 4:52 PM
deathinahole
Posts: 4139 (0)
Hall of Famer
76 2 1 42 1 75
Prospect
Yea, that's a damn shame.
10/25/2010 4:54 PM
philogenemay
Posts: 475 (0)
All Star
24 10
Prospect
Posted by jtrinsey on 10/25/2010 4:07:00 PM (view original):
philo,

With regards to your incredibly long-winded example, it would depend on how you went about proposing the deal. I have no problem with wanting to dump salary (although "dumping" an MVP-caliber player is baffling to me), but if so, it needs to be posted clearly in the World Chat and can't be rushed. If I see a trade went down sending an MVP-caliber 3B being dealt for 2 bench players I would veto that in a heartbeat and freak out in the WC. If you posted in the World Chat that you were looking to move that guy and, after 3 days, that was the best deal you could get, then I wouldn't veto.

But in any reasonable league, that would not be the best you could get.

It's funny, because I was part of a very similar trade in Happy Jack. I acquired a guy who was a former MVP-caliber 3B on the 4th year of a 5 @ 20M/per deal. He's still very good (~.900 OPS with good but not outstanding 3B defensive ratings), but not quite the MVP-quality player he once was. He's also in decline and next year his once excellent range will be in the low 60s and his once-93 power will probably be in the mid-70s. The owner posted the guy in World Chat for a while and the deal that got hammered out sent a solid ML starter (LF with 72/66 range/glove and career .810 OPS) who was in his first arb year and a prospect who will be good defensive 2B (borderline CF) with a somewhat weak bat. I would call the first guy a definite ML starter and the second a borderline starter or bench guy.

Your trade is not totally ridiculous, but should get vetoed if it came out of nowhere. It would probably (and should, IMO) pass if you posted him in the World Chat for a couple of days and that was the best offer you get.
But I don't want better players with contracts. I want those two role players, because that's what my team needs I want to bting them up NEXT season, so that ALL 10M left can be transfrered to prospects and I can land the IFA SP.

So I understand that I COULD get "more" but the best thing for MY TEAM is to get the two role players.

My question is not "would you veto or not?" My question is "What harm have I done to the world with that trade if I think it is the best deal for my particular situation?"
10/25/2010 5:35 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/23/2010 1:22:00 PM (view original):
You don't play in a vacuum.  Your deal, from a strong team to a middle of the road team, is between two of thirty two teams.  Those thirty teams get to decide if they like your deal.

Here

10/25/2010 5:55 PM
greeny9
Posts: 1444 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 37 11
Prospect
As has already been said a stud 3B is never worth just 2 role players when you can get those exact same role players in FA for less then a mill each.  Heck, you should be able to promote somebody up from AA or AAA that is good enough to fill those roles.  Another option is trading a low end prospect for a BL ready role player like that too.  If your circumstances make you NEED to trade away a stud 3B like that you should always be looking to get an equal talent SINGLE prospect to replace him.  3 for 1s are generally almost never a good thing, 2 for 1s maybe but only if the 2 you are getting are clearly better then anything you currently have in your organization.  Simply clearing capspace for the sake of clearing capspace isnt good.
10/25/2010 6:02 PM
philogenemay
Posts: 475 (0)
All Star
24 10
Prospect
So then the answer is "no harm done to the world, but still no one will like it and it will get vetoed."
10/25/2010 6:07 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
No, the answer is "You are trading a stud to another team for very little.  The team getting the stud will be better for essentially nothing."   Is this good for the world?  Most people are going to say "No."
10/25/2010 6:14 PM
philogenemay
Posts: 475 (0)
All Star
24 10
Prospect

The best answer I've heard yet and a legitimate concern.

 

10/25/2010 6:38 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
At least I now know that you understand, although you may not agree, what can present a problem.    IIRC, you said you were a top team and the team you were dealing with was middling team.   Which, to you, makes your deal acceptable.   However, reverse the deal, good team getting better, bad team getting worse and getting very little in return.   Now it becomes a competition issue. 

As I said before, a deal that works one way must work the other way.   For everyone, everytime.   Otherwise your world will be inconsistent with their approval/veto policy.  And, also I said before, that is trouble.
10/25/2010 6:56 PM
shobob
Posts: 3403 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 370
Prospect
Well put, Mike
10/25/2010 7:51 PM
tropicana
Posts: 980 (0)
Hall of Famer
184 13 588 202 293
Prospect
Also, philo, the example you presented is a little different -- the mega -player you were talking about had a year left on his contract, and this player that you actually dealt did not.
10/25/2010 10:02 PM
isack24
Posts: 1566 (0)
Hall of Famer
81 19
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/25/2010 5:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/23/2010 1:22:00 PM (view original):
You don't play in a vacuum.  Your deal, from a strong team to a middle of the road team, is between two of thirty two teams.  Those thirty teams get to decide if they like your deal.

Here

I understand your concern about this trade.

But using the above statement as some sort of standard for vetoing is ridiculous.

I don't like any trade that helps any team get better.  But I'm not going to veto because it helps other teams.
10/26/2010 11:10 AM
sergei91
Posts: 5950 (0)
Hall of Famer
13 2 2 275 115
Prospect
people can veto for any reason they feel like. if a proposed trade gets 10 vetoes, there must be something going on to make that many people veto.
10/26/2010 11:26 AM
◂ Prev 1...3|4|5|6|7...13 Next ▸
"Eating a contract" Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.