Cash in trades - Do worlds discourage it? Topic

oriolemagic
Posts: 253 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 10 93 95
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2009That is straight from the "It's my team, I should be able to do what I want with it!" handbook.What is good for 1-2 teams isn't necessarily good for the league.

Still trying to understand this... how is that not good for the league? You did give up something of value. How is it any different then trading a solid 35 year old pitcher to a contending team and getting a 19 year old who projects to be a solid pitcher?

All I am saying is that you are trading away something of value to another team (player) and getting something of value to you (cash). As long as you USE the cash then I would say there is nothing wrong with the trade. Can someone explain to me how this is not good for the league? I am just trying to understand why so many people are against this type of trade.
6/13/2009 12:50 PM
broadwayevns
Posts: 54 (0)
Hall of Famer
175
Prospect
While I understand the sentiment, and actually kind of agree with it, keep in mind that any cash transfer is a cash transfer period. It doesn't really matter if it exceeds the salary of the players or not, it is still a transfer of cash.

If all contracts were of equal value and matched up perfectly with the skill of the player (theoretical only of course) it would be one thing, but I think the whole idea is to prevent "extra" cash being transferred, it's already happening any time cash is included in a deal. You could theoretically have your entire ML roster "paid for" in cash matching salary trades, and the end result of having "extra cash/resources" is still the same.

That being said, I personally have no problem with the rule that many worlds have if for no other reason than it keeps the huge arguments from blowing up which seems to happen in many worlds from the sound of it.
6/13/2009 1:00 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By oriolemagic on 6/13/2009
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2009
That is straight from the "It's my team, I should be able to do what I want with it!" handbook.

What is good for 1-2 teams isn't necessarily good for the league.

Still trying to understand this... how is that not good for the league? You did give up something of value. How is it any different then trading a solid 35 year old pitcher to a contending team and getting a 19 year old who projects to be a solid pitcher?

All I am saying is that you are trading away something of value to another team (player) and getting something of value to you (cash). As long as you USE the cash then I would say there is nothing wrong with the trade. Can someone explain to me how this is not good for the league? I am just trying to understand why so many people are against this type of trade


Sure. I trade my 700k(pro-rated) 29 y/o RP and 5m to you for a prospect just before the deadline.

You complete 24 other trades in the exact same way. You suddenly have 100m in excess payroll and a team that is 100% paid by other teams. Everyone who made the deal is happy.

Now you'll say "WHOA! That's taking it to the extreme" and you're right. So I ask you "When is it too much?" Trade 5? Trade 11? Trade 20?

So, assuming you draw a line(and if you don't think there is one, there's no point in continuing this discussion), are you willing to tell trade partner #5 that he can't do what you've already allowed 4 others to do?

Welcome to World Explosion.
6/13/2009 1:41 PM
danmam
Posts: 342 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 22 22 82
Prospect
Mike, we all know that if you go too far in cash trades there are bad consequences. However, if you've got a world with owners who are not willing to let it go that far (who each draw their own line, as you put it) cash trades are kept under control, but still allowed. And it is not detrimental to the world at all. They're not ALL evil.
6/13/2009 2:15 PM
oriolemagic
Posts: 253 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 10 93 95
Prospect
No, I dont see the issue.. If you were able to build up 100M in excess payroll and you USE that 100M on players then what is the issue? You effectively traded away players to get additional cash to get better players. Nobody still has answered my underlining question - what is the problem with the situation you just described. Why do people feel it is unfair to the rest of the league. My sense is they feel it is unfair because they now dont have a shot at the top IFA... If this is the case, that is being selfish.. The team who made the trades obviously had to give up talent to get that much money back. They gave up the talent with the end goal of building up their farm system. How is this any different then trading that talent away for young prospects? I strongly believe if the trade is fair (and this could include additional money) then nobody should have an issue with it. What am I missing?

Also - just so its known, I wasnt involved in these trades, im just trying to understand what others are thinking.
6/13/2009 2:19 PM
oriolemagic
Posts: 253 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 10 93 95
Prospect
Hear is another situation... I have 10 million in prospect cash and am bidding on a top IFA. That IFA has now reached 12 million, and I tapped out, but I have a aging SS who will be valuable to a team on a playoff run. I trade him for a ML filler and 5 million to enable me to continue bidding on the IFA.

What is wrong with this? I am taking a chance that I am goign to get the IFA, but I am getting value for my SS through the IFA.
6/13/2009 2:23 PM
moosep
Posts: 1496 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 1 1 24 2 36
Pro
Quote: Originally posted by oriolemagic on 6/13/2009Hear is another situation... I have 10 million in prospect cash and am bidding on a top IFA. That IFA has now reached 12 million, and I tapped out, but I have a aging SS who will be valuable to a team on a playoff run. I trade him for a ML filler and 5 million to enable me to continue bidding on the IFA.

What is wrong with this? I am taking a chance that I am goign to get the IFA, but I am getting value for my SS through the IFA.
Just to enlighten you, you can actually figure out how much each franchise has to spend on Internationals. So that 5 mil wouldn't really be a shot in the dark.
6/13/2009 2:51 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By oriolemagic on 6/13/2009
Hear is another situation... I have 10 million in prospect cash and am bidding on a top IFA. That IFA has now reached 12 million, and I tapped out, but I have a aging SS who will be valuable to a team on a playoff run. I trade him for a ML filler and 5 million to enable me to continue bidding on the IFA.

What is wrong with this? I am taking a chance that I am goign to get the IFA, but I am getting value for my SS through the IFA.
If you want to spend $12m on an IFA, but have budgeted and already spent such that you only have $10m , then what you are proposing is a free way out of your poor budgeting. Plus you're allowing a contending team to "buy" a valuable player down the stretch by giving up "ML filler" and $5m in cash that they probably wouldn't be using (and thus losing) otherwise.

The main issue that most people have with cash in trades is the idea that the emphasis in trading should be "talent for talent", and not "talent for cash". Because if you find yourself short on cash at some point in the season, odds are you (a) either budgeted poorly to begin with or (b) spent your budget unwisely. Either way, it's all on you and all you're doing is looking for a bailout from somebody else to fix YOUR problem that YOU created.
6/13/2009 3:09 PM
danmam
Posts: 342 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 22 22 82
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
6/13/2009 3:14 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By oriolemagic on 6/13/2009No, I dont see the issue.. If you were able to build up 100M in excess payroll and you USE that 100M on players then what is the issue? You effectively traded away players to get additional cash to get better players. Nobody still has answered my underlining question - what is the problem with the situation you just described. Why do people feel it is unfair to the rest of the league. My sense is they feel it is unfair because they now dont have a shot at the top IFA... If this is the case, that is being selfish.. The team who made the trades obviously had to give up talent to get that much money back. They gave up the talent with the end goal of building up their farm system. How is this any different then trading that talent away for young prospects? I strongly believe if the trade is fair (and this could include additional money) then nobody should have an issue with it. What am I missing?

Also - just so its known, I wasnt involved in these trades, im just trying to understand what others are thinking


I stopped right here. You have a team full of players that someone else is paying for AND 100m to do with what you choose. If you don't see the problem, I can't help you.

Have a good day.
6/13/2009 3:19 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By danmam on 6/13/2009Mike, we all know that if you go too far in cash trades there are bad consequences. However, if you've got a world with owners who are not willing to let it go that far (who each draw their own line, as you put it) cash trades are kept under control, but still allowed. And it is not detrimental to the world at all. They're not ALL evil


It's the "kept under control" part that's the problem. If 9 owners have completed deals and my exact type of trade is vetoed, I'd dump all my players. And I'd encourage ANYONE who encounters a similar situation to do the same. Ruin the league as best you can because it's already 'tarded up beyond help. Leave your mark.
6/13/2009 3:23 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I read every world chat that spilled into the HBD forums with problems for the first 4-5 seasons. EVERY ISSUE stemmed from trades/vetoes. If trade 1 goes thru, you don't veto the exact same deal the third time it happens.
6/13/2009 3:25 PM
danmam
Posts: 342 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 22 22 82
Prospect
I don't really understand your post. Could you rephrase please?
6/13/2009 3:26 PM
oriolemagic
Posts: 253 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 10 93 95
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
6/13/2009 3:27 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By danmam on 6/13/2009I don't really understand your post. Could you rephrase please


Sure.

If you allow one trade to go thru, you can't veto an identical trade later on because you decide "it's gone too far".

Consistent veto policy. Plain and simple.
6/13/2009 3:44 PM
◂ Prev 1|2|3|4...35 Next ▸
Cash in trades - Do worlds discourage it? 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.