Quote: Originally Posted By gator993 on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By kingjohndevi on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By gator993 on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By kingjohndevi on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By gator993 on 6/15/2009

Setting the budget should be one of the most strategic parts of the game. Trading for cash makes it less important. Thats why many have a major issue with it. I agree with it, thats why I play in worlds where its not allowed.

I feel the worlds that allow it are easier to win and can build a superstar team much easier. But playing in those worlds are by choice and not against the rules, still comes down to preference.




There can be strategy in under budgeting hoping to sell players and there is strategy in over budgeting hoping to buy people. The 'strategy of budgeting' argument doesn't work.

Bottom line is players traded for cash happens in real life, so what wrong with it?

This is a salary cap game and MLB is not. Thats why thats not a good argument.

There is strategy in what you state but its an easier strategy to build a winner then a league that does not allow it. If you had to stick with a budget you set at day 1 through 90 days it is much more difficult then being able to trade for cash. Even if it is your strategy it also leads to an easier fix to teams that make a mistake.

Again if you enjoy that league go for it, I don'e and won't play in them. I enjoy the tougher challenge. I don't think either of us are going to change our minds.

HBD does have a budget, it also has the ability to trade cash, arguing for one thing included in HBD over another thing in HBD makes no sense.

I didn't say trading for cash is against the rules I said it makes for an easier game.

Quote: Originally posted by kingjohndevi on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By njohnson78 on 6/15/2009In one of my worlds, a trade just went down that involved more cash than the total salaries of every player in the deal. At first glance, it was an even trade. One stud going in each direction, one above average player going in each direction, along with one career minor leaguer going in each direction. But then one owner included $2M in cash.

The owner receiving the cash actually tried to work out this same trade with me a day or two earlier, saying that he needed the cash (it was $3M when he was talking to me) so he could sign a certain free agent. Ridiculous. Explain to me whats rediculous about that?

Quote: Originally Posted By tutmeister on 6/15/2009
can everyone who's fighting please sign in with your mindset on the issue so as to avoid confusement:

1) people can trade a crap prospect and up to $5 mil in cash for a decent prospect (because obviously if the guy getting the cash doesn't give someone even moderately talented up, it'll get vetoed just for that reason)

2) people can trade players and add cash only if the cash is needed to make the deal work for one side or the other's cap

3) i will veto ANY trade where there is something other than a 0 next to the dollar signs

Quote: Originally Posted By njohnson78 on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally posted by kingjohndevi on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By njohnson78 on 6/15/2009
In one of my worlds, a trade just went down that involved more cash than the total salaries of every player in the deal. At first glance, it was an even trade. One stud going in each direction, one above average player going in each direction, along with one career minor leaguer going in each direction. But then one owner included $2M in cash.

The owner receiving the cash actually tried to work out this same trade with me a day or two earlier, saying that he needed the cash (it was $3M when he was talking to me) so he could sign a certain free agent. Ridiculous.



Explain to me whats rediculous about that?

That owner now has more money than everyone else in the world.

Quote: Originally posted by njohnson78 on 6/15/2009In one of my worlds, a trade just went down that involved more cash than the total salaries of every player in the deal. At first glance, it was an even trade. One stud going in each direction, one above average player going in each direction, along with one career minor leaguer going in each direction. But then one owner included $2M in cash.

The owner receiving the cash actually tried to work out this same trade with me a day or two earlier, saying that he needed the cash (it was $3M when he was talking to me) so he could sign a certain free agent. Ridiculous.

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By jvford on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By jvford on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 6/15/2009

A 78 rated player is a 78 rated player to everyone. His value to the league is as a 78 rated players. Nothing changes that.

800k to an owner who was incapable of setting his budget properly(a day is dedicated to this) is a big deal. 800k to an owner who does set his budget properly is nothing.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Because it's wrong. You're confusing player rating with player value. A 78 rated pitcher has less value to a team loaded with SP at the ML and AAA levels than it does to a team that only has 3 starters. I would agree that cash is more fluid than players, but to claim that player value is static is extremely naive.



It's value to the WORLD not individual teams.

Seriously, think it out.

Re-read what I wrote and if you still don't understand, ask questions. Cryptic statements don't contribute anything.



Did you just say I couldn't understand you because I'm dumb? That's harassment according to KJD. ADMIN will be checking this thread. What will you do with your vacation time?

The value of a player to the WORLD is static. A 78 rated player making 2m is a 78 rated player making 2m to everyone. That is what he is. Nothing changes that.

The value of 2m varies. 2m might be a decent RP. 2m might be a 39 y/o mop-up man. 2m might be a young slugger in his 5th season still under arb.

Cash is fluid because it is what the owner makes it. A player is what he is.

Seriously.

Quote: Originally posted by plague on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally posted by njohnson78 on 6/15/2009In one of my worlds, a trade just went down that involved more cash than the total salaries of every player in the deal. At first glance, it was an even trade. One stud going in each direction, one above average player going in each direction, along with one career minor leaguer going in each direction. But then one owner included $2M in cash.
The owner receiving the cash actually tried to work out this same trade with me a day or two earlier, saying that he needed the cash (it was $3M when he was talking to me) so he could sign a certain free agent. Ridiculous.

Are you saying its ridiculous because the trade was even, but the addition of cash made the trade uneven? Or you saying its ridiculous just because cash was involved?

Quote: Originally posted by tutmeister on 6/15/2009can everyone who's fighting please sign in with your mindset on the issue so as to avoid confusement:1) people can trade a crap prospect and up to $5 mil in cash for a decent prospect (because obviously if the guy getting the cash doesn't give someone even moderately talented up, it'll get vetoed just for that reason)2) people can trade players and add cash only if the cash is needed to make the deal work for one side or the other's cap3) i will veto ANY trade where there is something other than a 0 next to the dollar signs

Quote: Originally Posted By njohnson78 on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally posted by plague on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally posted by njohnson78 on 6/15/2009In one of my worlds, a trade just went down that involved more cash than the total salaries of every player in the deal. At first glance, it was an even trade. One stud going in each direction, one above average player going in each direction, along with one career minor leaguer going in each direction. But then one owner included $2M in cash.
The owner receiving the cash actually tried to work out this same trade with me a day or two earlier, saying that he needed the cash (it was $3M when he was talking to me) so he could sign a certain free agent. Ridiculous.

Are you saying its ridiculous because the trade was even, but the addition of cash made the trade uneven? Or you saying its ridiculous just because cash was involved?

Both. I thought the trade was fairly even to begin with, but it seems like the owner basically said "I'm not trading this guy for anything, unless there is cash coming my way also." And I don't think there should be $2M in cash when the salaries weren't anywhere near that amount

Quote: Originally Posted By kingjohndevi on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By gator993 on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By kingjohndevi on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By gator993 on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By kingjohndevi on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By gator993 on 6/15/2009

Setting the budget should be one of the most strategic parts of the game. Trading for cash makes it less important. Thats why many have a major issue with it. I agree with it, thats why I play in worlds where its not allowed.

I feel the worlds that allow it are easier to win and can build a superstar team much easier. But playing in those worlds are by choice and not against the rules, still comes down to preference.




There can be strategy in under budgeting hoping to sell players and there is strategy in over budgeting hoping to buy people. The 'strategy of budgeting' argument doesn't work.

Bottom line is players traded for cash happens in real life, so what wrong with it?

This is a salary cap game and MLB is not. Thats why thats not a good argument.

There is strategy in what you state but its an easier strategy to build a winner then a league that does not allow it. If you had to stick with a budget you set at day 1 through 90 days it is much more difficult then being able to trade for cash. Even if it is your strategy it also leads to an easier fix to teams that make a mistake.

Again if you enjoy that league go for it, I don'e and won't play in them. I enjoy the tougher challenge. I don't think either of us are going to change our minds.

HBD does have a budget, it also has the ability to trade cash, arguing for one thing included in HBD over another thing in HBD makes no sense.

I didn't say trading for cash is against the rules I said it makes for an easier game.

Playing with people that have won less that 10 WS makes the game easier too, should that not be allowed? Only people with 10+ WS wins are allowed to play the game because if not its to easy?

Its a fine personal choise for you, and I don't have a problem with you playing in whatever worlds you want to play in, but your preference alone is not a solid argument for or against it.



I never said trading for cash should not be allowed. I said it makes the game easier. You are correct playing with less experienced owners makes the game easier too. I do avoid both in my worlds. I said from the very beginning its a preferance. Not knocking you for your choice just pointing out that your "mlb allows cash in trades" argument is a weak one, as HBD is not MLB.

Quote: Originally Posted By jvford on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By jvford on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By jvford on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 6/15/2009

A 78 rated player is a 78 rated player to everyone. His value to the league is as a 78 rated players. Nothing changes that.

800k to an owner who was incapable of setting his budget properly(a day is dedicated to this) is a big deal. 800k to an owner who does set his budget properly is nothing.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Because it's wrong. You're confusing player rating with player value. A 78 rated pitcher has less value to a team loaded with SP at the ML and AAA levels than it does to a team that only has 3 starters. I would agree that cash is more fluid than players, but to claim that player value is static is extremely naive.



It's value to the WORLD not individual teams.

Seriously, think it out.

Re-read what I wrote and if you still don't understand, ask questions. Cryptic statements don't contribute anything.



Did you just say I couldn't understand you because I'm dumb? That's harassment according to KJD. ADMIN will be checking this thread. What will you do with your vacation time?

The value of a player to the WORLD is static. A 78 rated player making 2m is a 78 rated player making 2m to everyone. That is what he is. Nothing changes that.

The value of 2m varies. 2m might be a decent RP. 2m might be a 39 y/o mop-up man. 2m might be a young slugger in his 5th season still under arb.

Cash is fluid because it is what the owner makes it. A player is what he is.

Seriously.

A player's value to a world is not static. In some worlds, hitters may have more value than pitchers. Some owners may place more value on defense, sign/trade for more of those players, thereby causing a shortage. Improper development of players could lead to a shortage of 78 or higher rated players making them more valuable. In season, a major injury to a player on a contender increases the value of comparable replacement players, while in season callups reduce value of players. Again, while the value of players is not as fluid as cash, it is still fluid.



Jeez. A 78 player in a world is a 78 player. Nothing changes this. His value, to the world, will not change because of injury or development. He is still a 78.

Cash has no value until it's assigned. It can be used well or poorly but it has no value until assigned.

You're confusing player value with the value he brings to individual teams.

Quote: Originally Posted By njohnson78 on 6/15/2009In one of my worlds, a trade just went down that involved more cash than the total salaries of every player in the deal. At first glance, it was an even trade. One stud going in each direction, one above average player going in each direction, along with one career minor leaguer going in each direction. But then one owner included $2M in cash.

The owner receiving the cash actually tried to work out this same trade with me a day or two earlier, saying that he needed the cash (it was $3M when he was talking to me) so he could sign a certain free agent. Ridiculous.


was it in a world that i am in with you, njohnson?

(this is sergei91, btw. i'm just banned from the forums for a while so i use this screenname to post)