Cash in trades - Do worlds discourage it? Topic

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2009Goddam, you're dense.  You tell me "too far" and I'll tell you why it's wrong to let one deal go thru and then veto a similar deal under the "keeping it under control" umbrella.
Take it on a case-by-case basis. That's what you do in player-for-player trades, why can't it apply to cash-for-player trades?
6/13/2009 4:36 PM
It was fine til you got there. Jinxer.
6/13/2009 4:36 PM
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 6/13/2009
It was fine til you got there. Jinxer.

That's not what I heard about the early days...Sounds like it's reverting back to form.

And danmam, the standard is to not allow it. To allow it sometimes and not others isn't a standard at all -- you do realize that, right?
6/13/2009 4:39 PM
Quote: Originally Posted By danmam on 6/13/2009
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2009 Goddam, you're dense. You tell me "too far" and I'll tell you why it's wrong to let one deal go thru and then veto a similar deal under the "keeping it under control" umbrella.
Take it on a case-by-case basis. That's what you do in player-for-player trades, why can't it apply to cash-for-player trades


Similar trades have to be vetoed or approved. The veto process can't be "loosey goosey" as A-Roid would say. It's black and white. If a type of trade is OK today, it's OK three weeks from now.
6/13/2009 4:39 PM
Mike, I think danmam is gonna give me an aneurysm...my head is really starting to hurt because of this....
6/13/2009 4:42 PM
He's not normally this dumb. Probably smoking weed or something today.
6/13/2009 4:43 PM
Your standard is to not allow any cash trades. You claim that the only other possible standard is to allow all cash trades. That's absolutely not true. You don't allow all prospect-for-prospect trades, or all prospect-for-vet trades, or all vet-for-vet trades. You're not holding up your standard!

How about a standard of allowing through all trades that don't hurt the league's competitive balance. That's my standard, and it works fine.
6/13/2009 4:43 PM
FWIW, Hometown(one of his leagues) has had a couple of blow-ups about trades/aliases/etc. I don't know anything about Alexander.
6/13/2009 4:44 PM
I'm pretty sure your standard is "OK today, don't know about tomorrow". That wouldn't float in ANY of my worlds.
6/13/2009 4:46 PM
Of course it has Mike...because what he's describing is moronic. And allowing that type of idiocy is the problem, and what causes good leagues to go bad.

Danmam, the standard of which I speak is for trades involving the sale of players. All trades are not the same. Surely you understand that, right? And I am guessing your next response will be that all trades are the same which means....no you don't.

Really...Mike...this guy is only high? He's not this dumb all the time? Because this kind of stupid indicates a problem.
6/13/2009 4:47 PM
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2009I'm pretty sure your standard is "OK today, don't know about tomorrow".   That wouldn't float in ANY of my worlds.
Say you've got an NL team in one of your worlds. He's got a loaded minor league system, but not much at the ML level. He trades a great SS prospect for a 30-year old slugging DH-type player. The talent matches fairly closely, so it goes through, you all assume he'll play the DH at 1B or something.

Then he does another very similar trade, a young stud for a good-hitting DH-type 30-year old. And another trade. And another. And another, until practically his whole ML team is DH's and he's got little in his minor league system.

Would all these trades get through in your worlds? You can't veto the 3rd, 4th, 5th trades of these because then you're not holding up your standard!!!!!!

It's impractical.
6/13/2009 4:52 PM
I'm just guessing. Maybe he had a few moments of clarity in his other posts.
6/13/2009 4:52 PM
Quote: Originally Posted By tropicana on 6/13/2009

Danmam, the standard of which I speak is for trades involving the sale of players. All trades are not the same. Surely you understand that, right? And I am guessing your next response will be that all trades are the same which means....no you don't.



You're too easy, danmam.
6/13/2009 4:54 PM
Quote: Originally Posted By danmam on 6/13/2009
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2009 I'm pretty sure your standard is "OK today, don't know about tomorrow". That wouldn't float in ANY of my worlds.
Say you've got an NL team in one of your worlds. He's got a loaded minor league system, but not much at the ML level. He trades a great SS prospect for a 30-year old slugging DH-type player. The talent matches fairly closely, so it goes through, you all assume he'll play the DH at 1B or something.

Then he does another very similar trade, a young stud for a good-hitting DH-type 30-year old. And another trade. And another. And another, until practically his whole ML team is DH's and he's got little in his minor league system.

Would all these trades get through in your worlds? You can't veto the 3rd, 4th, 5th trades of these because then you're not holding up your standard!!!!!!

It's impractical


Yes, they would go thru. He would be mocked for being a dumbass but no one would tell him how to run his team. If he wants to play a DH at 3B, and remains competitive because he's scoring 10 runs a game, so be it.

If he can't be competitive, he'll be asked to leave when the season ends.
6/13/2009 4:55 PM
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 6/13/2009FWIW, if a world wants to adopt a "Do what you want, it's your team" attitude, good for them. I won't play in it but, if the rules are the same for everyone, there shouldn't be any ********(or vetoes).
6/13/2009 4:57 PM
◂ Prev 1|2|3|4|5|6...35 Next ▸
Cash in trades - Do worlds discourage it? Topic

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.