|
Post by borgman420 (Yard Goats) on Jan 28, 2014 14:36:16 GMT -6
I'd like to propose another rule amendment this off-season:
I feel there needs to be a checks and balance system. Either a strong majority veto or have a trade review committee that will listen to comments from other owners and decide based on that. i think shitty trades can hurt the league, and i'd like something in place to help us out.
A number of owners seem unsure about the current state of trade reviews, i'd like to get something in place. thanks. please discuss.
GREAT PACE TO THE DRAFT THIS YEAR!!!! Good job everyone!
|
|
|
Post by Wolfy (P. Roses) on Jan 28, 2014 14:59:29 GMT -6
Just to start, this isnt me coming at SF , like we usually go at it lol Just to be clear. The way i feel is, i have NO WORRIES on the commish as a person, and as a commish in this league. He is very legit, and knows his shit. So putting something ELSE in place seems trivial....unless other owners have problems with the commish and his fairness and fantasy baseball mind? That being said, as i said before, im against other owners having any sort of power to vetoe a trade, because in their own personal minds, it isnt soemthing they would do, or that they woulda paid more, or wish they wouldve got, etc. Collusion trades are a different ballgame. But are OBVIOUS, and commish can shoot them down and fix the league and poop owner. None of us should have any power to have control over how each and every owner run their teams. Period. If there is a NEW owner, who comes in the league, and totally shits the beds with trades, yeah i agree, somethign should be done, but i think commish can see this OBVIOUSLY. A shitty trade is only in the mind of each owner, most of us have been together for awhile now, NOBODY is trying to tank, or get over on anybody. We run OUR TEAMS how we think is best FOR US. Period. If we had to "check in" with a SMALL amount of owners, who think that if THEY PERSONALLY dont like a trade, then that makes it 100% CRAP! lol...that would suck, in my opinion. So , i have full faith and trust in the commish, for any sort of "shenanigins" involving trades/new owners. And that is how it should be. We shouldnt all involve ourselves, pretty much being able to tell other owners, who have been here, working, thinkng, that they are MORONS?? lol Just my thoughts~
|
|
|
Post by bgins ( Brooklyn cyclones ) on Jan 28, 2014 18:17:09 GMT -6
I think we should have a approve or veto with a 48 hour time limit so owners can vote
Tampa. Yankees
|
|
|
Post by Wolfy (P. Roses) on Jan 28, 2014 18:34:09 GMT -6
Instead of just agreeing with everything SF says with one sentence everytime, why dont you explain why there needs to be a "babysitting" committee for trades.
Much rather hear your thoughts on it, maybe there is an actual realistic point in there that might open my eyes to the other side. lol
|
|
|
Post by borgman420 (Yard Goats) on Jan 28, 2014 18:52:26 GMT -6
"maybe there is an actual realistic point in there" Please be constructive to this discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfy (P. Roses) on Jan 28, 2014 19:18:05 GMT -6
It was constructive. As in there is nothing meaningful in any discussion we have tried to have on this subject, where Tampa writes one sentence to agree with you everytime. As in "maybe if he explains more, as to why he always writes one sentence to agree with what YOU want, then there might be a realistic meaning in there, other than just agreeing with you.
Hopes this explains more;)
|
|
|
Post by bgins ( Brooklyn cyclones ) on Jan 28, 2014 19:39:16 GMT -6
First of all I don't agree with everything San Francisco says second of all I have my own thoughts and yeah over the past couple years there's been some really one sided trades. And a one sided trades do hurt the other 18 teams in this league and in Major League Baseball trades to get approved by the commissioner
Tampa. Yankees
|
|
|
Post by borgman420 (Yard Goats) on Jan 28, 2014 19:41:21 GMT -6
20 owners have an equal voice. I am asking for 20 voices. criticizing the voices will not help there to be more of them.
I am hearing that you want a serious discussion on the matter rather than an up or down, yea or nay. I still think condemning everything that doesn't provide "realistic meaning" for you isn't the way to go.
again, quite the chasm here. let me start again. I feel there needs to be a checks and balance system. discuss with 19 other voices.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfy (P. Roses) on Jan 28, 2014 19:48:22 GMT -6
Thank you for explaining more, it is appreciated Again, my point is this, all owners think differently. Build differently. From win now, to win future, to all kinds of ins and outs. Why should the way owners build their own teams, have to pass approval from "other owners who really believe they are smarter than who think they are dumb" That is it exactly too. There is ALWAYS one side of 94.8% of trades, that look better to some, and other sides to others. So almost every trade is "one sided" I havent seen any DUMP trades, where one team purposely dumps his players to another, but if that happens, it is easily fixed, without "a disgruntled group" being up in every ones yard. If somebody wants to post, that they think The Commish is an idiot, and has no idea what he is doing, how to run a league, how to SPOT OBVIOUS collusion trades, etc etc, then sure, i will jump on the other side of the fence, and join the "nosy neighbor in my yard" gang. For sure. Id be all in it!!...but that isnt going to happen. A few of you act that way, like some committee of supposedly "higher intelligence" needs to be put in place...shit...haha
|
|
|
Post by Wolfy (P. Roses) on Jan 28, 2014 19:50:17 GMT -6
There is now where near 20 owners whining for a veto committee vote though!? ...obvious from the first discussion,where all hell broke lose, like a baby was thrown in a fire, but nobody came to save that baby...but...we are discussing this again!! haha
|
|
|
Post by bgins ( Brooklyn cyclones ) on Jan 28, 2014 19:57:41 GMT -6
Why don't we just leave it up to the commissioner I let him do what he feels is right
Tampa. Yankees
|
|
|
Post by Wolfy (P. Roses) on Jan 28, 2014 19:59:01 GMT -6
Exactly. Good point man ...which is exactly where i thought it was left, after our last discussion on this ....id like a vote on how many times we can beat a dead horse? haha
|
|
|
Post by stu (Orange and Blue Sox) on Jan 28, 2014 20:10:36 GMT -6
I do agree that shitty trades can hinder the other 18 teams in the league. I think having a trade committee that reviews all trades would be fair. I also believe however that all 20 owners should have a voice in all things involving the league. Like it or not every league has a veto process. sometimes it sucks but sometimes it improves the league. There needs to be a checks and balances system. I am not saying I would veto any trade I have seen, but there should be something in place just in case.
|
|
|
Post by stu (Orange and Blue Sox) on Jan 28, 2014 20:13:57 GMT -6
maybe like all other league decisions we should put a poll up to see if people want a 20 team veto process with majority vote req to overturn or let the commish just handle it. That way we actually see how the entire league feels about it. And for you opposed to the veto process think about this, you would need majority vote to overturn, 2 teams are already involved in the trade will obviously vote to keep it, so it will be quite uncommon for a trade to get overturned. and if 11 of the remaining 18 teams think it is vetoable, then you must admit that there is something uneven about the trade. Also it seems many people dont want to post on these controversial decisions so having the poll to determine how the league feels would allow people to express their opinion without taking heated backlash from any other owners.
|
|
|
Post by wingamge1 (Toronto Blue Jays) on Jan 28, 2014 20:14:08 GMT -6
But there IS a veto system, is there not? What they're proposing is tighter control over what gets passed and what doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by bgins ( Brooklyn cyclones ) on Jan 28, 2014 20:16:19 GMT -6
The only bad thing about trade committee is what if two those owners involved in a trade
Tampa. Yankees
|
|
|
Post by Wolfy (P. Roses) on Jan 28, 2014 20:16:38 GMT -6
Ok good points. But can i ask why you dont just trust the commish to do this? Do you think he is shady? has his own agenda? doesnt know what he is doing? anything? give me something haha I have full trust in his actions. I DO NOT have full trust is certain other owners, putting ANY WEIGHT on ANY trade they do not like themselves personally. And im sure others feel the same as me. I say until the Commish proves something otherwise, i think he has done a good job keeping things up, in check, controlled, LEGIT, etc. I mean, if you have a good reason why you dont trust the commish to do this, i will listen for sure! Lemme know bro!
|
|
|
Post by stu (Orange and Blue Sox) on Jan 28, 2014 20:16:39 GMT -6
I dont know of a veto system at the moment. I truly believe that every owner would rather have a veto system to allow themselves to have more control over the direction of the league. Either way I feel we should poll the league on how we should have a trade review process. League veto or commish decision
|
|
|
Post by stu (Orange and Blue Sox) on Jan 28, 2014 20:19:48 GMT -6
roses you are putting words in my mouth. i have no problem with the commish, i think he does a great job. I just say why not let the league decide how things are reviewed. For ALL other league decisions we have had a poll setting to determine. I mean back to your point. If we want to put complete control into the commish, why didnt he solely decide callup time, playoff dates, trade deadline, dl spots, future picks. Its because it should be a democracy. Everyone gets to voice their opinion. If the league votes for commish approval than we at least know what the league wants, instead of just 3 or 4 opinions.
|
|
|
Post by stu (Orange and Blue Sox) on Jan 28, 2014 20:22:25 GMT -6
ALSO we put alot of pressure on the commish who spends a lot of time doing this that we get to spend debating trades and reviewing players/teams etc. did you ever consider maybe he does not want sole responsability. So possibly all the pressure of the trade review does not rest solely with him. its hard to make important decisions when you know personally your word is absolute truth and you will likely be pissing some people off either way you decide.
I personally dont know how he feels, but i thought i would throw it out there
|
|
|
Post by wingamge1 (Toronto Blue Jays) on Jan 28, 2014 20:23:09 GMT -6
I could've sworn we had a veto system. I've had trades vetoed before and the commish telling me about vetoing trades. And I agree that owners should have a say if a trade is vastly lopsided, but there's a lot we have to consider in a trade. Many times, I'll overpay for someone I really like or want to get things done quickly. As well, each team has different needs that can weigh more on a decision more so than just what it says on paper.
|
|
|
Post by stu (Orange and Blue Sox) on Jan 28, 2014 20:26:25 GMT -6
i fully understand but thats why its not easy to get 11 out of 18 people to veto a trade, if u do then obviously its significantly unfair
|
|
|
Post by joints (Mile High Militia) on Jan 28, 2014 20:26:28 GMT -6
I vote for voting
|
|
|
Post by stu (Orange and Blue Sox) on Jan 28, 2014 20:29:53 GMT -6
also if there is a trade that seems lopsided and you (someone involved) wants to state your case about being in love with a guy and needing a quick response, that is completely valid and can easily be done. Like I said I havent necessairly seen a trade that I would veto, but I do think that if I (or some other owner) feels like a trade is detremental to the league they should have that ability.
|
|
|
Post by Texas Rangers (Texas Rangers) on Jan 28, 2014 20:34:01 GMT -6
I agree with Portland on this .. The league has a commish just like real baseball if a trade is so terrible he has the Ight to veto it .. Real baseball teams do what may seem like bad trades because they have excellent sourcing and it ends up panning out for them and firing their teams style .. Having every owners input on every trade is tedious not to mention it delays the time line a deal can be in effect .. And the fact some owners may complain because that trade would benefit another in a way that would make that owners team better than theirs .. If we think so low of a few of our owners we should just replace em
|
|
|
Post by Wolfy (P. Roses) on Jan 28, 2014 20:34:42 GMT -6
call up time? playoff dates? haha that has nothing to do with "owners taking personal opinions into vetoes"
THAT is a BIGGER matter than anything you said.
Im putting words into no ones mouth. It is obvious what a couple people are trying to say.
Why should anyone even think, that majority of the league should HAVE , get this, HAVE to think the same! About building teams, not even their own, but others, for a trade to pass? We might as well but strict rules into effect for all trades, also questionaires, where every owner MUSTTTTT think the exact same as majority of the league haha...that is kinda crazy (not calling anybody crazy before SF tries to make me look bad) just saying it is crazy.
Again, i have no faith in a certain few being on any sort of "everything affects ME" committee.
You come at me, like im not coming at this the right way, like im not looking out for EVERY TEAM in the league, but i am, as i know how a couple owners are, there is no way they should have ANY SAY in anybody elses trades. Period.
Im not fully against any of your points, but i know for a fact, trades will go down, and drama will ensue , over disgruntled owners jealous vetoes, hiding behind a "better for the league" vote. And that is fact.
Either way, maybe a trial of one way or the other can take place. This year one way, next year the other. Or something. Appease everyone type shit;)
|
|
|
Post by borgman420 (Yard Goats) on Jan 28, 2014 20:56:47 GMT -6
There is no veto system in the league any longer. that existed the first season, it was (by vote) replaced by a committee of five during the offseason because so many of the deals were vetoed throughout the season. many times leading to better deals, but overall much drama. I believe vetoes required were 1/3 of the league, it could have been half.
the committee, if I have it correctly was Chicago, Expos, Seattle, Bats, and Giants as designated by then-commish Bats. each member sent in a nay to the commish if they felt a deal was no good. Every deal has been passed. It simply dissolved into what exists now.
|
|
|
Post by stu (Orange and Blue Sox) on Jan 28, 2014 20:57:58 GMT -6
Well to quote you roses "If you select few, think THAT POORLY of Team Toronto's ownership capabilities, then why is he here? " nothing against toronto i hvae full confidence in his and other owners abilities. But if you dont trust other owners to make a good decision why are "they" here. and for that matter, if you feel that so many owners are incompetent they why would u spend so much of your time on this league
|
|
|
Post by stu (Orange and Blue Sox) on Jan 28, 2014 20:59:02 GMT -6
well as for that committee, seattle is gone and expos is almost never on, so ....
|
|
|
Post by Wolfy (P. Roses) on Jan 28, 2014 21:04:44 GMT -6
"if you feel that so many owners are incompetent they why would u spend so much of your time on this league" What the hell are you talking about?! I have FULL FAITH in every owner , in the matter of how THEY RUN THEIR OWN TEAMS. I do. Me. Wolfy. Yep, thats me. If the facts i know, that i wouldnt want TWO specific people, to be all in my back yard on some committee vote, makes it bad, then i apologize lol So, to clear your good try at being SF and trying to make me look bad, i will clear it up, for you, since you didnt understand. I have NO PROBLEM, with how ANY owner runs THEIR OWN TEAM. Period. All faith, all the time, 24/7, run your own team baby! I have PROBLEMS with other owners wanting SAY SO in trades, because THEYYYYYYYY think THEYYYY know whats better for each and every other owners team lol Hope thats clears it up bro!
|
|