I'm in a H2H keeper league that uses escalating values and space for prospects. I have the second best record in the league and the worst team just traded Crawford and Lowell for Millidge to the best team. I'm outraged not only by the imbalance of the trade but how early this guy decided to give his studs away (he also got some money, but big frickin deal). The best team just got a huge advantage for the final sixteen weeks. I've proposed prohibiting firesales until Aug. 1 so it doesn't have such a huge impact on the current season. Have you ever heard of such a rule? Am I off-base?
I do think a rule like that would be off-base. Owners--especially in keeper leagues--have to be able to manage their teams as they see fit. If this guy wants to make that trade (which is a horrible, ridiculous trade), he should be able to. Rules shouldn't be put in place to prevent idiots from making bad trades and good managers from taking advantage of them, they should be put in place only to prevent cheating.
A lot of owners in my league are upset with this trade I made on Monday (I'm in 1st by 17 games): I sent Verlander, Hart, Kershaw I got Peavy, Markakis, Jenks
My trade partner has lost 4 weeks in a row and is losing again this week. I think I got the better deal but for 09 and beyond, it is pretty even in our format (keep 5 plus 1 rook).
I think one thing that we are going to look into implementing against fire sales is to maybe give monthly prizes or maybe even reward a 1st/2nd half split winners. 3 teams already started selling and some owners who are not benefiting from the fire sales are pissed.
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin
Yoda wrote:A lot of owners in my league are upset with this trade I made on Monday (I'm in 1st by 17 games): I sent Verlander, Hart, Kershaw I got Peavy, Markakis, Jenks
My trade partner has lost 4 weeks in a row and is losing again this week. I think I got the better deal but for 09 and beyond, it is pretty even in our format (keep 5 plus 1 rook).
I think one thing that we are going to look into implementing against fire sales is to maybe give monthly prizes or maybe even reward a 1st/2nd half split winners. 3 teams already started selling and some owners who are not benefiting from the fire sales are pissed.
see, these arent typical "firesale" deals. a fire sale deal would be
matsui for milledge thome for saltalamacchia mike young for mike moustakas etc...
the two trades that you guys have presented, are just unfair, unbalanced trades. it doesnt have anything to do with firesales or trading for the future. its just two managers who are boneheads. not that i think they should be vetoed, but making a aug 1 date before you do something isnt right either.
Your trade is at least somewhat equitable compared to what I described above. I tend to avoid making trades with first place teams because I don't ever want to give the best team a boost. I guess not everyone thinks that way.
um that's not a firesale on the milledge, that's an idiot...
yoda's depends on kershaw's development...
moving your good players for a better stud keeper is fine whether it's in june or august.. but that deal should have been vetoed right away as it's going to affect the competitive balance of your league..
StlSluggers wrote:I don't think you can define fire sale. As soon as you try, owners will just say that they don't consider it a fire sale.
That's what I was thinking, it is too subjective of a term. How would you define a firesale so that you could look at it objectively and prove it was a firesale?
Yoda wrote:A lot of owners in my league are upset with this trade I made on Monday (I'm in 1st by 17 games): I sent Verlander, Hart, Kershaw I got Peavy, Markakis, Jenks
My trade partner has lost 4 weeks in a row and is losing again this week. I think I got the better deal but for 09 and beyond, it is pretty even in our format (keep 5 plus 1 rook).
I think one thing that we are going to look into implementing against fire sales is to maybe give monthly prizes or maybe even reward a 1st/2nd half split winners. 3 teams already started selling and some owners who are not benefiting from the fire sales are pissed.
see, these arent typical "firesale" deals. a fire sale deal would be
matsui for milledge thome for saltalamacchia mike young for mike moustakas etc...
the two trades that you guys have presented, are just unfair, unbalanced trades. it doesnt have anything to do with firesales or trading for the future. its just two managers who are boneheads. not that i think they should be vetoed, but making a aug 1 date before you do something isnt right either.
I'm not so sure mine was unbalanced. Peavy has elbow issues and my trade partner was very nervous and Verlander has been fine if you take away his awful April. Also, many people picked him to win the Cy this year and he was widely considered a top 10 pitcher preseason so they are pretty much a wash at this point.
Hart is slightly better than Markakis in the sense that he has much better support. If Roberts gets traded then BAL's offense drops another notch. Both are relatively equal.
So that brings it down to Kershaw and Jenks. Since Kershaw is a rook and we keep 5 plus 1 rook, his value immediately following the end of 08 is higher than Jenks's as no one in our league keeps closers. To sum it up, he got 3 keepers while giving up 2 keepers. I still think that I got better end of the deal but it's a lot closer than people are making it out to be.
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Danimal » Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:33 pm 
