172 transactions, a little too much? - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Commissioner's Corner

172 transactions, a little too much?

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: 172 transactions, a little too much?

Postby tuna411 » Mon Dec 29, 2008 8:44 pm

Anyone who thinks it is okay to change rules mid season is WRONG!!

In fact, your thinking is sooo wrong, I would leave the league if you trolls were allowed to change rules in season. If you don't like a rule, you wait until the off-season and vote it out.
tuna411
Softball Supervisor
Softball Supervisor


Posts: 29
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 172 transactions, a little too much?

Postby shawngee03 » Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 am

tuna411 wrote:Anyone who thinks it is okay to change rules mid season is WRONG!!

In fact, your thinking is sooo wrong, I would leave the league if you trolls were allowed to change rules in season. If you don't like a rule, you wait until the off-season and vote it out.


if you were the person churning, and making it worse for everybody else in the league, then left after the rules were changed...then mission accomplished. churning makes the experience of playing fantasy sports worse for everybody else, so if you leave and stop doing it....awesome. i would rather have a dead team than one that churns

again ill say im against changing rules midseason...but this isnt really a rule that affects the game. its not like changing the cats or how something is counted...this rule change is strictly to stop one owner form ruining teh experience for everyone else bc he feels the need to be a douche
shawngee03
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 650
Joined: 6 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Football
Location: H-Town

Re: 172 transactions, a little too much?

Postby tuna411 » Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:20 am

You don't see the bigger picture. What happens when several of your league mates don't like a rule that you DO like and want to change it mid season? Is that okay? You changed one rule in-season so what's wrong with changing more? If you open pandora's box, it is open forever.
tuna411
Softball Supervisor
Softball Supervisor


Posts: 29
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 172 transactions, a little too much?

Postby Matthias » Wed Dec 31, 2008 3:32 am

tuna411 wrote:Anyone who thinks it is okay to change rules mid season is WRONG!!

In fact, your thinking is sooo wrong, I would leave the league if you trolls were allowed to change rules in season. If you don't like a rule, you wait until the off-season and vote it out.

"Trolls" says the man with 6 posts who dug something up from July. Next Danny DeVito is going to walk in and start calling people fat.

In any case, the reason that leagues have a commissioner is to deal with small fires that crop up during the season. Because nothing is every fully anticipated and so no system is never fully perfect going in.
You don't see the bigger picture. What happens when several of your league mates don't like a rule that you DO like and want to change it mid season? Is that okay? You changed one rule in-season so what's wrong with changing more? If you open pandora's box, it is open forever.

It's pretty limited thinking to see only black and white, either you can make an adjustment to no rules or any rules. Thankfully, most of us are blessed with the power of reason and can differentiate between situations.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 4860
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 172 transactions, a little too much?

Postby tuna411 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:14 pm

Matthias wrote:
tuna411 wrote:Anyone who thinks it is okay to change rules mid season is WRONG!!

In fact, your thinking is sooo wrong, I would leave the league if you trolls were allowed to change rules in season. If you don't like a rule, you wait until the off-season and vote it out.

"Trolls" says the man with 6 posts who dug something up from July. Next Danny DeVito is going to walk in and start calling people fat.

In any case, the reason that leagues have a commissioner is to deal with small fires that crop up during the season. Because nothing is every fully anticipated and so no system is never fully perfect going in.
You don't see the bigger picture. What happens when several of your league mates don't like a rule that you DO like and want to change it mid season? Is that okay? You changed one rule in-season so what's wrong with changing more? If you open pandora's box, it is open forever.

It's pretty limited thinking to see only black and white, either you can make an adjustment to no rules or any rules. Thankfully, most of us are blessed with the power of reason and can differentiate between situations.


You may not like my directness but the fact remains, if you change a rule in-season, you are making a huge mistake.

Think about it this way, the guy churning may have devised his auction/draft strategy based on the rules. Essentially what you are saying is, "too bad son, you out thought us (or found a loop hole, how ever you want to phrase it), now we are going to change a rule."

Similar to a league which has no innings minimum and an owner drafts all relief pitchers to win era/whip/saves and build a powerhouse offense, this guy didn't do anything that was wrong, he just played with in the rules as written on draft day.

I play in a pretty decent size $$$ league and we would never change a rule inseason. If someone figures something out and uses it to his advantage, good for him. And if that happens, we fix things in the off-season. End of story, this is how you are suppose to play in a league with a written constitution.
tuna411
Softball Supervisor
Softball Supervisor


Posts: 29
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 172 transactions, a little too much?

Postby shawngee03 » Fri Jan 02, 2009 9:53 am

again ill say churning is not a rule. it is not an inning minimum, or transaction limit. you cannot draft w the intent to churn...as churning doesnt do anything except piss everybody off. streaming a viable strategy, albeit a crappy one, but it is a strategy that is planned and can be drafted for. yes, changing the rules mid season to stop streaming would be wrong, as it hinders that guy's team.

stopping somebody from churning, by doing what yahoo does and put players picked up and dropped the same day back in FA not waivers doesnt hinder that guy's strategy or team. and if it does, please explain to me how. and please explain to me how one drafts w the intent to churn...is arod a better first pick than hanley if you plan to churn?

i dont think this conversation is going anywhere as you are strict in your dont change rules mid season approach without giving way to logic....so i guess we will agree to disagree
shawngee03
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 650
Joined: 6 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Football
Location: H-Town

Re: 172 transactions, a little too much?

Postby tuna411 » Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:11 pm

I read this...

shawngee03 wrote:
tuna411 wrote:Anyone who thinks it is okay to change rules mid season is WRONG!!

In fact, your thinking is sooo wrong, I would leave the league if you trolls were allowed to change rules in season. If you don't like a rule, you wait until the off-season and vote it out.


if you were the person churning, and making it worse for everybody else in the league, then left after the rules were changed...then mission accomplished. churning makes the experience of playing fantasy sports worse for everybody else, so if you leave and stop doing it....awesome. i would rather have a dead team than one that churns

again ill say im against changing rules midseason...but this isnt really a rule that affects the game. its not like changing the cats or how something is counted...this rule change is strictly to stop one owner form ruining teh experience for everyone else bc he feels the need to be a douche


And then I read this...

shawngee03 wrote:again ill say churning is not a rule. it is not an inning minimum, or transaction limit. you cannot draft w the intent to churn...as churning doesnt do anything except piss everybody off. streaming a viable strategy, albeit a crappy one, but it is a strategy that is planned and can be drafted for. yes, changing the rules mid season to stop streaming would be wrong, as it hinders that guy's team.

stopping somebody from churning, by doing what yahoo does and put players picked up and dropped the same day back in FA not waivers doesnt hinder that guy's strategy or team. and if it does, please explain to me how. and please explain to me how one drafts w the intent to churn...is arod a better first pick than hanley if you plan to churn?

i dont think this conversation is going anywhere as you are strict in your dont change rules mid season approach without giving way to logic....so i guess we will agree to disagree


Yes, we may agree to disagree, and this is okay.

Just to clarify, if an owner is claiming, then dropping just to prohibit other teams from having a shot at a pitcher, it is not good. However, if your league is daily, and the constitution doesn't state anything against this behavior, then to change rules in-season is just as unethical.

If you don't want churning, set a transaction limit for the season or monthly or weekly. This is the easiest way to fight an action that most owners are against.
tuna411
Softball Supervisor
Softball Supervisor


Posts: 29
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 172 transactions, a little too much?

Postby Matthias » Fri Jan 02, 2009 2:05 pm

tuna411 wrote:Just to clarify, if an owner is claiming, then dropping just to prohibit other teams from having a shot at a pitcher, it is not good. However, if your league is daily, and the constitution doesn't state anything against this behavior, then to change rules in-season is just as unethical.

If you don't want churning, set a transaction limit for the season or monthly or weekly. This is the easiest way to fight an action that most owners are against.

You're too in love with the idea that one owner should be able to hold an entire league hostage for a year, no if's and's or but's, to see any other point of view. You may as well say that as long as there is no explicit rule in the Constitution against collusion, then two teams who draft cooperatively with an intent to load one team and split the winnings, is perfectly ok. After all, the remedy is to put in a rule saying so.

You have an extremely limited idea of what constitutes fair and legal. I suggest you read Ronald Dworkin's Taking Rights Seriously before you presume to lecture on what is the end-all, be-all on fair play. In a nutshell, there exist clear prohibitions (your league Constitution) but those prohibitions come from a set of principles that are understood to be functioning, even if they are not explicitly stated.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 4860
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Previous

Return to Commissioner's Corner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Sunday, Apr. 20
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Toronto at Cleveland
(1:05 pm)
LA Angels at Detroit
(1:08 pm)
Seattle at Miami
(1:10 pm)
indoors
Atlanta at NY Mets
(1:10 pm)
Milwaukee at Pittsburgh
(1:35 pm)
St. Louis at Washington
(1:35 pm)
NY Yankees at Tampa Bay
(1:40 pm)
indoors
Minnesota at Kansas City
(2:10 pm)
Cincinnati at Chi Cubs
(2:20 pm)
Chi White Sox at Texas
(3:05 pm)
Houston at Oakland
(4:05 pm)
Philadelphia at Colorado
(4:10 pm)
Arizona at LA Dodgers
(4:10 pm)
San Francisco at San Diego
(4:10 pm)
Baltimore at Boston
(7:05 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact