An Iconic Fantasy Baseball Community
Moderator: Baseball Moderators
BillyHoe wrote:If the other owner accepted the deal, then whats the problem? Any one of us would take a deal that would help our chances of winning our league, its common sense.
Everyone in the league has the SAME oppurtunity to make trades with eachother. Just because someone took the iniality to try and trade a lesser player for a better player doesn't mean anything, I do this in my league to with little success because the managers in my league are pretty knowledgeable about Baseball. Nonetheless I still try. If managers in this particular league think the trade is unfair, then they can vote on it, easy.
You can't lock his team from making moves and you can't refund his money. All you can do is take his messages with a grain of salt and move on.
To be honest, I have seen FAR worse trades then this, just take a glance at the trade forums here.
Anyways, thats my $.02
thehat wrote:I think the entire situation could have been avoided if you hadn't included triples as a category.
I'm actually only half joking. It's like those poker games where someone has to play some game with red threes and black tens are wild in the next hand after somebody farts.
Something I learned long ago about fantasy baseball (and I've been playing for many years). Keep it simple and there are fewer problems, if any. The 5x5 formula works beautifully. Maybe you add an OPS and create a 6x6.
But it always seems like the biggest problems occur in leagues with all the convoluted categories, where determing a player's value is almost incalculable...you know, the type of league where actually making a case that Anderson for Walker isn't a monster ripoff isn't all that farfetched.
Just my two cents as I know some of you guys love those types of leagues, and if you do, that's cool. I'll pass and stick to the "old fashioned" leagues where we have a blast and compete all summer, and where the biggest problems are yells and screams when Stattracker goes down for an hour.
SouthBronxBombers wrote:So when are you dropping Anderson to pick one of them up? LEt me see if I understand you. You traded for a player who you say is worse than all of those players who are available to you simply because you did not want to just drop the player you traded. And then you're going to stick with that player instead of dropping him for one of these players. Uh huh. I see.
A three year old could tell a better lie.
josebach wrote:SouthBronxBombers wrote:So when are you dropping Anderson to pick one of them up? LEt me see if I understand you. You traded for a player who you say is worse than all of those players who are available to you simply because you did not want to just drop the player you traded. And then you're going to stick with that player instead of dropping him for one of these players. Uh huh. I see.
A three year old could tell a better lie.
This is why everybody is giving Davus such a hard time. It's not just the trade. It's the justification. It's insulting to a lot of people as it obviously was to Rohan. If you posted justifications like these on the message board, it's no wonder Rohan got so pissed. A lot of people in this thread are pissed and they're not even in your league. It's obvious you have some friends in your league that don't care if it was uneven trade. They also might not want to veto the transaction just because you are their friend. I'm sure this is what Rohan is thinking. If you think this is the case, (which it probably is because so many people at the cafe would have vetoed it) then to keep the integrity of the league in tact, you should undo the trade. If it's too late for that, just think about it before you pass another trade that's so lop-sided. A good rule of thumb is the harder you have to work to justify a trade increases the likelihood that the trade isn't justifiable.
I do agree that if Walker was still doing as well as he was, then this wouldn't have been anywhere near the issue that it is. Unfortunately, that's just bad luck for everybody involved.
davus wrote:26 views and only 1 response? Come on help a brother out.
BillyHoe wrote:davus wrote:26 views and only 1 response? Come on help a brother out.
I guess this post on the first page was a bad idea eh?
Maybe check out this thread to see what most people thought. Almost NOBODY says they would veto it. You have 3 guys on this thread giving me a bunch of crap 4 days after it was accepted and Walker just so happens to have gotten rocked.
As far as friends in the league, they would like nothing more than for me to fall out of the money, trust me. This is an EXTREMELY competative league and at the time of the trade it made plenty of sense to both teams. I have no feelings of guilt over the trade at all, I cannot be blamed for Walker giving up runs after it was accepted. The other owner has plenty of smarts and needed a closer a lot more than a 4th outfielder. As a matter of fact, he is still satisfied with the trade after Walker has faltered...what does that tell you?
Thanks for chiming in, though.
P.S. If I post a question like this and a few goons start insulting me over the trade, should I not defend myself and my thought process? Seems like I'm in a no-win situation if I can't give reason why the trade makes sense because by doing so make the trade automatically illegitimate?
davus wrote:Time to work on that reading comprehension, bro. Seems like you aren't very informed about the situation even though it is all here for you.
Actually, most of the people who commented on it in the trade forum before Walker had his three poor games said it made sense for both teams. Of course when people start attacking me I'm going to defend my actions.
I understand just fine how to help my team, and letting one of my "real" competitors pick up a closer and gain points on me in that category would hurt me more than a marginally more valuable player on the wire.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 12 guests