noseeum wrote:You don't see how telling the rest of the league that one guy is going to be attempting to trade a bunch of hitting in order to address his newfound problem, caused by a rule change mid season, is unfair? How exactly is he going to get a fair deal? If he really desperately needs pitching, a competitive owner will put the screws to him and get the best deal possible for himself. But maybe now the rest of the league should collude, and agree to give the guy sweet heart deals for the sake of the league's integrity. That would probably make sense, given the rest of the warped logic being discussed here.
No, it's called trusting the market.
If there was only one other owner and that owner knew that the OP had to trade hitting for pitching, he could put the screws to him. But in a 10, 12, or 14-guy league, you have between 9 and 13 other owners bidding. The market should ensure that he gets a fair deal. Besides, the idea floated out was that if he didn't get two pitchers traded, he would continue streaming. That combination of stick & carrot should allow him to get a fair deal.