Return to Baseball Leftovers

Another serious ethics question

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Another serious ethics question

Postby mtarail » Fri Apr 23, 2004 7:01 pm

What do people here think about players who accept a trade the moment that they find out that the guy on their team is injured? For example, what if someone offered me his Sosa for my Preston Wilson and I accepted the trade as soon as I found out about the arthroscopic surgery?

To me this seems patently unfair. Does anyone think deals like this should go through (I guess since the guy offering the trade takes that risk), be automatically vetoed by commiss, or be vetoed by the league.

It seems to me a deal like this messes up the game. After all, in "real" baseball traded players go through physicals before the deals are done so that you pretty much know what you're getting when bring a guy onto your roster.
Bluto: Over? Did you say over? NOTHING is over until WE decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? HELL, NO!
Otter: Germans?
Boon: Forget it, he's rolling.
mtarail
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2433
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: on the 3B line stands at TEP

Postby bleach168 » Fri Apr 23, 2004 7:03 pm

If that happened in my league, I would veto it, no questions asked.
"And so he spoke, and so he spoke, that lord of Castamere. But now the rains weep o'er his hall, with no one there to hear." - The Rains of Castamere
bleach168
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 5033
(Past Year: -11)
Joined: 22 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby ponson's poor toilet » Fri Apr 23, 2004 7:05 pm

If the guy was healthy when the offer was made then a veto is in order. I'd seriously consider tossing the jackhole who accept out of my league as well if he did it knowing that the guy just got hurt.
ponson's poor toilet
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 118
Joined: 7 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Z-Dog » Fri Apr 23, 2004 7:30 pm

That's bad practice; Commish shoult veto.
"I came here to kick ass and chew bubble gum. And I'm all out of gum."
Z-Dog
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 132
Joined: 6 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Denver

Postby Madison » Fri Apr 23, 2004 8:13 pm

First of all the guy trading the injured player shouldn't accept the deal. In the case where he does, the commish should veto the deal if the injured player was originally healthy when the deal was offered.
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Madison
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
ExecutiveEditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 48715
(Past Year: -5140)
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Taking Souls...

Postby Zito is God » Fri Apr 23, 2004 8:20 pm

If the player is already injured and its more serious then day-to-day i would definetly veto.
Sean Tracey has my apologies, we all know Ozzie Guillen is an idiot. I'm rooting for you!
Zito is God
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe WriterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 4115
(Past Year: -54)
Joined: 11 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Secretly advising Cashman.

Postby ramble2 » Fri Apr 23, 2004 9:20 pm

In my league, we use the two day waiting period as an informal 'physical' for the players involved. If someone gets hurt in that time, then, as commish, I offer both players a chance to back out of the trade.

You seem to describe a case where an offer is made BEFORE both parties are aware of an injury. If a player is injured after an offer is made, accepting the offer before the other manager has a chance to void the offer is pretty low.
"The game has a cleanness. If you do a good job, the numbers say so. You don't have to ask anyone or play politics. You don't have to wait for the reviews." - Sandy Koufax
ramble2
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe Ranker
Posts: 2941
(Past Year: -6)
Joined: 27 Feb 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Salt Lake City

Postby mtarail » Sat Apr 24, 2004 12:16 am

Thx for the feedback. You've all echoed my sentiments. I was curious if someone could make an argument for letting a deal like that go through, but it looks like the disdain for that kind of stuff is universal.
Bluto: Over? Did you say over? NOTHING is over until WE decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? HELL, NO!
Otter: Germans?
Boon: Forget it, he's rolling.
mtarail
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2433
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: on the 3B line stands at TEP

Postby Jack-In-A-Box » Sat Apr 24, 2004 12:43 am

To put a different spin on this.. because someone in my league has a trade thats in its voting period now. Two of the 3 players coming from one team are injured. For 3 healthy, ready to start today guys.
Team A gave up
Helton,Ichiro,Jeter
Team B gave
Chipper,Prior,Nevin.

I didnt veto this and both sides knew that injured players were involved.. But it got me thinking that this isnt really fair. Chipper and Prior are question marks as to how to when and how they will return. In a sense.. Team B could be getting Helton,Ichiro,Jeter for Nevin! Should injured players in these kinds of deals be allowed to be traded with such uncertainty surrounding there returns? I dont veto hardly ever but this one has me thinking.
Jack-In-A-Box
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1194
(Past Year: -1)
Joined: 11 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Atlanta GA

Postby matmat » Sat Apr 24, 2004 1:04 am

Jack-In-A-Box wrote:To put a different spin on this.. because someone in my league has a trade thats in its voting period now. Two of the 3 players coming from one team are injured. For 3 healthy, ready to start today guys.
Team A gave up
Helton,Ichiro,Jeter
Team B gave
Chipper,Prior,Nevin.

I didnt veto this and both sides knew that injured players were involved.. But it got me thinking that this isnt really fair. Chipper and Prior are question marks as to how to when and how they will return. In a sense.. Team B could be getting Helton,Ichiro,Jeter for Nevin! Should injured players in these kinds of deals be allowed to be traded with such uncertainty surrounding there returns? I dont veto hardly ever but this one has me thinking.



yes. all trades that are not due to collusion are fine as long as _BOTH_SIDES_ are aware of any and all injury situations of the players involved. Full disclosure, just like in the major leagues... just think back to the trade between pittsburgh and boston last year... I forget the pitcher's name, but he was sent back because of "damaged goods" clauses and the like...
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll drown because you forgot to teach him to swim.
[url=http://www.indra.com/8ball/front.html]Invaluable Fantasy Baseball Resource[/url]
matmat
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 4107
(Past Year: -13)
Joined: 12 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: North cross down

Next

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

cron