-
That is really easy to say, and completely understandable for an owner not looking to compete for the top spots this year. Your point of view on the consequence of this situation is logical...but so is mine. I have never discounted your point of view.
Loco Canuck on
March 8, 2020 1:17 AM
-
so i actually have less players to trade than i would have. i think a bigger deal is being made about this than is necessary.
Kay Parker on
March 8, 2020 12:45 AM
-
I don't think I agree. What's unfortunate now is that you are just going to have to take my word for the fact that I was going to load up on tradable assets so that i could move them for affordable parts to help me going forward. If you believe me about this common sense strategy then there really is little to no difference. I was absolutely planning to get trout at any cost and unfortunately for me, I would have gotten more players to trade with the 83 dollars spent for seager and blackmon.
Kay Parker on
March 8, 2020 12:44 AM
-
..but instead we have this. I am fine with the result of the league veto vote. I don't think the core problem is fixed, either way. But, we have no choice but to move ahead. I wish I had a magic cure to suggest...I don't. Chin, I wish I could have voiced my worries in a way that satisfied you and Kay. I tried my very best to be honest and rational...I am sorry you saw it another way.
Loco Canuck on
March 8, 2020 12:43 AM
-
I did not question the details of the trade...value-wise. I was concerned that some unique circumstances left Kay with some players he was unlikely to own. This is going to lead to a cascade of events that I don't feel are good for the league. I am not blaming anyone. I am pointing out that his is not a usual Ottoneu problem..that the rationale posed by the trade partners was simplistic at best, but willfully reductionist, in my view. I was hoping to encourage a productive debate on remedies...
Loco Canuck on
March 8, 2020 12:36 AM
-
Well this went south fast. I brought up some concerns I had in a calm and reasoned manner. The defensiveness from those involved speaks volumes. I have no problem defending my veto decision. Kay doesn't make the auction..Chin recruits a proxy. The proxy buys a bunch of offensive players, when Kay really needs pitching. When Kay takes back control of his team, he says wow I don't need these high priced offensive players when I am rebuilding...admits it would have been fine to not auction...
Loco Canuck on
March 8, 2020 12:23 AM
-
Anyone who has the firepower with prospects and wants to make a play on trout LMK or forever hold your peace. If i don't hear from you then you have no right to be upset when I move him If i do hear from you i will give you a chance to match offers. Same with Blackmon. I have 2 teams interested in Blackmon and 1 in trout. I will move seager for prospects and obviously pay for his contract for this year.
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 11:19 PM
-
You know what, it doesn’t matter. I wasn’t even planning on making a big move like this before the season anyway. It’s done. I’m sorry.
Hamdingers on
March 7, 2020 10:48 PM
-
Also, Loco ... what? You guys escalated this. Don’t put this on me. You say me and Kay made the conversation about trade value and strategy. Ok, that’s right. We tried to keep this rational. About things related to the game. So ... if that’s not the issue, we’re vetoing trades for reasons other than value or strategy? Because you’re discouraged? I mean, he’s going to trade Blackmon and trout in the near future regardless. What have we solved here? Do t punt this. It’s on you guys to explain.
Hamdingers on
March 7, 2020 10:43 PM
-
I’m trying to be reasonable, and I don’t even care that much about the trade. Somebody tell me what we solved or what positive precedent we set? And yes, it is absolutely on the people throwing the ‘veto’ word around to defend that decision.
Hamdingers on
March 7, 2020 9:59 PM
-
in other news, I am very close to trading blackmon for a return that i feel really helps my team. I will give everyone until Tuesday to make offers or I'm probably going to make this deal. the market value for trout and Blackmon Is best before the season. Everyone is in contention now so i have everyone to trade with. If i wait there will only be about 4 teams to negotiate with.
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 6:11 PM
-
Just for the record. I thought chin music handled this situation with character. He has dibs on Trout as far as I'm concerned. If anyone can make a better offer, go for It, but I will take the 4 player return from CM, if not. Also, i am open to a financial arrangement if anyone has $. i will sell you talent so that I can grab some prospects off of the wire. thank you! I will not accept a trout trade without giving everyone a chance. If you feel like you have the talent to get trout from me LMK.
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 5:56 PM
-
seager or 45 on blackmon. In some ways I'm appreciative for the proxy and in others i feel like I could have gotten a ton of undervalued talent being the only one with dough after the draft. In my other leagues if you miss the draft, which other have, it goes on without you. No big deal. Anyway, I sincerely apologize for not communicating from the hospital and the trouble it has caused. I took over this team when it was in terrible shape and I plan to be a contender in 2022....
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 5:51 PM
-
I wrote fast this AM and my Ipad did a lot of unwanted auto-corrections that made me look a little crazy. I have enough time now to express my opinion legibly. My son had a burst appendix so it was a bit of an unnerving situation. We are in recovery now. I Was looking forward to going on my own spending spree for tradable assets. i was actually going to draft trout for whatever he costed. I had the most money to spend. So trout was mine no matter what. I wasn't going to spend 38 dollars on ..
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 5:46 PM
-
I didn't see have a huge problem with the trade since I do believe that Kay got a decent return for a rebuilding team, but I can also see the circumstances that would get people upset. Seeing both sides is why I have stayed quiet. The veto process is in place to handle these situations. Everyone in the league get a voice and if a majority disapproves, then majority rules. As a league, we just need to make sure that people actually look at trades and vote during the veto process.
CMC on
March 7, 2020 4:36 PM
-
Wow Chin...I bent over backwards to keep it super civil and explain my frustration as clearly as I could to spark and further the discussion. You and Kay made it about the trade value and the validity of the strategy. Which missed my points entirely, in an attempt to play the ‘sour grapes’ defence. I don’t have a problem with the value (like I said more than once). My issue comes arises from the uniqueness of the situation leading to the trade.
Loco Canuck on
March 7, 2020 3:10 PM
-
I wouldn't exactly call it pitchforks, but rather some valid concerns with how all of this unfolded. No need to amplify the drama. I think pulling in a proxy drafter at the 11th hour just to forge ahead was bad form, and should have been avoided. I should have said something in the moment, but folks seemed really keen on honoring the date and time we had all held - which I completely understand. Rescheduling would have been a real challenge for me as well.
-
That’s fine we can cancel. My frustration is I don’t see what we’ve solved. If the league (and specifically Loco and Stumptown) are going to bring out the pitchforks, I would like to have seen more constructive conversation about what we are trying to accomplish here. Or even specifically what we are trying to solve. “It makes me discouraged” isn’t really a problem. This is a game with only one winner. So what is the problem we are solving, and what is the proposed solution.
Hamdingers on
March 7, 2020 12:42 PM
-
I think this whole fiasco highlights the importance of not missing the draft, or communicating if something comes up last minute.
-
At the request of both Chin and Kay, I've cancelled the trade. However, I'm not putting any restrictions on anyone to continue to seek trades before the season starts, so Trout (or whoever) is free to move at any time. Next offseason we can discuss modifying rules to avoid this situation in the future.
-
Also, it sounds like Kay was planning to spend his money on high-end assets at the auction to flip (which was the correct strategy) ... and that’s exactly what the proxy did. So I’m also not sure the proxy specifically set anything dramatically different in motion here? I get the frustration that Trout wasn’t really marketed to the whole league for long, and obviously it came down quickly and combined with the context of the night before it felt odd.
Hamdingers on
March 7, 2020 11:42 AM
-
I mean, Trout was always going to be drafted by a rebuilder with the intent of flipping. Also, just to be fair, Kay got what I see as a much better rebuilding package than a $70 Trout was traded for last year by waiting until July, so it’s not clear waiting a few months would be better. That said, he may have gotten more if he’d pushed and gotten a bidding war going? That’s possible? And I’m open to a tiered salary cap over time for the league. There are leagues with rules on loans...
Hamdingers on
March 7, 2020 11:20 AM
-
I think only bad faith trades should get vetoed, and I don't at all think this was bad faith, so I'm fine with it. No one ever likes a "sell" type trade no matter when it goes up, but its key part of dynasty
Strick9 on
March 7, 2020 11:03 AM
-
The big picture is not the content of the trade...which is not vetoable on content alone. I have abstained from far more objectionable trades. Maybe there is no fair remedy...I just thought the debate should occur.
Loco Canuck on
March 7, 2020 11:00 AM
-
I personally have very little issue with the content of the trade. I think you can do better mid season, but that is your call. My issues are with the rules around these types of trades, the fact that this sequence of events would not have happened with all owners at the auction, and worried about the ripple effect. I have no specific remedy, which is why I felt my only option was my first veto vote. Happy to have the debate and good with league consensus.
Loco Canuck on
March 7, 2020 10:57 AM
-
I will be gone today so hopefully everyone can be diplomatic and look at the bigger picture rather than Who did or didn’t get trout. I have a real opportunity to improve my team for next year and beyond. But I’ll hold off for now if it’s what’s best for the league.
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 10:54 AM
-
To a new owner, or what ever you guys want. Just so you know, I was going to bid on tryout in the draft so that i could trade him I had 225 to spend and had every intention of getting the best tradable assets. I think you guys should overturn the trade if you think it’s bad for the league. I’ll do whatever y’all think is right.
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 10:49 AM
-
Got trout. Do you. See that my team is GREATLY improved for the future after that trade? Who’s to say that tryout doesn’t go down with an injury and Bohm is the next star 3B? Lamet stikes out 220 hitters when I had no pitching? Whoever drafted for me went Hogwild on hitters and didn’t get me a single pitcher. Anyway, I like the return on the trade, but i also understand that I did it too fast, which wasn’t fair for the league. I’ll take the trade, not take the trade, I’ll give the team over ...
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 10:46 AM
-
The season starts and let this blow over. At which point, I will start the trade talks giving everyone who wants a chance to make offers. OR If someone has a better idea, I’m open to anything. I don’t want to hurt the league anymore than I did, but I also need to improve my team for the future. Getting a betting champ contender, 200 k power pitcher, arguably the best 3b prospect, and a SS prospect who hit the cover off of AA pitching is a good return. You guys are only seeing that Chin music..
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 10:42 AM
-
Chin music, but maybe that deal will go through later or maybe not. I want to do whatever is right for the league. I have a 70 trout, 38 seager, 45 Blackman and so on. You all know I’m going to trade them and you all know that whoever doesn’t get them will be upset. Yes, this is a byproduct of me not being at the draft and in the future there is always FA and financial trades to be made so i didn’t need someone to draft for me. If the trade is overturned, I will hold onto my players until...
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 10:38 AM
-
...to see that some one had drafted for me. Anyway, everything you all have said is true. I got 4 players who will; be on my team next year for one player that won’t. That’s good for me. I’m happy with the return, but on the flip side, I don’t want to hurt this league more than I already have. I have asked the commish to overturn the trade so the I can be transparent with the league about my plans to liquidate and give everyone a fair shake. It sucks for ..
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 10:33 AM
-
I won’t get into the logistics of why this trade is good for my team. Instead I will address the bigger issue. I had a family emergency and couldn’t make the draft. I should have taken the few minutes to let the league know I wouldn’t be there, but I got wrapped up in w2hat i was doing. My team is in a rebuilding stage and I thought I would probably come back and make financial related trades and pick up prospects - there are still some good ones out there. Instead I checked in the next AM ...
Kay Parker on
March 7, 2020 10:28 AM
-
Not sure why my message was cut off, as it was within 500 characters. In any case, my final comment was: given the ongoing silence from Kay Parker, I have also cast a veto (which I would not do without serious consideration). Related to this, we still don't have confirmation that the original owner is back at the helm, correct?
-
I'm with Loco Canuck on this...it certainly appears as though bringing in a proxy drafter set in motion the dynamics leading to this trade, which is not "business as usual". Sure, trades like this will happen in ottoneu, and in real life, but this one appears to be a response to actions taken by someone who isn't even a part of this league. And, it could have significant implications on the season ahead - for the entire league. Given the ongoing silence from Kay Parker, I have also cas
-
...this scenario (which would not have prompted my veto vote) would have denied the full season Trout production and removed more valuable assets from the acquiring team. This is a much more unusual situation than the owners saying...'this is a part of Ottoneu'...'business as usual unless there was collusion'. I am not devastated by this, or going to quit. I worry about the ripple effect this will cause. I am already looking how I can make a similar preseason deal to keep pace
Loco Canuck on
March 7, 2020 10:18 AM
-
My second issue with this trade is that you can't evaluate the trade without including how the main piece was acquired. I doubt real Kay would have bought Trout with the intent on trading him, and with the real Kay in the auction, someone who wanted Trout would own him within the salary cap. Also, a player who really wanted Trout acquired him in the auction...I am guessing the price would have been higher and the trade would have come later...
Loco Canuck on
March 7, 2020 10:13 AM
-
Fair points all. My 2 issues are...One...I feel there should be a point in the season where salary cap can be exceeded...not minutes after the auction. This beef is systematic, can only be addressed by the bosses, but is making me more and more likely to leave Ottoneu after many years. I thought it would be better in the higher cost leagues, with less teams willing to scrap & rebuild so early...it is not.
Loco Canuck on
March 7, 2020 10:08 AM
-
I'm pretty much where CM is at. I'm wary of the subjectivity of trade vetoes without a clear set of standards as to whether we're talking about simple fairness/balance in the sides of a trade, nefarious intentions, or even harm to league competitiveness. I also don't think we can tell KP how to manage his team if he isn't doing anything illegal, no matter how much I dislike a trade or not. As long as we're all confident that everyone is trying to execute a legit strategy, then that's that.
-
i'm the newest member here, and i'm rebuilding a pitiful team so I really don't have much of a voice but to me there's no clear answer to fix this..you can't really reverse the trade and tell Kay he can't make a similar trade another day to a different team. I'm just ready to start the season this seems like a good league and im ready to make this team much better and compete.
Masebot33 on
March 7, 2020 8:01 AM
-
If people are really concerned about it, I’m fine reversing it on my end. Or some other solution. It’s not a huge deal to me as long as we’re reasonable and productive about this. But, then what? Can he trade Trout to somebody else next week? Is that fair? If not, can he trade somebody more like Blackmon? Or are we going to tell a rebuilding team that they can’t trade their best expensive assets? Or that nobody can trade a good player until May? I just think this needs to be thought through.
Hamdingers on
March 7, 2020 2:38 AM
-
If we are going to go down the path of considering a veto (and I’m fine discussing it), then I think we at least need to be clear about exactly what the issue is and exactly what the rules or expectation will be in the future. The circumstances are odd, but I don’t know any reason to think anything was done in bad faith (though it’d be nice to get Kay’s take), and obviously trades like this are common in otto. So I think we need to be specific if we are going to consider setting such precedent.
Hamdingers on
March 7, 2020 2:16 AM
-
I checked with proxy to double-check it wasn’t from him, but regardless, it seems as though it would be helpful to get Kay’s perspective on this whole thing?
Hamdingers on
March 7, 2020 1:12 AM
-
Do we even know for sure the trade was made by the original Kay or the proxy? This whole thing is smeared with uncertainty. I hoped we we would hear more than “oh well” from the commish. I am not saying I have a clear way to right the ship...just finding it troubling. I cast my first veto vote In my long Ottoneu career...I didn’t see another option.
Loco Canuck on
March 7, 2020 12:32 AM
-
Commish, with all due respect, that is a bit of a reductionist view of this. Unfair trades happen in fantasy and in real life...that’s the take? Don’t you agree this a bit of an outlier?
Loco Canuck on
March 7, 2020 12:23 AM
-
Sure, or more likely, it goes the other way and we spend much of the season wondering why Trout wasn’t shopped around a bit more. Surely there was a better offer out there that wouldn’t have rocked the boat quite as much...
-
For all we know Trout will blow out his ACL tomorrow, and then Kay will look like a prophet.
-
I dislike this trade too, but seemingly unfair trades are part of fantasy (and real-life) baseball. If both Kay and Chin want to reverse it I will, but I would prefer to not set a precedent where every trade gets scrutinized and called out from some teams that disagree with it
-
I guess had I known how this was going to end up I should have just brought out Trout from the get go.
Masebot33 on
March 6, 2020 8:53 PM
-
Maybe that means increasing the stakes/buy-in (as per Kenny Powers' suggestion), maybe we tinker with trade rules (or at least start a conversation about whether we should do more to scrutinize trades), or maybe it's as simple as just reaffirming everyone's commitment to playing to win. I dunno. But I agree with everyone's sentiments so far that this didn't feel great.
-
Yeah I don't think that's enough for Trout (and certainly not Trout+). But I also both respect the rebuild and the decision to act on a chance to get better fast. I just wish it had come to pass differently.
I think we had a bit of a hiccup, but I LIKE this league, and I think it's worth giving some thought to how we can keep the competitive balance fair without over-manipulating things . It's been a fun/competitive 5x5 to be a part of, even when my team was in the basement a few years ago...
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages