-
Try Not to Suck's trade block has been updated!
-
In all honesty, the veto process in this trade was where the actual collusion took place. Want to win? Make better offers for valuable players on rebuilding teams instead of utter garbage where there isn't even a place to begin negotiations.
-
That trade being vetoed kinda makes me not want to be in this league next year.
-
Criminal Shadymen's trade block has been updated!
-
I'm excited to see what these "fair" offers are - Sale, Goldschmidt and Kimbrel on the block.
-
WTF's trade block has been updated!
-
Lake Bell, I think you can locate the no loans league through Slack. I believe Justin Vibber launched it this season. The realism I'm not sure, since MLB teams often pay down an albatross contract to deal a player or get a better prospect. But it definitely does present a totally different strategy for managing your roster and making trades.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 6, 2017 2:37 PM
-
The 5MiLB spreadsheet has been updated to best of my knowledge. Everyone please check for accuracy: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fuKp8XZ4W5DNlH48EgOq3SDy3PKiSasx0Mmn1BzzdXQ/edit#gid=0
Going forward, please send me a message any time 5MiLB players are traded or promoted, and I will update the sheet. Thank you.
WAR Horse on
June 6, 2017 2:23 PM
-
i'd love to be in a league with no loans. I don't like the "arcade" aspect of seeing 3 of the best players in baseball go to one team in a single deal. I don't blame either team for doing it, but it takes all of the realism out of it for me. plain and simple. Where do you find no loan leagues?
-
True contenders needs a SP, RP and a C/1B. So come one, come all. Get them before they disappear
-
Fly Eli's Evian Showers's trade block has been updated!
-
Are you a contender? Do you want to beat SABRmagician? Four Horsemen has solutions! Miguel Cabrera! Stephen Strasburg! Get 'em while they're hot!
WAR Horse on
June 5, 2017 3:41 PM
-
Four Horsemen's trade block has been updated!
WAR Horse on
June 5, 2017 3:40 PM
-
The only time this comes up is when someone makes a trade that others don't like. But changing the entire system because of that still won't fix that issue. People are going to make trades that other don't like. Sometimes they will work out in ways we can't predict and sometimes they will be every bit as bad as everyone thinks at the time. I do think there's one league that started this year with no loans and it would be interesting to hear their perspective after the season.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 5, 2017 2:19 PM
-
Recoup via trade or keep the player they've acquired for another season, I should say. Or how do you handle, for example, it if a team acquires a player with a loan and still falls out of contention, leading them to want to flip the player they acquired? I get the consternation with loans, but it's super complex to try to customize changes to the entire system.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 5, 2017 2:13 PM
-
Agree that the smaller deals are often likely to be better for the seller. But the buyer having no opportunity to recoup any of their costs in the offseason would also reduce the price they are willing to pay. The price goes down for a pure rental. So I'm not sure we can conclusively say that's better for the league. It's just different.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 5, 2017 2:09 PM
-
I think if people were pushed to make smaller deals though, it would quickly become clear how often these big package deals are bad for the seller. I think that by itself would be an improvement. By the way, this deal still could have happened even with that restriction - it would have simply rendered Goldy/Kimbrel/Sale free agents at the end of the season, which would be good for the health of the league.
WAR Horse on
June 5, 2017 1:46 PM
-
reached the loan limit. The deeper issue you guys are really raising is that some owners make questionable trades or some trades just don't work out like you hope, which affects the balance of the league in the current season and going forward. But I'm not sure there's much to be done about that other than what our commissioner has done, which is to try to get good owners who are active and engaged.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 5, 2017 1:42 PM
-
I agree the loan issue is a big one in Ottoneu, but the only leagues I've seen make any meaningful change are those that allow no loans. The loan limit per transaction idea just pushes people to make smaller, individual deals though. You'd just take a larger deal and split it up into three smaller deals with the loan spread around. And a $100 seasonal limit on loan acceptance just rewards early sellers more than later. Sellers would have no market later in the year once contenders have...
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 5, 2017 1:39 PM
-
The idea of all players received with a loan above a certain amount automatically becoming free agents in the offseason is a very interesting one. I think I like that more than other hard cap/loan limit ideas.
WAR Horse on
June 5, 2017 1:22 PM
-
Oh, and, my money's still on Fly Eli to take it down this year, lopsided deals be damned.
-
I'll add that collusion is relatively serious accusation and it probably shouldn't be mentioned unless you're prepared to back it up with something tangible. I honestly don't think the return was that bad, but I do think it's good practice for any owner (and league as a whole) that assets in high demand be shopped around, or at put on the trade block.
-
+1 "The larger anti-competitive problem with big loans trades, and especially here, doesn't come from the seller not getting enough back, but from the buyer being able to then trade those assets for a large return in the offseason and perpetuate roster inequality and that's where I think the situation would be easy to rectify."
-
Make Love Not WAR's trade block has been updated!
-
Ⓜ️ Montreal Royals's trade block has been updated!
-
/rant over
-
So the easy fix would be along the lines of "if you take on a loan (greater than $0? $10? $20?) in a given deal, all players acquired on that side of said deal will be free agents when the season ends." That way even an objectionable trade won't be helping the contender for seasons to come. And if a contender wants to take on a guy they view as a keeper, they'll have to get creative in freeing up salary instead of the standard "loan to make you whole" approach.
-
But loans trades should have a place in ottoneu, they allow rebuilders a faster route to getting back into contention and grab those top surplus assets off contenders' rosters. Some rebuilders even take this strategy into auction and target a few big fish at bloated costs with the express intention of cashing them in later.
-
If you take on a $80 Miggy, it's not much of a problem going forward because he would be seen as a universal cut. But Sale, Kimberly, and Goldie? Top 2 at each of their positions. Preseason they were all seen as ~par value considering our league's inflation, but their superior performances and the corresponding changes in projections mean that they're all looking like easy keeps for '18. Wouldn't be shocking to see SABR turn around and net big surplus for them. Maybe from Y+H new owner?
-
The larger anti-competitive problem with big loans trades, and especially here, doesn't come from the seller not getting enough back, but from the buyer being able to then trade those assets for a large return in the offseason and perpetuate roster inequality and that's where I think the situation would be easy to rectify.
-
I don't find it collusionary, but in accordance with my liberal views on veto usage, I feel MLNW left too much $ on the table, so I'll be casting a veto vote.
-
Okay. So this brings up an interesting point and I have a solution I should tell niv. This is an inherent issue with ottonue. Loans make it so there really is no salary cap once the season starts. WARiors had almost 700 in payroll last year. What about a 500 hardcap? That way you can only take on 100 extra dollars during the season and it doesn't get silly like this league. You would need to be at 400 to start the season and could never go above 500? Would really solve a lot of issues.
-
There was a lot of player/money capital left on the table - I'm not happy about it like some of us it seems. I don't think there is collusion but it is a bad trade and I oppose it. My veto vote means basically nothing and I don't think that this is the clear end of this year's season. I know that I am trying to make trades more fair than that in other leagues and am not getting any bites. I don't like my chances as much in this league for this year but it is not over.
-
The best thing I can say about it is I've seen worse deals, I guess.
WAR Horse on
June 4, 2017 11:28 PM
-
I don't think there's been collusion, but I would say that when several teams have a strong reaction against a trade, it does normally mean there was a better deal to be made. Maybe not. But without advertising and exploring the possibilities, you'll never know.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 4, 2017 11:23 PM
-
It's a really poor return for those players, but I don't have any reason to suspect collusion, so I'm not going to vote to veto. Congrats to SABRmagician for finding the mark.
WAR Horse on
June 4, 2017 11:21 PM
-
At the very least don't loan all the money. Ppl already game the cap system via drop and reaction drops, now we continue to pull this. What's the point of having a cap if no one wants to hold ppl to it. We're just hurting ourselves (low ranked teams).
-
I understand he got prospects for expensive talent, I'm no dummy. But what point is there in playing if ppl wanna just give away CY prize money
-
He got trea Turner, benintendi, and an underpriced top 12 pitcher. All for superstar players who are expensive!! That's with this league is all about. I agree, you could have said those players were on the market, but it's not like he got a bad deal. No collusion. Come on.
-
That's cute - the "c" word. I don't know if I've made another trade with SABR in the three years I've been in the league - but you're right. Totally collusion. The amount of poor sports in ottoneu is ridiculous. All of my players are on the block.
-
The trade hasn't went through. I vetoed it, 6 of you could as well
-
Fwiw, I wasn't ever part of a trade offer. Don't want to say it, but smells like collusion
-
The fact an owner makes a trade like this for one all star, let alone 3 means I won't be donating my fee to this league again next year. Feel free to come get everyone
-
But again, that's your prerogative.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 4, 2017 10:21 PM
-
I don't care if you counter or not. All I'm saying is from a business standpoint, no company with a great product and a desire to maximize profit fails to inform the market of the product's availability. Unless you told them individually, none of the other owners knew that Sale, Goldschmidt and Kimbrel were available.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 4, 2017 10:20 PM
-
I just said you made and offer which I didn't think was reasonable. I apologize if this sounds abrasive, but if we aren't in the same ballpark in a trade offer (apologies for the pun), than I don't see a reason to counter. Someone was willing to offer something I deemed acceptable, so I accepted it.
-
I'll second those comments as well.
-
And sure, maybe you didn't get comparable offers for Sale alone, but your trade isn't for Sale alone either. But hey, you paid the fee and you get to run your team however you like.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 4, 2017 10:15 PM
-
All I'm saying is that if you're selling the best starting pitcher, best first basemen and best closer in the game, I think you're better served by putting them on the trade block. Maybe SABR's offer would've been the best one, but probably not. And he likely would have upped his own offer if he'd had competition.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 4, 2017 10:13 PM
-
You gotta do what you think is best for your team, but you didn't trade offers with me brother. You rejected my feeler offer without comment, even to say whether you were even interested in discussing Sale or selling at all.
Lamoka 🏹 on
June 4, 2017 10:10 PM
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages