Computer Trades

One idea I had is beginning next year, you may make a trade with a team currently without a gm. How it would work is you must post your trade and what you are going to trade. It has to be realistic for both teams and two mods must approve. After it has been approved, other teams will have 24 hours to make a better offer than the one posted before. Once a better offer stands for 24 hours, that teams trade goes through.


Comments???

I'm tentatively for it. In my opinion, a slightly greater effort to
explain the reasoning of the trade will have to be made. In
particular, I'm most concerned with this being seen as taking
advantage of an unmanaged team. Definitely a good deal of
effort should be required to explain how the trade helps the
unmanaged team. While it may only require two admins to
approve, these sorts of trades should definitely be under the
scrutiny of the rest of the managers.

But I really do like the idea!

-Cinci'

The trades would have to be realistic for the other team. For example, you cant send prospects to a team currently in first for their best player, that wouldnt make sense.

I think it should require approval of not just the mods, but a certain percentage of other active GMs. This could turn into a bad situation quickly, and would need heavy rules regulating this from getting ugly. I don't think a trade proposal/auction scenario is the best way.

As it stands I'd vote no, but with more regulation and such, I would change my mind.

hoosier31 wrote:

I think it should require approval of not just the mods, but a certain percentage of other active GMs. This could turn into a bad situation quickly, and would need heavy rules regulating this from getting ugly. I don't think a trade proposal/auction scenario is the best way.

As it stands I'd vote no, but with more regulation and such, I would change my mind.

We could do an unaminous mod approval.

What scenario do you think would be the best?

Admin wrote:

hoosier31 wrote:

I think it should require approval of not just the mods, but a certain percentage of other active GMs. This could turn into a bad situation quickly, and would need heavy rules regulating this from getting ugly. I don't think a trade proposal/auction scenario is the best way.

As it stands I'd vote no, but with more regulation and such, I would change my mind.

We could do an unaminous mod approval.

What scenario do you think would be the best?

I see wher hoosier31 is comming from

Unanimous mod approval is better than just 2, but I think general league involvement is nessecary to keep this from being exploited.

just my opinion

i would support the idea as long as something along what hoosier said is implemented.

I vote no....let's just get active GMs

uscsteve wrote:

I vote no....let's just get active GMs

Easier said than done

i agree with uscsteve. we should start recruiting new gms.

i think computer trading is too hard to keep fair.

uscsteve wrote:

I vote no....let's just get active GMs

We've been trying to do that... are brains are bleeding just trying... its tough to get new GMs on these crappy teams...

thrower25usr wrote:

i agree with uscsteve. we should start recruiting new gms.

That isn't as easy as it sounds, esspically when at most three, in my opinion one, open team(s) is/are good looking

Then you should have listened to some of us several months ago that were begging you guys to stop Pittsburgh from claiming every terrible player on waivers. Some of this is come-uppins for short-sighted decisions.

As for this, again, trade moderating is difficult enough and has been sketchy enough in this league to allow this sort of thing. I'm willing to take the bullet and allow my appealing Baltimore team to be open to someone else. That's at least one more GM.

OriolesGM wrote:

Then you should have listened to some of us several months ago that were begging you guys to stop Pittsburgh from claiming every terrible player on waivers. Some of this is come-uppins for short-sighted decisions.

Thing is that wasn't Pittsburg trading say, a 98 stud for a 85 prospect... that was just Pittsburg being stupid.... in reality, you don't stop somebody for being an absolute moron as long as another is not take advantage of it.... (aka trades)

tunit wrote:

OriolesGM wrote:

Then you should have listened to some of us several months ago that were begging you guys to stop Pittsburgh from claiming every terrible player on waivers. Some of this is come-uppins for short-sighted decisions.

Thing is that wasn't Pittsburg trading say, a 98 stud for a 85 prospect... that was just Pittsburg being stupid.... in reality, you don't stop somebody for being an absolute moron as long as another is not take advantage of it.... (aka trades)

But this isn't reality. Yes this leagues strives to be the MOST realistic - but you have to cut the line somewhere so that the league stays strong. In real life no thumb-sucking moron is going to do any of the things that Pitt or some of the other GMs did. And if they did - their owner would fire their ass. I warned you specifically after approving the Detroit/Pitt trade that sent that team further into debt that you'd be making the team completely unattractive to a future owner and that the league must step in to stop mindless spending if it wants to keep a full, fun league.

You didn't listen, now you're recruiting problems are significant. You have nowhere else to point the finger but at yourself. Again - lets be the MOST realistic while still keeping idiots in check. If they don't like it and leave - what was lost exactly? Another thread like this one trying to figure out how to fix their messed up team?

OK....here's what we should do. If people aren't joining because the teams aren't attractive we should make them more attractive. I don't think any of the open teams are great teams because they have too many stud players. Drop some of the big salaried non-stars from these teams w/o the team buying out the contract. Balance out the team debt and give them either $0 if we can get their payroll in a position to make money or maybe $5 $10 mil to manager their own team if we get the budget close. I have no problem with the league taking steps to make these teams more attractive. The only thing is that you cannot drop star players from these teams that other teams will be able to take on during Free Agency. I think I've made a clear post that would help this situation. Ask me if there's anything to clear up but I think that would be the best possibility. And I do NOT think that teams should switch just to take on more of a challenge. The Orioles and Marlins already have their own identity and it would take away a lot if they just switched teams.....IMO.

I think this would be hard to regulate. On a side note I would like to see a better system in place for approving trades. Maybe involve more teams and require 75% approval instead of the current system which doesn't really seem to follow any guidlines.

I'm for this. I don't see why we should be held back from dealing with a team just cuz no one has picked them up. And yes, obviously the trade would have to make a lot of sense and a reasoning of why you believe the open team should make that trade would need to be posted.