General Fantasy Sports

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: Trade Deadline Talk

Posted by: Great One@Work
- [59946299] Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 15:37

I am addicted to trading. No question. But I wanted to check on whether or not we ever established a trade deadline.

I was thinking a full month before Wrestlemania.

Thoughts... concerns... formal proposals... talk amongst yourselves...
1Mike D
      Sustainer
      ID: 41831612
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 15:41
Other than my obviously prized keepers in Colon and Cena (cuz they ain't scorin'!), I'm always willing to talk. Speaking of which, you have yet to respond to some Hoops offers bro. And a football offer to be named later!
2Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 2824911
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 15:42
I've always felt we need a clear trade deadline.
3Great One@Work
      ID: 59946299
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 15:45
forgot to add... I was thinking a full month because it will avoid complete roster revamping after things are already decided.
extra...
I also had in mind a provision where 1 for 1 deals could still be done with approval. Like if say MITH and I wanted to swap Christian for Shelton. That trade is dramatically different than "roster reorganization" trades where you would you move 3 guys for 1.
I think the deadline is to prevent late "roster reorganization" moves not to prevent people from doing balanced 1 for 1 deals.

I have a feeling no one will be in favor of the extra provision - but I think we should still vote on and establish a standard trade deadline.

4kev
      ID: 3155515
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 16:03
I have a #1 pick I can shop around ;)
5Mike D
      Sustainer
      ID: 41831612
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 16:05
I would agree a trade deadline should be instituted.
6kev
      ID: 3155515
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 16:09
I think a trade deadline is a good idea, but I also believe there should be a window as to where "offseason" moves can be made, before Keepers are announced.

For example- lets say I really want to keep Y2J, and he is my top scorer, but it's close with Mysterio- I obviously can't pull the trigger with a trade deadline to pick up a top scorer to insure I keep Y2J. After the season, Y2J outscores Mysterio, and I have to lose him. If there is a little window to pull off an "offseason" trade, it would allow for more roster flexibility.

Up to you guys- just a suggestion.
7Great One@Work
      ID: 59946299
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 16:19
Kev - you are shopping my number 1 pick too which currently makes it very valuable lol...
8wiggs
      Donor
      ID: 04991311
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 17:44
I dont think we can establish a trade dead line. For example, I want to hold onto orton, but you never know what might happen at WM. Maybe Angle ends up out scoring him. You never know what will happen. I think we should leave it the way it is.
9Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 4494554
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 20:52
I think that's exactly the reason for why we should have a deadline. We all want to be able to put ourselves in a position to keep our best corers, but inevitably, the people with the best rosters are far better suited to pull off such a trade than others. To allow this in the final weeks of the season eliminates almost any potential risk for the rich to set themselves up to be even richer next season.

August discussion.

10Farn
      Sustainer
      ID: 451044109
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 21:11
I am in favor of a deadline. All leagues have them, we should too.
11Tree
      Donor
      ID: 599393013
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 21:49
i am in favor of a deadline as well.

i think we should be simple about it, something like 4 to 6 weeks before the end of the season.
12Great One
      ID: 1110371021
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 22:44
how about - not a specific date - but an event, like the last PPV of year before Wrestlemania. whatever the heck its called.

Most deadlines in sports/leagues are a couple months before the end - so I think 1 month is reasonable.
13Great One
      ID: 1110371021
      Wed, Nov 10, 2004, 22:44
and by not a specific date, I mean each season it'll just be the next-to-last PPV.
14Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 2824911
      Thu, Nov 11, 2004, 12:58
Currently, the WWE PPV schedule lists No Way Out on Feb 20th (Week 26) as the last one before WMXXI on April 4th (Week 31). I think 5 weeks is fine, but we should set a specific date, in case WWE changes the No Way Out date or decides to squeeze another PPV in there. I doubt the WM date will be changed at this point, since the event is already sold out.

Also, we never discussed a waiver claim deadline, but I can't think of a reason for why we should have one.
15Great One@Work
      ID: 59946299
      Thu, Nov 11, 2004, 13:02
I am down for waiver claims til whenever...
16Bond, James Bond
      ID: 271037118
      Thu, Nov 11, 2004, 14:22
In regards to the trading deadline issue, there seems to be an inkling of support in favor of policing us against, well, ourselves.

I don't understand why that is.

It's not that I'm not in favor of a deadline (frankly, I haven't been convinced yet), it's just there seems to be an aura of mistrust among our comrades--one that I have yet to see. To me, if a deadline is set, it's because somebody is trying to protect their interests in case of some sort of unforeseen shenanigans by another party or parties.

In major league sports, yes, a trading deadline is a necessary evil but not here.

I feel (until I'm convinced otherwise) that a trading deadline could harm us more than help us. There will always be those occasions where we may come down to the end of the season and one or more of our superstars are injured. A trade may be a fast and easy way to "steal" a league victory but at what cost?

As you all know, there's always a risk in trading. If you trade too well, that is, if you're team improves much greater than the team of the person with whom you traded with, then the risk is that the person whom you made the trade with may never trade with you again. Fair? Absolutely!

We've heard it time and time again that the best trades are the ones that help both teams. I agree whole-heartedly with that statement.

On a personal note, ever since I was fortunate enough to be able to join your coveted league, I've been actually quite pleased for the most part with the honesty and integrity of all of you. Not for a single minute have I had to take pause and consider whether or not somebody wanted to shaft my team intentionally. Granted, many of the trade discussions have been a little "out there" but in my viewpoint that's just a normal way of assessing one's opinions vs. another's. Never have I felt anybody was out to destroy my roster no matter the cost.

I love the fact that when trades are made here, they don't have to go through a Commissioner or a board of directors or even need a majority of league member's approval before they'll allowed to pass. It works here because we trust each enough to be honest with all league parties. That's integrity and integrity should never be enclosed within boundaries.

Do we really need a trading deadline to protect ourselves from each other? Think about it and after you get done, think about some more and you may find that the person you actually don't trust may be that person you see every morning in the mirror. If you've gotten to the point where you don't actually trust the other league members to police themselves appropriately then maybe....

Just one man's thoughts.
17Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 2824911
      Thu, Nov 11, 2004, 14:58
I don't think it has anything to do with honesty.

In my opinion, the reason for a trading deadline stems from the fact that late season trades are frequently used to reposition our teams to better set them up for the draft. In this keeper league, we must give up our top scorer (total scores for the season count, not team totals) and then pick 4 of the remaining 7 to keep. This leads to competetive late-season jockying for the handful of players that can be traded to teams that will allow them to keep their (otherwise) top scorer. And that is fine. But the inevitable fact is that the top teams will always have an easier time accomplishing this than the lesser teams, and a greater number of lesser teams that might be able to benefit from such a deal will always be at the mercy of the few greater teams who can benefit from making a trade from the opposite perspective.

Setting a deadline will do two things. First, it will introduce a risk factor. Five weeks before the end of the season, some teams won't know for sure who their top scorers will be (this is usually moer true of the better teams, but this season is an anomoly). They may wind up trading for someone who fails to score enough to allow them to keep the guy they want.

Second, it prevents a lopsided talent exchange. Last year, Wiggs traded Booker T and Mysterio for Benoit and Richards. It was a great move. Adding Benoit for the last week of the season allowed him to keep Orton. Now, this issue wouldn't have affected Wiggs last season since he won by such a wide margin, but a team that isn't running away with the title probably can't afford to make that trade with 5 weeks to go in the season.

Understand that as far as I'm concerned there have not been any occasions of wrongdoing of any kind by anyone on this issue. It's just that the lack of a deadline (a) allows for a strategy that (I think) most of us believes is a variation from the purpose of what trades should be for and (b) serves the wealthier teams better than it serves the less-wealthy ones. This has always been a league where we have tried to make the rules accomodate parity from season to season.
18Great One@Work
      ID: 59946299
      Thu, Nov 11, 2004, 15:00
Bond -
certainly don't think its an issue of collusion or anything like that... trades always help both sides around here. so thats not the question.

I think most of us felt like we got burned a bit -(read through the august discussion link)with that trade the day before the season ended. And the trade was legit, helped both teams etc... but I think it left a bad taste in our mouths.

The only reason I could see not having a deadline though is because there is no offseason for this league. In other keeper leagues you have similar trading in the offseason and not a rush during the last week after things are decided. And I have surely seen similar deals to the one Wiggs got go down (witness my acquiring KG for Wade,JermO and Brad Miller in Jeepers Keepers)... but that was during the offseason - not the last day of the year.
So the question is - does not having an offseason change the entire dynamic of things? Like considering NOT having a deadline?

I guess its tough to put your arms around the whole situation really.

and btw - my offer of Rodney Mack for Batista was not "out there"... and it still stands! think he is due for a huge push! :)
19wiggs@school
      ID: 910341114
      Thu, Nov 11, 2004, 15:37
While I totally understand what you are saying about the trades, look at how much it improved Kevs team as well. He got Rey Mysterio for basically nothing because he was looking at losing Beniot no matter what and it helped me because that allowed me to keep Orton. Rey has scored 304 points to date, so I still believe it helped both of us equally.
20Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 2824911
      Thu, Nov 11, 2004, 15:45
I agree, Wiggs, it wasn't a lopsided trade at all in terms of how the participants benefitted.
21Species
      Leader
      ID: 07724916
      Thu, Nov 11, 2004, 16:51
I am in favor of a trading deadline 1 month before the final PPV of a particular season.
22kev
      ID: 3155515
      Fri, Nov 12, 2004, 01:32
In most keeper leagues, there are trade deadlines, but there is also that time for jockeying of position/keepers. That is all I'm looking for.

The trade I made with Wiggs last year set me up to be in a better spot to compete. Honestly, for a guy who was running in last, to 2nd last, does it really matter to me if Wiggs wins by 300 or 3000 points? No. Not in the least. My goal is to improve my team to the point it is a top 3 or 4 team, and hope an injury happens to a top dog, and I can take a run at the top.

I think the Booker/Rey for Benoit/Richards trade is a prime example of why, in the very least, there needs to be some sort of window to set your keepers in the manner you want. That trade helped both teams out greatly. Wiggs came up with the idea of keeping Orton by trading away 2 quality guys to a team with a higher scorer than Orton- anyone else could have tried to make that deal too.

If there had been a trade deadline, and I wouldn't have been able to make that trade- my team would still be last to 2nd last, and I wouldn't have the interest I do. Now, I have quality wrestlers who gain me points, and I like, instead of having my keepers of Bischoff, Keibler, Lita, and Cade.

I hope to try and deal with Wiggs again this year. If I can gain another scorer to add to my keepers, while giving him what he is looking for, I'm all for it. I might have the #1 pick in the next draft. If I can combine that wrestler with 3 quality keepers, I'm gonna take that shot.

If there is a trade deadline, I think we need to have a period of time where trades can be made before keepers are declared. These are when trades are best made.

Making a trade deadline could also hurt in some ways- for example...

I have a trade already done with Great One to swap first round picks. If his team doesn't make the turn, it looks like I am picking top 2 no matter what my team does.

Wiggs has approached me with a trade I deem to be very helpful to my future success. If I take the trade now, my teams total points probably take a hit, but not big enough to slip me past Great One (no offense). Wiggs team, however, would gain in a big big way, giving him the extra gun to pull away from MITH. If the trade doesn't go through till the season is really late, Wiggs might not have the oppurtunity to pull away, and if someone gets injured, maybe the pot gets juicer for me or him.

Trade Deadlines could hurt just as much as not having them. If trades that are made to change keepers are made with 5/6 weeks left in the season, then there could be some major point spins. What if the trade involving Benoit was made this year, with a deadline in place? It still would make perfect sense for me to make, but it would kill off any hope MITH had of winning..

just blabbing...
23Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 4494554
      Fri, Nov 12, 2004, 06:37
Setting a trade deadline is not an effort to keep me in the hunt for the title or to keep Wiggs from pulling away.
24Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 2824911
      Mon, Jan 03, 2005, 13:54
The following was sent to me by Great One:

Its been mentioned before and I think we need to formally vote on this
so people can plan accordingly.

Trade Deadline

A.The date thrown around was the last PPV before WM. (No Way Out I believe). I propose the deadline be the roster freeze before No Way Out
which is 5 weeks before WM. Maybe MITH can come up with the specific dates for this but I think its an easy enough guideline for this and future seasons.

(Note, unless WWE has changed their PPV sched, since I posted #14, No Way Out is on Feb 20th (Week 26), 5 weeks before WMXXI on April 4th (Week 31). -mith)

B.I would like to propose that draft pick trading still be allowed, as it techically is a trade for NEXT season anyhow. Assuming we all could just make it official after the draft starts anyway - why not just let it go on before the actual draft so that a nice clean draft order can be established beforehand. i.e. if I wanna swap 1st and 4th round for 2nd and 3rd then I have the ability to do so. But obviously no specific
talent can be exchanged. People can still feel free to swap DURING the draft, but this will hopefully accomadate the majority of moving around
for organizational purposes.

A. Yes
B. Yes
25Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 2824911
      Mon, Jan 03, 2005, 13:54
A. Yes
B. Yes
26Farn
      Sustainer
      ID: 451044109
      Mon, Jan 03, 2005, 14:01
(No Way Out is Feb 20 but WM is April 3)

to clarify, you won't be able to swap any of your nonkeepers (or is it any wrestler at all?) in the week between week 31 and the new season right? Only Draft picks? If that's right then my votes are:


A. Yes
B. Yes
27Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 2824911
      Mon, Jan 03, 2005, 14:05
Great One's proposal doesn't specify but I'm certain he intends a trade deadline at the NWO roster freeze for any and all wrestlers, divas, announcers, and anyone else that occupies a roster spot.

Part B is a seperate provision that allows for the trading of roster spots only, i.e. trading roster spot(s) for roster spot(s).
28wiggs
      ID: 2311312214
      Mon, Jan 03, 2005, 17:15
A NO
B NO
29wiggs
      ID: 2311312214
      Mon, Jan 03, 2005, 17:17
I think that trading is what makes this league alot of fun. With the stip that you cant keep your highest scorer I dont see how you can put a trade deadline. For Example, Angle is my leading scorer and Orton is 2nd. I think I am happy with the way my team is set up, then orton wins the belt at Mania, now my whole roster is messed up. I think that we should allow trading the whole time, but if we are going to set a deadline then we need to be consistant, a trade is a trade, weather it be wrestlers, picks or a combo of the 2.
30Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 321145174
      Mon, Jan 03, 2005, 17:52
Well I think the reason for the difference is that none of the reasons for preventing late-season trading really applies to draft picks. The reason I agreed with the 'part B' provision is that I feel it helps to allow for as much leniency as possible while still accomplishing the goal of a trade deadline. If there is a deadline, I don't really see a point in prohibiting draft pick trades, except for the purpose of keeping the rule simple. But really, this isn't complicated.
31Great One
      ID: 551038246
      Mon, Jan 03, 2005, 18:36
home... the picks are irrelevant really... I could still have a "handshake agreement" with say Mike D to swap 1st and 3rd picks or something - and we could easily just wait til the draft actually starts to make it official. This rule is just to clarify and say - why not just allow it in the first place?(when its not involving players, just the numbers).
32Bond, James Bond
      ID: 45011412
      Tue, Jan 04, 2005, 14:31
After reading and re-reading this entire post a number of times, I have been convinced (for the most part) to have a trading deadline.

Perhaps it may have to do as well with all the trade propositions I have received the last couple of weeks or so. Nevertheless, I now can see where a trading deadline makes absolute sense.

Going back against my aforementioned views in post 16, I am convinced this issue is NOT totally about honesty, integrity and ethics (although my ending argument will state that they can't be ignored); rather, this is about making the best possible moves for your team within the framework of our current rules and regulations as they apply to upcoming drafts.

Certainly there are many reasons to NOT have a trading deadline but I will defer to the astute opinions of others in this thread that a trading deadline, as I see it, is in the best interest for our league.

I cannot, for the sake of brevity, go into all the convoluted, elaborate and variegated thoughts that makes voting for this idea a better option than not having one. To be sure, this is not an easy issue to decipher and just a simple mandate will not suffice. There are risks involved. Numerous risks. Risks that must be taken seriously. An etched-in-stone trading deadline can seriously be a detriment to some teams. I understand that. Wiggs' point in post 29, for example, is a valid one. So is Kev's in post 22. Having a deadline can cause, under the most extreme conditions, a debilitating and harmful consequence that was not intended.

However it is now my belief that a deadline will definitely cause a G/M to take a better account of not only his current team's climate but also the climate of his nearest competitors. And yes, anything that leads us to better accountability among each other, a better climate to enjoy and better long-term planning on the part of all of us is a good thing to consider.

Finally, I like the idea that with a deadline, one or more persons can't intentionally "tilt" a season championship toward or against a certain individual. For example, in baseball, we know there are some serious Yankee haters out there. Just suppose that Toronto, Baltimore and a myriad of other teams threw their support behind Boston and gave them players that would seriously assist them in catching the hated Yanks? Would that be fair? No way. As such, this type of scenerio is one of the main reasons there is a trading deadline in baseball today.

Therefore, our league should create a situation whereby each team earns their final position based upon their season-long accomplishments and not just from the "generosity" of others. A trading deadline is an essential, necessary and logical course of action for our league.

A. Yes
B. Yes
33Great One
      ID: 551038246
      Tue, Jan 04, 2005, 19:04
a simple yes or no would have sufficed. :)
34Great One
      ID: 551038246
      Tue, Jan 04, 2005, 20:15
Bond - I don't even know what some of those words mean! but thank you for thinking everything through thoroughly.
35Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 2824911
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 16:15
BUTT

Still waiting for official responses from Kev, Tree, Goatlocker, Species and Mike D.

Current Status:

Prop A
Yea: 4 (Great One, MITH, Farn, Bond)
Nay: 1 (Wiggs)

Prop B
same
36Tree
      ID: 76471215
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 16:25
Prop A: i am voting NO on this because of semantics and language.

this proposition is for this season only. i definitely believe in a trading deadline, but i'd like to see it for EVERY season.

if this were re-submitted with clear deadlines for BOTH seasons, i'd vote yes in a heartbeat.

Proposition B: because i voted NO for A, my vote here is to keep the status quo.
37Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 2824911
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 16:30
Great One can clear that up but I'm pretty sure that he intends the roster freeze for the last PPV before WM, this case being No Way Out. Regardless, its good that you caught that to prevent any future issues, but I don't think it needs to be resubmitted, just clarified. Anyone who doesn't like the clarification can change their vote.
38Farn
      Sustainer
      ID: 451044109
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 16:40
well, my understanding is that it would be the last PPV before WM and then the last PPV before Summerslam. But we should make that language clear in the official rule.
39Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 321145174
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 18:10
Right, thanks Farn.
40GoatLocker
      Sustainer
      ID: 060151121
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 20:29
OK, finally had time to digest all of this.
Would personally prefer to see the deadline the week after the last pay per view before the one that ends the season.
That gives people a little better feel for where they really stand and if there are any moves to make.

Based on the way it reads now, my vote would be

A. No
B. No

Cliff
41Bond, James Bond
      ID: 161159316
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 20:29
I concur that a strict and definitive deadline should be set for each season. I'm okay with Farn's idea as stated in post 38 to be the rule we should follow.
42Bond, James Bond
      ID: 161159316
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 20:47
If I'm reading that right, does that mean that you're not against a trading deadline GoatLocker? You'd just prefer a different set date, correct?
43GoatLocker
      Sustainer
      ID: 060151121
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 23:04
I'm for it, but I want it a week later.

Cliff
44Farn
      Sustainer
      ID: 451044109
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 23:18
I'm ok with moving it to the week after the last PPV before WM and Summerslam. No farther than that though.
45Bond, James Bond
      ID: 161159316
      Thu, Jan 06, 2005, 23:28
Ok thanks. Now we need to understand the pros and cons of setting a trading 5 weeks before WM/SS or whether a 4 week deadline would be suffice.

Great One...I believe the 5 week period was your original idea. You get first dibs! Have at it. ;)
46Species
      Leader
      ID: 07724916
      Fri, Jan 07, 2005, 00:28
I agree with Cliff. The week AFTER the PPV before WM and Summerslam. Allows a manager to see how his keepers are likely to shake out.

NO on both if it is the week OF those PPV's.

YES on both if it is the week AFTER those PPV's per Cliff's suggestion.
47Bond, James Bond
      ID: 161159316
      Fri, Jan 07, 2005, 01:15
I'm ok with that as well. Would like to hear others thoughts regarding this.
49Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 321145174
      Fri, Jan 07, 2005, 07:30
Thinking about this more, I don't know that setting the deadlie according to the timing of WWE's PPV schedule is wise. WWE does not bother to have a set period of time between it's PPVs. For example, New Year's Revolution is this Sunday, the 9th. The Rumble is Sunday, Jan 30, only 3 weeks later. No Way out is only 3 weeks after that.

Looking at past years, WMXX came 4 weeks after NWO/04, unlike this year's 5 weeks. It looks like they do try to keep the PPV sched open for at least a month before SS and WM, but they certainly aren't bound to do so by anything and I don't really see the point in basing our deadline on the hope that they continue to keep it that way.

I think a set period of time before the final week is optimal. 4 weeks seems to make sense and seems to be preferred by most who voted against this prop.
50Great One
      ID: 551038246
      Fri, Jan 07, 2005, 07:50
i will type and email more from work but my thinking behind it was it was only another week - but affected two PPV's instead if you wanted to do a 3-1 type of trade it would make you think twice if you say you were in first place by 100 points. If it only affected 1 PPV I thought it wouldn't hurt as much to do it.

It should be around that PPV though, I am not really deadset on before or after...
51Mike D
      Sustainer
      ID: 41831612
      Fri, Jan 07, 2005, 07:53
Guys sorry I haven't been able to fully read this thread. In general I favor a deadline. It looks like when that would be is still being kicked around based on the recent posts. So I'll defer reading everything until I have more time and it is indeed needed. Sorry again.
52Tree
      ID: 76471215
      Fri, Jan 07, 2005, 12:51
i would be in favor of a set time, as per MITH's comments.

i believe 4 weeks prior to WM, and 4 weeks prior to SS. the deadline being 11:59 pm that sunday.
53Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 2824911
      Fri, Jan 07, 2005, 12:56
I was thinking the roster freeze 4 weeks prior. So, assuming there's no PPV that week, effectively 20 hours after you suggest, Tree.
54Farn
      Sustainer
      ID: 451044109
      Wed, Jan 12, 2005, 12:00
butt

We should get around to finalizing a trade deadline if that's our intention. That would include dates (or "X number of weeks before said PPV") and whether you can trade wrestlers in the down week after the season ends. Oh, we should also make it clear if we are going to have the week after the end of the season off to organize the next season. The ability to trade draft picks and when that's allowed after the deadline should be made clear as well.

It might be a good time to revisit scoring rules just to see if anybody wants anything tweaked as well.
General Fantasy Sports

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours11
Last 7 days43
Last 30 days1211
Since Mar 1, 20071788666