Hasn't he already traded all of his good picks anyway? He has a (low) fourth and four fifths now. I'm obviously fine with letting him know that we can't let a roster continue to go backwards like this. In terms of timeline, however, we already missed the important milestone of his picks for this draft being tradeable, and for me the next important milestone is when his picks become tradeable for the next draft, because he's traded away just about anyone with even remote potential to be a difference maker.Reds wrote:There has been more rumbling on this issue and we should take a closer look at it well before the draft if a move is going to be made.
This is another place where I'm probably in the minority, but I pretty strongly disagree (as it pertains to someone with this managerial style). It's a matter of degrees. 'Isn't very good' to me suggests a little below the average standard for a given league, and I would tend to agree with that statement for someone like that.Reds wrote:My original thoughts about it were more based on activity than results. I would almost rather have an active member who isn't very good than one that doesn't respond or who goes missing for months at a time.
Where I think you have to draw a very clear line on that, though, is when the person's judgment is poor enough that he contributes to upsetting the balance of the league by continuously handing over any good players he come across to the guy who hounds him the most or who is nice to him. We've clearly seen that here.
I obviously don't mean to be a jerk about Dan. Just like Dave he seems like a very nice guy and I'm sure I'd like him as a pal.
