IBC

Athletics wrote:

Indians wrote:OK god damnit, here goes:

Go ahead and put this trade up for for vote. Go ahead and overturn it. I don't give a rat's ass. That being said, I respect the GMs of this league, and I respect the league rules and will abide by them.

I've always played to win immediately in all fantasy and SIM leagues I've been in my life. You may not like a trade I make, but to suggest the balance of power could be affected by a GM who is a fighter that always "goes for it" for the now...not sure I can agree. But OK.

An ideal team would of course have a 25-year old potential all-star at every position. But realistic? Hell no.

A few points specific to this trade:

To suggest having three DH/1B's is too many, and then referring to any of them as injury prone? Do you see the contradiction? And I'd love to be able to rotate them all if healthy to maximize matchups. Hopefully that will happen, but I'm prepared if it doesn't.

As a general rule, I think the GM getting the best player in any deal wins, but at times, with a weak roster and a victory-hungry GM, quantity beats out quality. I'll concede that Soriano is the best player in the deal. But for 2008, I get the next best three players. And all four players I received are upgrades to the players they will replace in 2008.

And as far as GMs who are complaining that I've received past their prime players in Thome and Mussina, and then a sentence or two later state that a young player such as Ramirez (or Misch for that matter) aren't worth it because they aren't established? You can't have it both ways, pick an argument and stick with it. While Thome and Mussina aren't going to improve, at least I know what I'm getting, and I'll also benefit from two arms on the rise. Fortunately for me, I CAN have it both ways.

Look - here's the bottom line - I have and always will try to put the best team I possibly can on the field every year. Period. And making trades like this have been and will continue to be part of my strategy. It has ALWAYS worked for me in the past, and win continue to in the future. Check out this site:

http://www.geocities.com/fatcats33370/S ... iants.html

Look familiar? Look a lot like my IBC roster? It is my IYFBL roster that I took over last off-season, my first SIM experience. The team finished 2006 62-100, the worst record in the league. I took over and finished 95-67, eliminated from the playoffs on the final day of the season. Same roster type - Dinosaur but predictable SPs that won't kill me. Power and OBP lineup that mashes without DEF or speed. Lights-out bullpen.

Ask about my success with current IBC owners in the IYFBL - Brett Z, Jim B, Jake L, Jagger, John A, Nate, Jason, Shawn L, and JP. Even if any these GMs would vote against this trade (as some have already said they'd do), my body of work speakes for itself, and ya'll will see the results with the 2008 Indians.

Again, I respect everyone's opinion. But pul-leeeze, if you have a bitch about this trade, please respond the every portion of this post. Don't be chicken-shit and quote one sentence to counter-argue and think you are holier than thou.

Thanks all for listening, and good luck to everyone.

Kelly CLE

That roster also looks a lot like my 2006 roster which featured Griffey in CF, Thomas, Wily Mo Pena, Luis Gonzalez, Troy Glaus and a whole host of other old guys who mashed but didn't play defense (Jeromy Burnitz's ridiculous projection that year for example), and the pitching staff looks pretty similar (though I'd wager Brad Radke's projection was better than what your SP will get), and I finished right around .500, which was certainly an improvement on the year before (I lost 95 games in 2005 IIRC), but didn't make me competitive. My biggest fear about this trade isn't its impact on next year, its that as you say you're an impatient type GM and once these guys are used up, which could be next year or could be the following year, we'll be left with a non-competitive team without any prospects (assuming you continue your practice of trading draft picks aggressively). So that's my history with that style of building, I know exactly where you are coming from philosophically.

This is the only SIM league that I have extensive experience in, so I can't speak from too much experience, but by and large this seems like a group of GMs who take the long view in building their teams and who want the league to be around for a long time. Having a team whose key components are all set for retirement or major decline in the next 1-3 years, who doesn't have a significant prospect pool (I'll grant you Gallagher, Ramirez and Mangini but after that the cupboard is pretty bare), and has very few building blocks in terms of up and coming major leaguers is fine for now, but my concern is about what happens when the 1997 All-Stars retire. Left with a team that will take years of rebuilding, and you've already acknowledged that you don't have the patience for that, are you just going to abandon the team to us and force us to find a new GM to fill a team with all the holes mentioned above? Who's the biggest trade chip on that team in 2010? Maybe Mags, but he'll be 36. Maybe Glaus, but he'll be 34 and he's not a bat you can build an offense around. My point is that if you're willing to commit to tackling that rebuilding job (as much as you can commit to anything in a fantasy SIM baseball league) then I'm less worried, but if your plan is to hit it and quit it then this trade is definitely not in the best interests of the league.