September/October trading- gauging league interest

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 6:34 pm

Royals wrote:The league is CLEARLY not on the fence about this rule - outside of Bren (who is, actually, technically FOR it) and Jake, no one wants it next year, they want it this year. And it's being shot down for personal reasons - honestly, can you both admit that neither of you has presented a cogent argument against?

I would just like to echo this sentiment.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 7:02 pm

Z, Brennan, get over it. The ExCo is NOT a vehicle for enacting the 'will of the league' it's our job to look out for the best interests of the league. In my opinion, based on 5+ years as a commish and GM, changing the rule right now is not in the best interests of the league. If you don't like it, you can kiss my rosy backside.
As i recall, neither of you wanted the 'hassle' of being on the ExCo, so go back to your porch and to.. well, whatever Z does in his spare time, I haven't asked. Neither of you wanted to be hassled, but you're more than willing to hassle others. Very endearing.

And the purpose of the articles mentioned is for the entertainment of the league as a whole.
Powerrankings? jeez, i don't suppose the person doing them could make judgements as to what the best teams are and why... or even look ahead and do a projection for next season. that wouldn't be even slightly entertaining.
Playoffs? yeah, why talk about the playoffs at all? If you're not going to be there, why should you care? It's not like you'd watch MLB's playoffs or world series even if your own team wasn't in it.
Draft comments? pff, who cares about the draft or how anyone did?
breakdowns? Silliness to have a GM analyze your team. This wouldn't be even slightly beneficial for any of the newer teams to do, analyzing other teams and having their own analyzed. Useless!

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 7:18 pm

If we don't listen to the league and what the league wants, then really whats the point in even having a committee or even a commish? Just have a database person, a simmer, a roster guy and let oopss handle the rest. Really. Think about it. The best interest of the league often times is the will of the league. Keeping people happy and encouraging activity is in the best interest of the league. In this case, it's not a league-changing, ground breaking, shake the league to its core change. In fact, it's even less of a change than draft pick trading is.

But really, if we don't listen to the league, what's the point? Lay down the rules, say this is how it is and how it will be unless theres a 26/30 GM vote to overturn it and lets just have business as usual, no figure heads, no room for improvement, no anything. Assign everybody a task and if they don't want it they can walk out the door. This is getting to be silly.

Yankees · Post by **Yankees** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 7:27 pm

I've really tried to hold it together - JP, nicely put.

But Bren...

In my opinion, based on 5+ years as a commish and GM, changing the rule right now is not in the best interests of the league. If you don't like it, you can kiss my rosy backside.

THAT'S NOT A VALID REASON. THAT IS, ACTUALLY, COMPLETELY DEVOID OF REASON. IT ACTUALLY GOES AGAINST THE GENERAL CONSENSUS OF REASON THAT THE LEAGUE HAS BEEN PUTTING TOGETHER. JP, ROPERS, ME, ETC. ETC. ETC. HAVE PUT TOGETHER REASONS WHY WE SHOULD DO IT. YOU, 'MEH, I FEEL LIKE I DON'T WANT IT, SO F**K YOU LEAGUE.'

Off my soapbox, after 5+ years of working for the league it just looks like you are taking a casual swipe at all of us for no apparent reason. If you gave me three days alone with my thoughts I still would not be able to find ONE person this rule negatively affects. Maybe Josh Morgan - he doesn't get to have this rule, and he would have loved it.

It's literally just a point of pride for you - and you're making it suck for the rest of us.

Tigers · Post by **Tigers** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 7:44 pm

RedSox wrote:Z, Brennan, get over it. The ExCo is NOT a vehicle for enacting the 'will of the league' it's our job to look out for the best interests of the league. In my opinion, based on 5+ years as a commish and GM, changing the rule right now is not in the best interests of the league. If you don't like it, you can kiss my rosy backside.

Nice to see your baby Hitler side come out again. This is definately another situation where the view of the minority (you and Jake) are overruling the will of the majority.

As i recall, neither of you wanted the 'hassle' of being on the ExCo, so go back to your porch and to.. well, whatever Z does in his spare time, I haven't asked. Neither of you wanted to be hassled, but you're more than willing to hassle others. Very endearing.

This has nothing to do with being on the committee. As I've mentioned, I haven't had time all summer due to my backyard project to be overly involved in extra items in the leauge. Life just gets in the way sometimes, that's the way it is. There was no need for you to make this discussion personal, however I guess when you couldn't come up with a legitimate reason not to do what everyone other than you and Jake were in favor of you had to go a different direction with the conversation.

And the purpose of the articles mentioned is for the entertainment of the league as a whole.

And the proposed minor rule change wasn't for the entertainment of the whole league, especially the MAJORITY of the league who doesn't have alot to do right now to keep their interest.

Way to think it through Bren. Way to think it through.

Powerrankings? jeez, i don't suppose the person doing them could make judgements as to what the best teams are and why... or even look ahead and do a projection for next season. that wouldn't be even slightly entertaining.

Yes, it would be "slightly" entertaining at this point in the season. Nothing more, nothing less.

Playoffs? yeah, why talk about the playoffs at all? If you're not going to be there, why should you care? It's not like you'd watch MLB's playoffs or world series even if your own team wasn't in it.

As I said above, but apparently it went over your head. It is an interesting thought, but since you chose to champion it, while failing to come up with even a slightly reasonable reason why the league shouldn't implement JP's idea (the main topic of this thread), other than your own self interest, I wouldn't touch your idea with a 10 foot pole right now.

Draft comments? pff, who cares about the draft or how anyone did?

Our draft was done over a year ago.....I'd imagine GM's are more interested in the upcoming IBC new player draft than they are in who everyone drafted last season.

Didn't everyone already do "draft reviews" on their own team last year and send them in to be posted? I know I did, though not sure it ever got posted where it was said it was going to be. Once again though, it is your idea, so feel free to get right on that.

breakdowns? Silliness to have a GM analyze your team. This wouldn't be even slightly beneficial for any of the newer teams to do, analyzing other teams and having their own analyzed. Useless!

Apparently my comment above failed to sink in, as well. I'll repeat it. Every time we've done team breakdowns we get maybe half the GM's responding and even then it takes 1-2 months to get all the breakdowns completed. It would be a complete waste of everyone's time right now to do this, two weeks before the regular season is over. As stated above, by the time the breakdowns did get completed, most eveyones rosters would have significant changes making the time and effort put into the breakdowns a waste.

The best time to do the breakdowns has always been in March, when rosters are primarily set and GM's are waiting for the season to start. It gives everyone a nice insite into their competition as the season is getting ready to start.

But, hey! Its your idea and not JP's, so lets throw logic out the window.

I wasn't really on board with the whole open the league to trading again right now when this thread started, but after I read some of the arguements for and didn't see any logical reason not to I decided to speak out for it. Since you've decided to take this discussion a whole different direction I'll just bow out and shut the fuck up at this point. I've said what I wanted to say and I still haven't heard a single logical reason not to implement JP's idea.

So with that, I'll be back around in the offseason and willing to help out, but after this, there isn't a chance in hell I'm going to help out with your playoff idea that actually had some merit.

DBacks · Post by **DBacks** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:04 pm

This, really, is unbelievable. I say everybody start trading and say fuck it. After Bren's Nazi post I'm really done with it. Bren, in all honesty man, I really do appreciate all the work you've put into the league the last five years. I really do. The IBC wouldn't exist without you, but please, for the love of God...

SHUT THE FUCK UP

The league belongs to all of us. I really don't give a fuck what you have to say about it. You were in charge, yes, but it was this superb group of GMs that made the league what it is. It's time to start showing some respect to everybody.

The Ex-Co needs to be open. I agree, the vote of the ExCo should be final, you guys are in charge, but the rest of the league needs to know what's going on. Some kind of log of discussions maybe?

Interests and opinions in the IBC are at an all time high. There have been plenty of proposals this last month that have plenty of merit, and the rest of us have no idea how they are being handled. How many topics have had 40+ replies lately? What happened with all these issues? We continue to argue them in circles with no end in sight because we don't know what's going on.

This issue was brought up and the league obviously wants it but it's not happening...why? And this is not the first time the majority of the league has been in favor of something...and nothing has happened. We just sit here in the dark while only six of you really know what's up. I think it would be in everyone's best interest if there was some way to see how things are being worked.

Hell, you can even watch Congress on CSPAN if you like torturing yourself. The only way to ensure that are interests are being served is to see what the people in charge are doing to serve them.

There should be a vote on this issue. Soon. We should know the results. If the majority of the league wants something and the ExCo refuses it, we deserve to know who on the Co opposes it and what reasons they have.

Also, there are certain members of the Co that continue to ignore the arguments of others. They act like they were never said and continue to repost their same ideas that were argued against time and time again by intelligent and valuable GMs. This needs to stop. If you guys are going to be in charge, you need to at least listen to the people you're representing.

I don't envy your responsiblity, and I appreciate you all taking it on, but the rest of us need to be in the loop. I know I'm not the only GM who feels like the rest of us are constantly being ignored.

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:12 pm

Most of our discussion takes place out here actually.

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:19 pm

I think what Bren was trying to say in his usual classy, tactful, and appropriate way, is that there is such a thing as "groupthink," which happens when the same group of people all latch on to an idea and suddenly it seems to makes all the sense in the world and everyone is in a rush to accept it, often getting really pissed off at anyone who disagrees. In the long run groupthink leads to bad decisions, the events leading up to the Challenger explosion are considered the classic example. The will of the league and the best interests of the league are not the same thing.

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:20 pm

Still waiting on a valid reason to say no other than "its new, lets not make or abolish rules."

DBacks · Post by **DBacks** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:22 pm

yeah good luck with that.

DBacks · Post by **DBacks** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:29 pm

and i don't buy your group think logic. sure, there have been times (in the history of the world) when an idea has swept over people and ended up badly. However, thats not true for everytime a group of people agree.

Let me break down everything that has transpired so far.

First, JP posted an idea.

Then, people argued the merits of that idea.

People made valid points in support of said idea, and as a result, people began to support it.

You and Bren, on the other hand, have made no valid points, and, as has been your MO lately, have completely ignored the arguments of others. Instead you have chosen to tell us that our opinions are not as important as yours. You have told us that our voices, either solo or together as a group, mean nothing because you aren't going to be bothered with responding to what we have to say with any actual points.

You have instead chosen to tell us that because we all agree on this, we must be wrong, and we are simply the victims of some sort of mass brainwashing.

Priceless.

DBacks · Post by **DBacks** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:33 pm

Also, I wouldn't mind discussing this thing calmly and rationally, because getting pissed off just tires me out, but thats going to require some effort from the people on the other side of the argument. Meaning, mainly, that you're actually going to have to come with some legitamate excuses as to why you're trying to deny the league what it wants.

<i>Still waiting on a valid reason to say no other than "its new, lets not make or abolish rules."</i>

That would be a good place to start.

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:45 pm

OK, here it is all laid out then. The two big issues I see are this: First of all, there have always been concerns about the gentleman's agreements that teams reach between the trading deadline and the end of the season when trades can be consummated. To me, this rule legitimizes those kinds of agreements. Second of all, there is a lot of potential for confusion if people have a DB roster and an OOPSS roster that are completely different. Imagine trying to explain this non-trade trades to a newbie who already is trying to figure out all the other crap that goes on in this league. Those are two valid points against this new rule. If you don't feel like they outweigh your support of it, by all means keep supporting it.

Also, I don't necessarily think that groupthink is what's going on here, I'm just saying that I think what Bren was trying to say was that the whole league supporting a rule change doesn't by itself make the new rule good.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:47 pm

I dunno wtf 'groupthink' is, but Jake did hit the nail on the head with his last sentence. what the league wants isn't necessarily the same as what is best for the league. in this case, i think the two depart.
You guys CHOOSE to belong to the league, in doing so, you agree to abide by the rules. Those include the role, workings and decisions of it's leading body, whether that be a single Commissioner or a 6 person committee.
Personally, what you guys WANT plays a fairly small role in my decision making process. I go solely by what I think is best for the league, just as every other member of the ExCo should do. not what Z, brennan, Gabe and a few others whinge about, not what's in the best interest of two or three GM's, but the entire league. The role of the ExCo isn't to be herded around by the 24 other members of the league (or 4-5 very vocal ones). We vote based on our experience, personal insights, opinions and to varying degrees the input from the league.

To address Gabe's comments, as I've already said, we had one informal vote on the issue and it was shot down. Another has been posted and when a result is in, we'll share that result.
yes, may issues do get brought up and we try to address first, the ones which are pressing or urgent, and then next the ones that have merit. If no member of the ExCo feels strongly enough about an issue to start an exCo discussion or vote, it's not going to get brought up.

this brings to mind an issue from the 'Getting Shit Done' thread. You want us to vote and decide an issue? Well, honestly, so do we usually, but we don't necessarily know when you guys are done putting forth opinions so we can vote. If you want us to vote, then tell us that. one method of doing that would be to start a poll on the league forum.
I.E.
Poll Question
Has there been enough debate and should the ExCo vote on the value of EU dollars v. American Dollars?
a. Yes, please Vote
b. No, more debate is necessary.
When there are a couple votes for A (maybe 4-5, not counting ExCo members since we can call for a vote almost any time) then we'll know the members of the league want a decision.
This is not an official ExCo suggestion, this is just my own personal suggestion.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:06 pm

One other thing.
I don't necessarily think in this case that those advocating sept/october trading are wrong. I just disagree with you.

Additionally, this 'mandate' of sorts that has been suggested as existing... is hardly a mandate. 6 non Ex-Co GM's have said they want this. Another GM agrees with me that the rule is fine, but should be implemented for next season. There are a lot of GM's who have not chimed in, don't presume to speak for them.

DBacks · Post by **DBacks** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:08 pm

RedSox wrote:If you want us to vote, then tell us that. one method of doing that would be to start a poll on the league forum.
I.E.
Poll Question
Has there been enough debate and should the ExCo vote on the value of EU dollars v. American Dollars?
a. Yes, please Vote
b. No, more debate is necessary.
When there are a couple votes for A (maybe 4-5, not counting ExCo members since we can call for a vote almost any time) then we'll know the members of the league want a decision.
This is not an official ExCo suggestion, this is just my own personal suggestion.

i think that is a great suggestion.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:09 pm

One last thing...
As I said in a prior post, the vote is up. Your shouting and complaining and rehashing the same arguments over and over are going to accomplish absolutely nothing aside from getting yourselves worked up and annoying others. Find something else productive to do, either in the league or out of it, until the vote is done.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:30 pm

Cubs wrote:
RedSox wrote:If you want us to vote, then tell us that. one method of doing that would be to start a poll on the league forum.
I.E.
Poll Question
Has there been enough debate and should the ExCo vote on the value of EU dollars v. American Dollars?
a. Yes, please Vote
b. No, more debate is necessary.
When there are a couple votes for A (maybe 4-5, not counting ExCo members since we can call for a vote almost any time) then we'll know the members of the league want a decision.
This is not an official ExCo suggestion, this is just my own personal suggestion.
i think that is a great suggestion.

See, even Hitler isn't wrong all the time...

DBacks · Post by **DBacks** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:59 pm

i dont disagree with you all the time. its just when i do, i really, really, really do.

Yankees · Post by **Yankees** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:58 am

A Couple Quick Points:
1) If you want us to believe you are acting in the best interest of the league, don't act like a pompous jackass. Creating an "I'm right, you suck" atmosphere does not help us want to understand your side of the argument.

2) What the fuck is your side of the argument? So far Jake gave two points (I have no idea what that first point meant - How does a gentleman's agreement (Im assuming your are talking about the Sosa trade) work when it doesn't affect the DB?), but at least the second point has some merit. Unfortunately, sitting each newbie down and taking 2 minutes to clarify (you can make trades, but they won't effect the DBase - this is the difference between the DBase and OOPPS) would probably work just fine. Unless the newbies are all REALLY dumb. I would volunteer to have this conversation with them. Holy crap, sound the alarm, I'm volunteering on behalf of the league.

3) Bren, you have clearly either seen the movie 'Thank You for Smoking,' or read the book, because you are not trying to argue the point in the hopes of winning it. You are trying to deflect the question. How can you agree with Jake? You two actually have OPPOSING VIEWS on this. You agree it should be enacted next year, per your posts, and Jake thinks it should never be enacted. You can't technically agree with Jake - and my benevolent self has promised to take the time to explain everything to the newbies (which is the one argument that you seem to have, in passing, stated), so, at the moment, you are argumentless.

4) I'd like to see you either:
a) Construct a logical argument against this - if this is really for the better of the league NOT to have it, you should be able to argue that point
b) Just admit that this is a total power 'fuck off' to the rest of the league

I'm writing a new movie, it's called "Thank You for Not Listening," and it's going to star Peter Dinklage as Bren.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:04 pm

A 'Gentleman's Agreement' is what some of us call the situation where two GM's agree to a trade that isn't done at that time. I.E. You and I agree now to trade players W & X for Y & Z once the trade deadline is over. There's nothing binding either of us except our word, thus the term. This is something that the ExCo hasn't officially addressed, but still discourages.

What I agreed with Jake about is the point of "What the league wants isn't necessarily what's best for the league". I think his points have merit and agree with them to some extent, however I disagree with his conclusion.

As I've said before, I feel that the ExCo shouldn't be enacting rules, barring urgent or unforseen circumstances, that come into effect mid-season. You disagree, fine, but I'm not changing my stance just because you disagree and keep harping for something. And, frankly, calling me a nazi or fascist isn't going to win me over either.

Yankees · Post by **Yankees** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 1:05 pm

As I've said before, I feel that the ExCo shouldn't be enacting rules, barring urgent or unforseen circumstances, that come into effect mid-season. You disagree, fine, but I'm not changing my stance just because you disagree and keep harping for something. And, frankly, calling me a nazi or fascist isn't going to win me over either.

This is my entire point - which is why I keep harping on it. This is NOT A REASON. A sentence with a reason would go, "I feel that the ExCo shouldn't be enacting rules, barring urgent or unforseen circumstances, that come into effect mid-season BECAUSE point point point."

You still have not come up with one valid reason, which is confounding because you ACTUALLY SUPPORT THE RULE.

I was thinking the 'Gentlemen's Agreement' was, "I'll trade you X and Y if you trade me X back after the season." If what you mentioned is the definition that you and Jake are using, then this rule actually HELPS. The trades would be binding because they are submitted and approved in the system, and would be enacted the day the season is done. This would actually ELIMINATE 'Gentleman's Agreements.' Which, apparently, would solve a problem that I did not know existed.

As frustrated as this makes me, I'm not gonna let you off the hook Bren. If you don't have a reason say, "I don't have a reason," and if you have a reason, please elaborate. I'm not letting you duck this.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 1:58 pm

Who needs o duck it, the vote is up. If you think hounding me is going to change ANYTHING... then you haven't been paying too much attention during your time in the league. Pestering me isn't going to change my vote. The best you could hope for would be to get me to reconsider the issue in a month or so (which I told Dan I'd do on the moving issue, and JP when he was seeking a reduction in the Draft Pick Penalty), but that isn't going to do you any good.
Actually, it's kind of amusing.

Yankees · Post by **Yankees** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:46 pm

At what point in this entire charade did I ask you to change your vote?

I'm asking for a constructive response to a simple question: What is your reasoning for voting this way?

If your response is, "Fuck it, because I feel like it," then say, "Fuck it, it's because I feel like it." If it's because of "Reason X," then state, "Reason X."

I'm glad you find this dance amusing, it just makes you continue to look like you're just ducking a simple answer to a simple question. At least Jake stepped up and answered the question, and I appreciate that and understand his thought process better.

I hope you aren't like this in the real world. What are you going to do when your boss keeps firing at you for an answer to what should be an easy question that you don't know? You going to deflect? Try to pussy-foot your way out the backdoor?

As my boss here at the NBA always says, "I don't care if you're wrong, have an opinion and argue your opinion reasonably until you're right or until you're clearly wrong."

All you've done is prove to everyone that you can't honestly answer an easy question.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:55 pm

Just wanted to add that "gentlemen's agreements" are horrible for a league because they invite bad feelings when circumstances are different at the time of consumation. Something like what is being suggested here is so much better than "gentlemen's agreements" that isn't not even funny.