Broken system?

[Royals]

When Dave got the boot I dropped him a line to wish him well and he raised a few interesting points in the discussion that ought probably to be mentioned in a public forum.

How is it that Dave got booted for making god-awful trades, yet his deals weren't vetoed? They weren't even publicly denounced by anyone in the league aside from my comment, which wasn't intended as an official challenge (though i should have made it one).

Doesn't it seem a little fucked up that rather than veto Dave's deals, he gets booted? I know it wasn't an either/or situation, but really, where was the TRC when Dave was getting bent over? Where were the rest of us to object when the TRC dropped the ball? bad GM's can certainly fuck up the competitive balance in a league, but so can a lazy review process and GM's who are unwilling to call out a bad deal because they want to be the ones to pull off the next ripoff.

If Dave's deals were bad enough that he got the old heave ho, then there's no way they should have been approved in the first place and that means the TRC fucked up and so did the rest of us... and we really ought to do something to try to make sure it doesn't happen again.

[Rangers]

This feels like a prepackaged bitch. You just did that deal so that you could make this complaint? For the rest of the league's benefit, Bren and Nils did a bad deal just so that Bren could either point out that he had a deal vetoed and Dave had bad deals passed, or that even his intentionally terrible deal was passed. Darn clever, bro.

Oh, and people denounced Dave's deals all of the time. You just don't pay attention to anyone but yourself.

[Cardinals]

I don't feel the need to really get into the decision to boot Dave, but I told Dave if he wanted to make a defense for himself he could go ahead and do so, I'd rely the message to ExCo and we could try to work something out. He didn't. So I don't really think that this is Dave's point, but rather your point and looking to stir the pot and making retarded trades to prove a point.

Also, no, it's not fucked up that we booted him but the TRC didn't veto his deals. It's not the TRC's responsibility to make sure that a GM isn't perpetually getting the shaft. They should be looking at each deal individually, and there should be a pretty high veto standard. His trades were bad, but not bad enough to be vetoed individually. Add them all up and they're abysmal.

[Astros]

Dave had plenty of warnings. He got to start over with a clean slate. And he ran the team into the ground and multiple people came to ExCo members about his removal. We did what we thought was best and it was a 4-0 vote with me abstaining. I seem to recall someone that used to remove people for the league for disagreeing with them.

You're trying to create a shit storm for no reason. If Dave didn't feel the need to defend himself, and Dave's had no bigger defender than me, then the matter should be dropped and we all move on.

[Royals]

This feels like a prepackaged bitch. You just did that deal so that you could make this complaint? For the rest of the league's benefit, Bren and Nils did a bad deal just so that Bren could either point out that he had a deal vetoed and Dave had bad deals passed, or that even his intentionally terrible deal was passed. Darn clever, bro.

Oh, and people denounced Dave's deals all of the time. You just don't pay attention to anyone but yourself.

Yup, nils and I put together the worst deal I could think of because I didn't think the TRC would actually veto it. Credit where it's due, they did veto the absurd trade, so they're not completely asleep at the wheel (though the fact that it was Nils and I was probably kind of a dead giveaway that something was up).

Still, the point isthe TRC let a bunch of deals through that they shouldn't have and that no on said squat about them. Bitching amongst ourselves on IM doesn't count, the deals should have been vetoed by the TRC, objected to by the league membership ad then, finally, Dave booted.

But, because it's me, and because no one ever wants to take the chance that their own chance to bend over another GM is going to get vetoed, no one is going to agree.

[Cardinals]

Yeah except you're missing the part where I told Dave that people were extremely unhappy with his trades, multiple GM's wanted him gone and I went to Dave and said he needs to be smarter with what he does with his team because he's on a bit of thin ice. And then he makes some more terrible trades. So no, this didn't come completely out of the blue to Dave like you're suggesting.

[Royals]

Yeah except you're missing the part where I told Dave that people were extremely unhappy with his trades, multiple GM's wanted him gone and I went to Dave and said he needs to be smarter with what he does with his team because he's on a bit of thin ice. And then he makes some more terrible trades. So no, this didn't come completely out of the blue to Dave like you're suggesting.

Actually, I'm not suggesting that at all. What I am saying is that the TRC didn't do it's job, something which I'm pretty sure you know to be true since you're doing your best to avoid the issue. You're really going to try "bait and switching" me of all people?

[Cardinals]

Also, no, it's not fucked up that we booted him but the TRC didn't veto his deals. It's not the TRC's responsibility to make sure that a GM isn't perpetually getting the shaft. They should be looking at each deal individually, and there should be a pretty high veto standard. His trades were bad, but not bad enough to be vetoed individually. Add them all up and they're abysmal.

No, actually, I already addressed that, but you're only interested in reading what you want to read right now. So I'll let you be and let you have your own little thread pissing and moaning.

[Royals]

Also, no, it's not fucked up that we booted him but the TRC didn't veto his deals. It's not the TRC's responsibility to make sure that a GM isn't perpetually getting the shaft. They should be looking at each deal individually, and there should be a pretty high veto standard. His trades were bad, but not bad enough to be vetoed individually. Add them all up and they're abysmal.

No, actually, I already addressed that, but you're only interested in reading what you want to read right now. So I'll let you be and let you have your own little thread pissing and moaning.

Right, it wasn't the individual rape jobs... *cough bullshit*. To say that not one of those deals deserved to be vetoed is completely absurd and you know it. How about you justify that Kuroda trade to start with? If none of them were bad enough to be vetoed, i'd love to read the justification on that deal.

Or, alternately, you could sack up and say "Yeah, the TRC fucked up and we all (meaning everyone in the league, and yes I'm including myself here) got lazy and didn't call them on it, the ExCo is working on addressing the issue".

[Rangers]

Definitely don't want to contribute further to another Bren meltdown, but two things that I think are important to point out:

1. You have always had something backwards when it comes to the makeup of a league. The goal needs to be to have 30 strong GMs who don't have to rely on a authoritarian TRC to veto loads of trades to ensure fair play, not to simulate a good collection of GMs by forcing TRC veto after TRC veto down poor GMs' throats. The reason that we had to let Dave go was that he was the guy in this league who couldn't operate in a constructive manner for his team and the league. Great guy, but he's just not up to the current level of competition in this league.

2. You created a system whereby every member of the league has the ability to appeal any TRC vote. I believe that you set the threshold too high, back when you and Nils were making those guideliness, and I still think that it's too high now. But if you were right in your standard, stop making excuses for yourself for not challenging deals you think should have been vetoed. Stop blaming everyone else. Pay attention and challenge a deal if it shouldn't have passed in your opinion. If you don't think you set the correct standard, if you think that it's too hard for the league as a whole to overturn a TRC decision, request that the exco lower it. I would love the support on that.

[Marlins]

Dude listen. You fuckin passed the test ok? But barely. Ya know what you
got?
What?
F plus. Click

[Pirates]

Is that Tenacious D?

[Marlins]

yup

[Royals]

Definitely don't want to contribute further to another Bren meltdown, but two things that I think are important to point out:

1. You have always had something backwards when it comes to the makeup of a league. The goal needs to be to have 30 strong GMs who don't have to rely on a authoritarian TRC to veto loads of trades to ensure fair play, not to simulate a good collection of GMs by forcing TRC veto after TRC veto down poor GMs' throats. The reason that we had to let Dave go was that he was the guy in this league who couldn't operate in a constructive manner for his team and the league. Great guy, but he's just not up to the current level of competition in this league.

2. You created a system whereby every member of the league has the ability to appeal any TRC vote. I believe that you set the threshold too high, back when you and Nils were making those guideliness, and I still think that it's too high now. But if you were right in your standard, stop making excuses for yourself for not challenging deals you think should have been vetoed. Stop blaming everyone else. Pay attention and challenge a deal if it shouldn't have passed in your opinion. If you don't think you set the correct standard, if you think that it's too hard for the league as a whole to overturn a TRC decision, request that the exco lower it. I would love the support on that.

1. I'd love to be in a league that didn't need a TRC. The IBC has never yet been that league though. I do believe it continues to get closer to that point, but it's not there yet and I think any time you bring in new GM's it's going to be necessary again as they're the most frequent victims.

2. You haven't been in the league as long as some of us so you might be ignorant of some of the history. The reason that we have had imbalance problems is that the bar wasn't high enough in the early days. We still feel the effects of those early days in some areas (not to pick on JB, but he's an easy target and made an absolute killing in those days, as did many others as we churned through new and naive GM's).
It's still pretty hard to get a trade vetoed and has been for most of the history of the league, most vetoes involved experienced GM's taking advatage of new or foolish GM's (i.e. JB on Dave, sorry again JB). And for the league to overturn an approval is extremely hard, requiring 20 of 30 members. Dave's trades were bad enough to deserve to be vetoed though, he's not some successful GM who had pulled off impressive gambles and the vetoes are intended to protect the rest of the league from his foolishness just as much as to protect him. If Dave's trades had been vetoed, that wouldn't have protected him from being booted, it likely would have hastened it. But at least once that happened we wouldn't have been seeing the rich get richer and whoever took over his team wouldn't have been in such a deep hole.
It's been a very long time since a trade has really deserved to be vetoed in the IBC and I'm sure we all kind of fell asleep at the wheel in that regard as a result. But it shouldn't be any surprise that Dave managed to do it.

My point isn't that we need to be stricter, the point is that we all got lax in paying attention to this sort of thing and when a really shitty deal came before the TRC they passed it, probably because it had been forever and a day since they'd actually had to veto anything. Then none of us looked at it enough to raise the appropriate objectionsafter it passed.
You all might just think I'm making a stink for the sake of stirring the pot or whatever, but I'm not. The trades Dave made cost him his spot in the league and the Kuroda one at least was certainly bad enough to be vetoed. We also have two new GM's coming in for the first time in a while and we all know that's like blood in the water to most of us and the TRC needs to not be dozing when the other 28 do their best to bleed them dry.

[Giants]

So here's the issue that I think JP was trying to get at. The TRC is designed to work on a trade by trade basis, and none of the deals that Dave made were individually as atrocious as the joke that you proposed. Certainly they weren't in Dave's favor, but none of those trades individually brought Dave's team down. The problem was the cumulative effects of a whole bunch of of bad trades, not one atrocious trade coming through. The TRC could have vetoed all of those deals, but it would not have resolved the problem that Dave was not competent to build a team in this current league and was going to continue to make awful trades. Should some of those trades have been vetoed? Probably, but vetoing those trades would not have solved the problem, and Dave would still have needed to go.

[Phillies]

I think I'm the only one Dave could get fair deals with. Does that put me in danger of getting the boot? I also gave Tommy Hanson away for free...

[Astros]

You're next Nick!

[Marlins]

So we've now learned (as per the ExCo) it's bad for the league to make a series of deals that are bad but not bad enough to be vetoed, to the point of kicking someone out. Does this mean that it's also bad for the league to make a series of deals that are good, but not so good they would be vetoed? Was my joke about kicking JB out going to end up being foresight?

Quick, JB trade me Pujols cheap so you can stay in the league!!!

[Giants]

He'll certainly need to send me Mauer back to keep my support . In all seriousness no, everyone makes mistakes, so one bad deal isn't enough to get a GM kicked out of the league, it's more like if a GM has no fucking clue how to build a team to the point that it's just getting ridiculous, when he's never made the playoffs or even approached .500 despite having mutliple redos through minidraft, when he has no coherent plan for building a team, and when he gets called out for his incompetence and offered a chance to defend himself and chooses not to, then he's probably in over his head and it's time for him to go. It wasn't just bad trades, it was also bad drafting, bad waiver wire pickups, and bad general understanding of player value. Being too good a GM doesn't have this problem, though once I can prove that JB has been secretly installing a virus in all of our computers to hypnotize us into sending him players I'll certainly push to send him the way of Dave.

[DBacks]

We've got real problems in the IBC and the TRC isn't one of them. ZiPS, for starters, is KILLING our league. I know from conversations with other GMs that I'm not the only one who's having a lot less fun with the IBC because the produce we use to compete is a joke. We see the evidence of it in everyday's box scores.

Today, after two rough losses to Aaron, I was so mad that I wanted to be a asshole. So I did what assholes do and behaved particularly asshole-y in an attempt to prove a point. I decided that if ZiPS was going to be so ridiculous, I would take advantage of it. So, I had my backup catcher be my SP. Ronny Paulino pitched 5 innings for me, allowed 3 ER, and picked up the W. So I avoided the sweep by getting my backup C to pitch. My utility man Jose Bautista had 2/3 scoreless innings, so he now has a sparkling 0 ERA, and Cliff Pennington, SS (who is on the block btw) shut it down with a scoreless ninth inning. Way to go guys. Anyone H2Hing me in the future better look out! My Clayton Kershaw - Ronny Paulino - Kevin Frandsen - Cliff Pennington - Jose Bautista rotation is about to run wild!

[Giants]

That is a fact. Fuck Zips.

[WhiteSox]

So i guess I need to have a fire sale and fast if I want to stay in the league...

All is available at discounted rates, you know where to find me and my voodoo dolls.

[Royals]

Jake, I know what JP's point is, and I completely disagree. The Kuroda deal was atrocious. Go ahead and take a look at the guys he got there... totally awful.

I agree with Gabe that ZiPS is the worst thing we have going in the league, that doesn't mean that we can't address other issues though (TRC, the Cuban/International player signing date issue). at least these other things are issues we can effect, there's nothing we can do to fix ZiPS or to make DMB start producing projections (the fuckers are do disorganized they can't even sell past season disks at this point).

[Giants]

So Alex Torres is a 22 year old in AA with this line:

5-2 2.64 1.25 WHIP 47.5 IP 53/19 K/BB 3.16 FIP

Also handled the Cal League last year, and has swing and miss stuff from the left side.

Dayan Viciedo is struggling but he was a super highly touted prospect.

It's two solid AA prospects who are both arguably in the top 10 in their team's system for a mid-rotation starter.
I'm not a fan of the deal, but I don't even think it was his worst one. It's certainly better than Pavano for Chris Nelson

[Reds]

I wasn't a big fan of the deal either but if a team wishes to deal a mid 30's SP with a limited MLB track record coming off an injury filled season for two decent prospects because they are looking to rebuild who are we to say no under the current rules and guidelines. If the league as a whole wishes to tighten the the trade process and put each deal under closer scrutiny just let us on the TRC know and that is what we will do but keep in mind that in the past that has not gone over very well. I mean could there be more uneven deals than dealing productive major league players (even bench bats) for 3rd and 4th round draft picks?