IBC

As a result of the discussion started here viewtopic.php?p=51340#51340, ExCo has been revisiting the role of the TRC in the IBC. Current discussion is trending towards elimination of the TRC for initial approval and instead making more formal rules for when a passed trade needs to be reviewed by either the TRC (in hindsight) or the league as a whole for reversal.

At this point, we'd like to open the floor to the rest of the league for comments and discussion regarding any and all possible solutions.

1) Trades made by new members (probation period of 90 days) get reviewed
2) All other trades get posted - if 5 or more members call for a vote within 72 hours of a trade being posted - then it will go to league-wide vote
3) A trade only gets overturned with 2/3 majority (19 votes since the two involved in the trade are ineligible to vote)
4) A trade should only get overturned under the premise that it severely impacts the viability of a franchise and will affect the integrity of the league going forward.

I don't have any problem with TRC. It seems like they're less likely to shoot down a deal between two veteran GMs, so I think the spirit is still there to watch out for new guys.

When trades reach league vote I know I'm pretty unlikely to veto a deal just because there's so much information out there now-a-days that I can't say I know any better than another GM. Look at all the questionable deals Billy Beane makes. Who am I to say I'm smarter than him? I think everybody has different philosophies for projecting future value. I think the key is that GMs need to build a reputation in our league first before we give them the benefit of the doubt.

I dont mind the current system.. but as Bren D notes.. I think when the TRC rejects a trade we should hear their reasoning as to why. I don't think thats an invalid stance.

But I'm also very pro "free market" - except in the cases of a new guy. We've all been doing this for a long time. We should all be able to make the trades we want to make when we want to make them for better or for worse. Thats baseball folks.

Rockies wrote:I dont mind the current system.. but as Bren D notes.. I think when the TRC rejects a trade we should hear their reasoning as to why. I don't think thats an invalid stance.

But I'm also very pro "free market" - except in the cases of a new guy. We've all been doing this for a long time. We should all be able to make the trades we want to make when we want to make them for better or for worse. Thats baseball folks.

Agree with Nate.

General agreement with the proviso that the whole league should automatically get a vote on any JB trade

General agreement with the proviso that the whole league should automatically get a vote on any JB trade

Voo Doo doll is ready to go, who wants to deal!

Yankees wrote:Voo Doo doll is ready to go, who wants to deal!

"JB, what's that doll you are playing with? It's sooooooooo prrreeeeetttttttyyyyyyyy............................

10 minutes later...........

"Hey, wtf just happened???? Where did Buxton, Moncada and Abreu go? They were on my roster a minute ago!

I posted a variation of this in Exco:

I'm all for getting rid of the TRC. I don't know if people need to be protected anymore, and if the TRC even functions as such.

Bad trades are going to happen, we just need to prevent horrible ones. At this point, though, I think we may just be best off having everything automatically passed, and if say, 5 people have a problem with the trade, it then goes to the league-wide veto vote. With all the stats out there and the valuations each person places on players, this may be the most accurate in terms of what's fair and what's not, since we all have our preferences as to the stats we think are important.

We get what, one or two trades a year that go to vote? I think it may just be time to cut the TRC out of the process entirely since it doesn't really seem to do much anyway.

Works for me, I only seem to get to sign off on the late night deals anyway and I bet it makes Shawn's job with the new coding easier.

Rockies wrote:I dont mind the current system.. but as Bren D notes.. I think when the TRC rejects a trade we should hear their reasoning as to why. I don't think thats an invalid stance.

But I'm also very pro "free market" - except in the cases of a new guy. We've all been doing this for a long time. We should all be able to make the trades we want to make when we want to make them for better or for worse. Thats baseball folks.

"Like" "Thumbs up" "+1"

Yea - I agree with all of that as well.

Thunderdome.

I agree with Nate and John. I think TRC serves to protect new guys and suspected collusion (which isn't something we encounter as we had in years past).
I like a free market approach...I think just about everyone understands values pretty well and there haven't been too many very slanted deals (minus the two Z deals in recent history) that seem like collusion. I think if deals are bad enough, everyone will smell it and we can bring it to a league vote. I would hope league votes don't become more common in order to try to frustrate opponents, but I don't think that will be the case with this group of guys.

Pirates wrote:I posted a variation of this in Exco:

I'm all for getting rid of the TRC. I don't know if people need to be protected anymore, and if the TRC even functions as such.

Bad trades are going to happen, we just need to prevent horrible ones. At this point, though, I think we may just be best off having everything automatically passed, and if say, 5 people have a problem with the trade, it then goes to the league-wide veto vote. With all the stats out there and the valuations each person places on players, this may be the most accurate in terms of what's fair and what's not, since we all have our preferences as to the stats we think are important.

We get what, one or two trades a year that go to vote? I think it may just be time to cut the TRC out of the process entirely since it doesn't really seem to do much anyway.

I'm okay with an arrangement like this. An appeals process that is well defined would need to be implemented. In the last 12 months I have voted to reject a few deals, but with most of the league being longstanding members it doesn't happen often.

Bumping up the TRC discussion. For what it's worth, I don't think the TRC serves a real purpose. Nothing against the current or prior members, of course. I think most of us are established enough in this league to not need trade monitoring.
There have been a few questionable trades that have passed, were challenged by members, put to a vote and decided that way. I think that system works fine without the role of the TRC.
Perhaps ExCo can act as a quasi-TRC for the first three months/six months/determined time period for new members to watch for bad deals/collusion.

Trade reviews should not be a function of the ExCo. We'd be better off keeping the TRC than consolidating all the decisions into one entity.

Alternatively if the TRC was to be eliminated a league wide protest system as discussed earlier could be a reasonable replacement.

Reds wrote:Trade reviews should not be a function of the ExCo. We'd be better off keeping the TRC than consolidating all the decisions into one entity.

I agree.

Reds wrote:Alternatively if the TRC was to be eliminated a league wide protest system as discussed earlier could be a reasonable replacement.

I agree - however with the interest of several GMs in wanting to be on the TRC I wonder if it really is no longer useful.

I'm all for NOT having the TRC be an ExCo function AND disbanding the TRC with the open forum.

That said, I find a lot of merit in what Jim said, too. My idea would be to have one person oversee the trading side of the business. They would approve each trade, they would be in charge of handling league-wide votes, and would facilitate conversation on any changes to the trading rules. Someone who makes this a simple, clean process. They should be diligent about checking the league site, a GM with a good trade history, and someone who has a consistent presence on the message board. Obviously this person would not have final say on all trades...just think this makes it cleaner.

Reds wrote:Trade reviews should not be a function of the ExCo. We'd be better off keeping the TRC than consolidating all the decisions into one entity.

Alternatively if the TRC was to be eliminated a league wide protest system as discussed earlier could be a reasonable replacement.

My point on ExCo looking at trades is simply for the first (whatever the designated time period is) a new owner is in the league, which is pretty rare (once every several years).

I'm wondering if we're at a point that, even with a new member, we can as a league police trades(think Fantasy Football style)? Maybe the TRC has served its purpose.