ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: History Books => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Archives => Topic started by: rcankosy on May 03, 2013, 10:31:55 PM
-
Please refer the thread below and cast your cote for who should be the future owner of the Dodgers.
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=94354.0
-
There are only 6 on the RC right? Is Howe still here?
-
I vote Rick gets the Dodgers, Eric gets the Nats.
I also vote that the Padres get a salary cap bump of an additional 10 million to help execute their plan
-
I vote Rick gets the Dodgers, Eric gets the Nats.
I also vote that the Padres get a salary cap bump of an additional 10 million to help execute their plan
So how about instead of giving me a tiny bump in cap that is a joke (the SD are 60m the LAD who I am missing out on, are 140m, that's 80m in difference, an honest attempt to show respect in this situation would be at least 40m as I am wronged out of 80m); how about that I am given auto win of the next job I apply for? That would be essentially the treatment for Rick and the same for what I expect for dealing with the same thing he got the reward for (and this will be 2x it has happened to me, with NYY prior).
So, the next job I want I totally get, no questions.
-
Noway should any team go up 40m.
I Do believe that we should have a floor. Meaning no team go below x amount of cap. I think 70 is a safe floor. But that has nothing to do with this situation and is in fact a topic for a different discussion.
No one person should ever be guaranteed the next opening that they want. That is just dumb.
-
Noway should any team go up 40m.
I Do believe that we should have a floor. Meaning no team go below x amount of cap. I think 70 is a safe floor. But that has nothing to do with this situation and is in fact a topic for a different discussion.
No one person should ever be guaranteed the next opening that they want. That is just dumb.
Then in all rationality I would like a list of why Rick is the better choice for the Dodgers, other than it's to right a wrong. I have been wronged twice and Dan was trying to point this out with some compensation. Therefore, that Rick was wronged out of a gig the last time cannot be reasoning for him getting the job over me, as we were both wronged out of a job already at one point. This isn't me complaining or whatever else people will sling at me. This is asking for support for opinions that are objective not subjective.
-
Like I said earlier. The padres have not improved. Rick made the white sox verybgood and Jeff made the red sox improve drastically. The padres have stayed the same. Hard to get a promotion when you havent succeeded at your current role.
Rick and jeff have not had any behavioral issues or warnings given for behavior on ProFSL.
2 main reasons would be performance and behavior.
Im on my way home from the fundraiser and then ill post the 3 patches of 30 plus days of inactivity as well.
-
How bout I take the Dodgers and everyone can go scratch
-
And then after that we can change the rule and all of this will be for not...
-
Like I said earlier. The padres have not improved. Rick made the white sox verybgood and Jeff made the red sox improve drastically. The padres have stayed the same. Hard to get a promotion when you havent succeeded at your current role.
Rick and jeff have not had any behavioral issues or warnings given for behavior on ProFSL.
2 main reasons would be performance and behavior.
Im on my way home from the fundraiser and then ill post the 3 patches of 30 plus days of inactivity as well.
Dude my Padres are 100 total fantasy points behind you? Haven't improved? Please...just hate
-
Lmao. You mean 7000 points. :rofl:
-
Like I said earlier. The padres have not improved. Rick made the white sox verybgood and Jeff made the red sox improve drastically. The padres have stayed the same. Hard to get a promotion when you havent succeeded at your current role.
Rick and jeff have not had any behavioral issues or warnings given for behavior on ProFSL.
2 main reasons would be performance and behavior
Rick was a .500-.600 win ball club when he was there for one year. Jeff:
2011: 3rd in AL East (87-75)
Boston continued to regress heading into 2011 failing to win 90 games and once again missing the playoffs for the second straight year. The franchise went into a different direction headed into the trade deadline by trading their best player, CI Miguel Cabrera and signing young players such as Daniel Murphy, Dexter Fowler, Felipe Paulino as well as acquiring MI Dustin Ackley. The team heads into 2012 with plenty of cap room and looks to retake the top of the AL East.
Red sox = 133m this season
White Sox = 102m this season
Padres = 59.5M this season
Give me 40m and I'll do wonders with it, haha! But in reality, I've given plenty of examples of why the Padres are in a great spot because of my leadership. And my first draft was three years ago those guys are just beginning to be expected to start showing results. And what do you know, my team looks better than ever this season and in the first 3 weeks I almost beat many "better" teams. I can't beat LAD but who rarely can? The Padres are definitely headed for better days. You have said nothing to disregard this opinion. Other than record, and the Mets are only a few games ahead. Bad leadership or simply that it takes time?
Colby says his next competitive season is 2015...bad manager? Has he ever won anything as the Pirates? Does that mean he should be considered unqualified, no. And on and on
-
Lmao. You mean 7000 points. :rofl:
Excuse me, I meant win percentage. Typing too much and not editing before posting.
Grow up Corey, the LMAO and :rofl: are immature and a bad way to handle a serious issue. This might not impact you but it does to me. Your problems with me on a personal level are blatant throughout your posts. Leave the snide stuff to PMs if you want. Baiting me on a forum is really low.
-
Jeff took the Sox over in 2011 correct, but you left out 2012 where he went 106-54. A 19 game improvement and got in the playoffs. This was done by multiple excellent trades. When Jeff took the Sox over he had 0.4m in cap room and 21 players on his roster. Excellent job Jeff.
There is no baiting. You said you were 100 points behind me. That is incorrect its merely 7000 instead. How am I baiting you? You asked why is Rick or Jeff more qualified, I am simply answering your questions and correcting you when you are wrong.
Im sorry you think its personal, its not. I have stated already if it was personal, I would be all in for Mr.Tradeking. But thats not the case. Not one thing I have said is snide. I will say LOL and I will put the laughing logo when 100 = 7000
-
San Diego Padres History :SD:
2012: 5th in NL West (60-102)
Despite the GM's comments in the newspaper that San Diego is turning itself around, the team actually played worse in 2012. The Padres finished with the worst record in the National League. The bright spot was their pitching led by Mat Latos and Dillon Gee. The team's offensive woes are a major issue that needs to be addressed in the off-season.
2011: 4th in NL West (65-97)
The Padres continued to be an NL West bottom feeder, but luckily beat out the Giants in H2H competition for the 4th place tiebreaker. San Diego had very few assets to utilize. One of Chris' accomplishments in 2011 was getting rid of the horrible Heath Bell contract. Other than that, the team actually performed above expectations and picked up some cheap wins in the second half.
2010: 5th in NL West (54-108)
Greg Lake cleaned the house a bit as he took over but only made a few moves in his short tenure as Padres GM. Chris Calcia was hired as his replacement and had a tough task at hand with a barren MLB roster and a team at the bottom of the standings, a couple big, painful contracts, and little wiggle room under a $60m cap.
Chris put the Padres through a rebuilding stage by trading away star slugger Adrian Gonalzez to the Cardinals in return for many of the top prospects they received in the Pujols deal. The team was by far the worst in the first half and picked up the pace slightly in the 2nd half to finish with the 2nd worst record in the majors in 2010.
2009: 5th in NL West (73-89)
The Padres performed poorly in 2009 due to a lack of talent and injuries to the once solid starting rotation.
Management
Christopher Calcia (joeshmoe (http://profsl.com/smf/index.php?action=profile;u=567)) [5/25/10 - ]
Greg Lake (glake (http://profsl.com/smf/index.php?action=profile;u=397)) [12/31/09 - 5/10/10]
Sam Valenti (tfence (http://profsl.com/smf/index.php?action=profile;u=296)) [7/1/09 - 12/29/09]
1) My record is pretty good all things considered. The increase in my first season from first half->second half.
2) I had a regression in year three but that was to be expected as I was busy signing solid players that were young and project for the right time frame.
3) The issues of last year were addressed and my offense is good, not great, but pretty good. I don't have the depth to rotate and get the extra 100 abs most do. My guys are still young. But I have proven adequate to get guys who contribute to the team rather than take away. And I added to the bullpen to bolster pitching stats. Starters aren't cheap and buying one now makes no sense if my compete phase is when Baez, Soler, Romero, McCullers, Meyer, Vitek, Tapia, Abreau, and Perez are ready. It's smart.
4) It is clearly documented that the Padres I took over were the worst team in the league by far and away. They weren't ever going to be a one season fix. That is unrealistic in building a sustainable future.
My success isn't hidden and isn't some illusion. It is there for all to see.
-
1) Jeff took the Sox over in 2011 correct, but you left out 2012 where he went 106-54. A 19 game improvement and got in the playoffs. This was done by multiple excellent trades. When Jeff took the Sox over he had 0.4m in cap room and 21 players on his roster. Excellent job Jeff.
2) There is no baiting. You said you were 100 points behind me. That is incorrect its merely 7000 instead. How am I baiting you? You asked why is Rick or Jeff more qualified, I am simply answering your questions and correcting you when you are wrong.
3) Im sorry you think its personal, its not. I have stated already if it was personal, I would be all in for Mr.Tradeking. But thats not the case. Not one thing I have said is snide. I will say LOL and I will put the laughing logo when 100 = 7000
1) So clearly not every problem can be solved overnight. Exactly my point. Jeff took time to turn around the Red Sox. They were in much better position than the Padres of 2010...Mike Cameron, Heath Bell (12m), Jake Peavy (16m per, 40m+ owed), a 1st rounder of Donavan Tate, who was a horrible pick (should have been a football player). The team had one quality piece, AGON, and I wasn't going to be able to afford him so I got the one training lesson I needed at FGM, and Gamel hasn't gotten onto the field yet. If he had or does, the deal would/will have worked for me. All with 60m in cap at most.
2) I acknowledge I made a mistake, but that being corrected, for a mere 90m larger salary you have less than .100 points more in the win column. Does that mean you've not improved? Your salary is decreasing for the next two seasons.
3) And yes, the LMAO and :rofl: are largely uncalled for. They're unprofessional and rude. This is a serious issue and doesn't deserve mockery. Further you haven't given one statistic about why the Padres are worse. All you've said is what "you think" and that isn't enough, show me why.
-
In my opinion this shouldn't be a popularity contest or about righting a wrong. This also isn't a negotiation for a team to get more cap space because they didn't get a position they wanted. The best person for the job should get it period.
So far each candidate has thrown their name in the pot by making a short one or two line post saying they are interested but I feel this is not enough information to make a decision. Neither is all of back and forth arguing between different members.
There has been alot of arguing about who is better and who deserves the job, or who got wronged in the past. Personally I would like each GM to post a longer response on why they should get the job. What Strengths and Weaknesses they see in the Current Dodgers Roster, what they plan on doing to improve the roster, Long Term strategy for sustainability, Etc.
In my opinion each GM should make one post (an interview of sorts) to express why they are the best person for this job and then the RC can vote. This post should not be focused on how they got wronged in the past but why they are the best candidate to lead the Dodgers into the future.
-
In my opinion this shouldn't be a popularity contest or about righting a wrong. This also isn't a negotiation for a team to get more cap space because they didn't get a position they wanted. The best person for the job should get it period.
So far each candidate has thrown their name in the pot by making a short one or two line post saying they are interested but I feel this is not enough information to make a decision. Neither is all of back and forth arguing between different members.
There has been alot of arguing about who is better and who deserves the job, or who got wronged in the past. Personally I would like each GM to post a longer response on why they should get the job. What Strengths and Weaknesses they see in the Current Dodgers Roster, what they plan on doing to improve the roster, Long Term strategy for sustainability, Etc.
In my opinion each GM should make one post (an interview of sorts) to express why they are the best person for this job and then the RC can vote. This post should not be focused on how they got wronged in the past but why they are the best candidate to lead the Dodgers into the future.
I feel like trying to sit here and put together what I am going to do with the Dodgers is silly. Firstly, I have no idea what people will and will not trade. Secondly, they're a winning ball club, not much need be done for this year at all. Third, explaining my plan gives other teams every chance to stop that plan.
What I have done is shown why at FGM I am the best choice. I have done well with the Padres as stated above in previous posts. And, I have had the guts to stick it out even when the league didn't go my way. The Dodgers shouldn't be a revolving door. They're too much of a valued franchise for that. For me, the Dodgers just need good drafting and a steady hand to manipulate the cap. The talent is already there; Cabrera, AGON, Hanram, Heyward, etc.
-
I vote for Paul S and Brewers GM to co-manage the Dodgers. Anything to get them out of the NL Central will only help Dan Wood and I.
-
That and getting Hamilton a larger bat. Like a comedically oversized bat so he can make some contact
-
Who has the longest tenure for a transfer?
Joeshmoe
Who is the most reputable MLB GM applying for the job?
MTK
Who is another FGM GM who served his time and lost out on the Dodgers wrongly last time?
BHows
Who has done a great job since transferring from Detroit to Boston?
Nerwffej
Who would bring new blood to the league?
Joe
Who has applied before, is very active, and wants to stay with one team?
Eric
Who deserves it?
That's the big question. It is a subjective matter. People shouldn't get upset. It is a fantasy league. Personally, in any other keeper league, you don't get the opportunity to take someone else's team when they leave.
I like the idea of Chris or BHows getting it. Worse teams should go to new GMs and Chris has served his team albeit the Padres have improved very little. Meanwhile, BHows deserves to be back in this league and lost out unfairly but so did Joeshmoe with the Yankees when OUDAN took them.
How many times can BHows apply for the Dodgers and be rejected? He and nerwffej have the best FGM resumes and should be considered first and foremost if tenure isn't the ultimate decision maker. With that said, I vote for BHows.
However, don't throw any candidate under the bus in this discussion. Likewise, candidates shouldn't be complaining about the process and calling out people. This is meant to be a fun league.
-
Who has the longest tenure for a transfer?
Joeshmoe
Who is the most reputable MLB GM applying for the job?
MTK
Who is another FGM GM who served his time and lost out on the Dodgers wrongly last time?
BHows
Who has done a great job since transferring from Detroit to Boston?
Nerwffej
Who would bring new blood to the league?
Joe
Who has applied before, is very active, and wants to stay with one team?
Eric
Who deserves it?
That's the big question. It is a subjective matter. People shouldn't get upset. It is a fantasy league. Personally, in any other keeper league, you don't get the opportunity to take someone else's team when they leave.
I like the idea of Chris or BHows getting it. Worse teams should go to new GMs and Chris has served his team albeit the Padres have improved very little. Meanwhile, BHows deserves to be back in this league and lost out unfairly but so did Joeshmoe with the Yankees when OUDAN took them.
How many times can BHows apply for the Dodgers and be rejected? He and nerwffej have the best FGM resumes and should be considered first and foremost if tenure isn't the ultimate decision maker. With that said, I vote for BHows.
However, don't throw any candidate under the bus in this discussion. Likewise, candidates shouldn't be complaining about the process and calling out people. This is meant to be a fun league.
I'd like to know what the expectations were for a team that had little cap space, no assets and a terrible roster? What more could I have done? How many times can Rick apply for it and get rejected? How many times can I apply for a transfer and be rejected without the same argument for me? The fact is no one has been objective and applied why, only what they think. That's not cool. Why was it you think Rick did so well with the White Sox? What was the expectation (since it was changed midstream) for me to apply for a job? And yes I will COMPLAIN when the rule change of the procedure only negatively impacts me. Why did we set up a rule that made me think I was next in line if that wasn't the rule?
Why did a member approach Rick before the situation was handled in the appropriate manner? A member went to him and suggested he should apply, totally out of line with the rules that existed. And those rules were followed up until this very transaction. The rules were changed to prevent me from transferring and they target only me. If nobody can understand my distress then what use is talking about it.
Just remember this, Rick quit on this league once. That's not calling out a member, that's just a fact. One the entire community is willing to reward with the first job he desires to get back into. For shame to punish me for sticking with my club. And now it seems the RC can simply disallow any transfer I ask for. Will I ever get a chance for a transfer? I can't understand how a fun league, that set up a rule to stop hard feelings about this stuff, is intentionally disregarding this and creating hard feelings. And to suggest I'm complaining unjustly is a slap in my face.
Thanks for giving the job to Rick and saying I suck at management without giving me one reason. Thanks.
-
And for the record this method of finding a new owner isn't something I made up or wrongly thought was what the method would actually be. It was an executive order but the Admin for the league created the rule by using it repeatedly, and as Dan said best, we all knew what it was. Whoever "invited" Rick did wrong, because the job was open only to internal members for 72 hours. When I brought this inconvenient fact up a new executive order was issued to disregard the old exec order because exec orders aren't rules. So what validates the change of transfer rules that Roy did? There is no preceedure being followed and this whole thing is being created as we go. That's not the way to do things. This isn't like Shooter where the intent of the rule was unclear. The intent of the rule was very clear for transfers. But again, we all knew the rule and the proof is how it was applied consistently for the time period upto this time:
It has been brought to my attention that the Mariners GM, no longer wants the gig...You guys know the process. 72 hours internal, then we take it outside...Please post interest below...also please explain what you would do with the team, and try not to make it the usual, I will build with youth and veterans, blah, blah blah - snore... I would like any prospective GM to have knowledge of the players on the roster
Thank you - Management
-
I personally think that we need to stick with what we have done in the past and allow internal members to have first go at the job. I think that once a member within the league has applied and become a the new owner of the team, their old team should go to a new owner from outside the league. I think that joeshmoe has been a part of this league with a tough team for a while and has not changed teams for 2 1/2 years and deserves a chance to change. I do not think owners should be allowed to change teams more than once or twice, that just is too much. If you are in this league you should be expected to take over a team with a plan and stick with it. This league is the closest to real life that I have personally been in and there will be tough seasons, but I don't think that owners should be moving around often, or should want to. I would never want to change teams even if a team like the Yankees opened up...I would hate to see my team in someone else's hands. Anyway I feel like I am ranting. I suppose that means my vote goes to joeshmoe. I also think that there should be a limit on how many teams a single owner can own in this league during his tenure here and there should also be a specific amount of time that an owner needs to be with his current team before transferring.
-
Chris - you turned down the Rockies... Not like you haven't been granted a transfer before
-
Even though I believe the rule is bogus to begin with, the fact that it has been used on several occasions already leads me to believe it needs to be followed in this situation. In a perfect world, a GM would be allowed one move during his time at FGM. This would emulate real life, as rarely do GMs get to run 3 or more teams during their careers. I would actually prefer to see newbies take over available squads, especially when they are strong teams, as parity is an issue already in this league and a good team taking a potential small step back is not catastrophic, as some believe it is.
All of that being said, my vote is for Chris to be awarded the Dodgers. If he goes inactive again, he is gone, period, and their can be a new period of application for the Dodgers (at which time Rick would get the job I'm sure). Turnover lately in this league has been pretty high, so the chances of Rick having the opportunity to land a better team is also high. As much as I like Rick, I think the guy who quits because the bounce didn't go his way should not be rewarded over the guy who stuck it out despite facing the same "bounce." Rick is a fine GM who will do well no matter where he ends up, so I also feel this is better for the league as a whole. Lastly, I am a big fan of rules and procedure being followed. I have had problems in the past with leagues that cherry-picked rules based on a variety of reasons. I've always found that things work for the better morale-wise when the letters in print are followed. Tough call fellas, but I have to go with what I feel is the right thing to do.
-
Chris - you turned down the Rockies... Not like you haven't been granted a transfer before
I did throw my hat in the ring for the Rockies, but I wasn't interested by the time the I had reviewed the team and decided to remain in SD. I'm not lying when I said I was waiting for the right transfer to a team I cared to manage...and I knew if I took that Rockies gig I wouldn't have had the chance to move somewhere better when the opportunity presented itself.
-
I change my vote... Chris can have the Dodgers.
-
I'd like to know what the expectations were for a team that had little cap space, no assets and a terrible roster? What more could I have done? How many times can Rick apply for it and get rejected? How many times can I apply for a transfer and be rejected without the same argument for me? The fact is no one has been objective and applied why, only what they think. That's not cool. Why was it you think Rick did so well with the White Sox? What was the expectation (since it was changed midstream) for me to apply for a job? And yes I will COMPLAIN when the rule change of the procedure only negatively impacts me. Why did we set up a rule that made me think I was next in line if that wasn't the rule?
Why did a member approach Rick before the situation was handled in the appropriate manner? A member went to him and suggested he should apply, totally out of line with the rules that existed. And those rules were followed up until this very transaction. The rules were changed to prevent me from transferring and they target only me. If nobody can understand my distress then what use is talking about it.
Just remember this, Rick quit on this league once. That's not calling out a member, that's just a fact. One the entire community is willing to reward with the first job he desires to get back into. For shame to punish me for sticking with my club. And now it seems the RC can simply disallow any transfer I ask for. Will I ever get a chance for a transfer? I can't understand how a fun league, that set up a rule to stop hard feelings about this stuff, is intentionally disregarding this and creating hard feelings. And to suggest I'm complaining unjustly is a slap in my face.
Thanks for giving the job to Rick and saying I suck at management without giving me one reason. Thanks.
Oak was in same situation.
-
This needs to go by protocol of the league. Existing members are allowed to transfer 1st. New or returning members are then allowed the remaining teams. This protocol eliminates the subjective and this is why a standard is in place, it upholds the credibility and respect of the league.
Chris or Jeff both have a shot at the openings in my opinion, right of refusal. Which gets the first shot is subjective. I would only believe that Jeff to LAD and Chris to BOS would fit Chris' personal preference.
For the next teams, I would vote Rick, Eric, and then MTK in that order. Based upon how they left and where they stood on application.
-
Im not in favor of a team getting extra cap space to please their prospective owner, many teams would want the same treatment.
-
MT - here is the issue with the protocol, and it is something I have argued against since day one. It was a rule put in place that wasn't voted on by the RC. We all just took it as gospel.
As the rule states Chris should get the Dodgers on time spent here alone. Jeff recently moved to the Red Sox, so his time at that team gives him less tenure than Chris has with the Dodgers.
Here is my biggest problem - outside of the subjective - Chris was removed from the team in 2011, by me, for in activity. Technically that would give Jeff the lead for the Red Sox. So how hard are we going to follow the rules?
And I will state again, and you can quote me on it - this system for choosing new GMs sucks. Plain and simple. It has nothing to do with the talent of the GM and what they have done in the past. I could have hung around here for 3 years scratching my ass too, waiting for the Dodgers, Yanks, or the Brewers to open up, and then BONANZA!
And I refuse to censor myself on this issue because I believe in it so much. I'm sorry Chris, but your team has done nothing since you took over. That is not a personal attack, that's just facts. You can call me out, say I'm a d-ck, whatever, that's your opinion, I am a d-ck, ask my friends. But personally I don't think you deserve a promotion. And I changed my vote in your favor.
-
MT - here is the issue with the protocol, and it is something I have argued against since day one. It was a rule put in place that wasn't voted on by the RC. We all just took it as gospel.
As the rule states Chris should get the Dodgers on time spent here alone. Jeff recently moved to the Red Sox, so his time at that team gives him less tenure than Chris has with the Dodgers.
Here is my biggest problem - outside of the subjective - Chris was removed from the team in 2011, by me, for in activity. Technically that would give Jeff the lead for the Red Sox. So how hard are we going to follow the rules?
And I will state again, and you can quote me on it - this system for choosing new GMs sucks. Plain and simple. It has nothing to do with the talent of the GM and what they have done in the past. I could have hung around here for 3 years scratching my ass too, waiting for the Dodgers, Yanks, or the Brewers to open up, and then BONANZA!
And I refuse to censor myself on this issue because I believe in it so much. I'm sorry Chris, but your team has done nothing since you took over. That is not a personal attack, that's just facts. You can call me out, say I'm a d-ck, whatever, that's your opinion, I am a d-ck, ask my friends. But personally I don't think you deserve a promotion. And I changed my vote in your favor.
I respect all of this statement and agree. At the very least the standard for manager selection should be improved.
-
We should update the rules to limit a GM transfer to once every 5 years and a lifetime max of 3 different teams. We should also have a formula for internal transfers that takes relative performance in account.
In reality, we have two applicants for this job being joeshmoe and nerwffej. By my executive ruling, joeshmoe would have the job due to longer tenure with his franchise.
-
MT - here is the issue with the protocol, and it is something I have argued against since day one. It was a rule put in place that wasn't voted on by the RC. We all just took it as gospel.
As the rule states Chris should get the Dodgers on time spent here alone. Jeff recently moved to the Red Sox, so his time at that team gives him less tenure than Chris has with the Dodgers.
Here is my biggest problem - outside of the subjective - Chris was removed from the team in 2011, by me, for in activity. Technically that would give Jeff the lead for the Red Sox. So how hard are we going to follow the rules?
And I will state again, and you can quote me on it - this system for choosing new GMs sucks. Plain and simple. It has nothing to do with the talent of the GM and what they have done in the past. I could have hung around here for 3 years scratching my ass too, waiting for the Dodgers, Yanks, or the Brewers to open up, and then BONANZA!
And I refuse to censor myself on this issue because I believe in it so much. I'm sorry Chris, but your team has done nothing since you took over. That is not a personal attack, that's just facts. You can call me out, say I'm a d-ck, whatever, that's your opinion, I am a d-ck, ask my friends. But personally I don't think you deserve a promotion. And I changed my vote in your favor.
I don't need to call anyone a name or anything. I am not doing that. What I am saying is, what was the measure of improvement that I needed to show before getting a promotion? Was it make 5 trades good or bad? I have ascertained offers, and everytime I get counters that are a joke. I mean honestly...why would I trade the pieces I do have to set back 4-5 years. I never had superstars to trade away and recoup great talent, except AGON and the return would have worked had Gamel gotten healthy two years ago. All signs were good.
What I am saying is, show me where you think I haven't done anything...or not enough. Show me....point to it. Not just a stupid w/l column stat. It's exactly why Colby said he wont be viable til 2015. Because to do it right takes time. Look at my drafts and tell me I screwed up the rebuild. It's not the case it's the expectations...and those were never posted...except for in the instance of a tie.
As far as my time of absence...I admit it. I was gone in 2011 due to a horrible breakup that coincided with the RFA schedule? I messed up...but life was in the tubes for me. I lost a few guys that I would have signed cheap, maybe, but that opportunity would have prevented me from other opportunities. I am simply pointing out...what is the reason someone believes the Padres are no better than they were?
-
Chris, can you just leave it? You have said the same thing over and over again. I think everybody gets your point. Just let it play out as it should. Its fantasy, no need to fire on all 8 cylinders over a team.
-
Chris, can you just leave it? You have said the same thing over and over again. I think everybody gets your point. Just let it play out as it should. Its fantasy, no need to fire on all 8 cylinders over a team.
It's not fire or anything else. Others have said I did nothing with the Padres (Dan Wood, Corey) but they never provided a single reason why they felt that way. Asking for a reason is perfectly acceptable.
Furthermore, Corey is in a thread continuing to say these things and you chimed in "I agree 110%" so if you truly wish to calm the storm stop supporting someone from ranting baseless claims.
It's quite insane to me that I got lambasted for asking the league to follow the rules set forth. I slang no mud and made legitimate posts to base an opinion on. I used evidence. I'm asking that those who have taken a perch and are slinging arrows at me at least offer why they have the opinion they do. That's not much.
And it's hard to have fun when Corey is using this to strike his personal vendetta against me. I brought up a rule and this is the disrespect it cost me. Horrendous. I admit Corey and I don't get along, but I'm also not here saying he's a terrible manager and a bad person. I am getting that from others though and if they're going to say it, they should be able to point to why.
Corey, I asked for the three instances you claim I was absent...you said you'd show me...do it!
-
If you don't like how things are ran around here then just quit instead of keep rambling about the same things in every post.
-
If you don't like how things are ran around here then just quit instead of keep rambling about the same things in every post.
No, I don't have to quit because people were trying to end around the rules. I also would have stopped posting about the same things had they been answered at all. It's a discussion thread for the purposes of proposing questions and getting answers.
Lastly, where's this advice for Corey who is using this opportunity to insult my management without the base of the claim stated. He has said much of the same things on many posts and in three threads now. Instead of suggesting he quit you are suggesting he not quit. It's a two edged sword you're using to villainize my concern about this issue that in fact affects me.
Where has the respect for a member of this league gone? It's fantasy, it shouldn't be hard to have respectful disagreements.
-
First off, its not a personal vendetta. Its purely simple for the 5th time, since you cant comprehend. The Padres have not improved. Your cap continues to fall because you fail to put a team out there to even win 35 games. 35 games would keep your cap constant but you failed to do that.
You claim no talent? Where is agonz or better yet where is the return? Where is Chase Headley or the return...
The team has not got better. I dont care if it was Dan Wood who was running the Padres, I would say he should not the Dodgers because the team has done nothing.
Im sorry you take everything personal by thinking its a vendetta. That must happen to you a lot.
Record of inactivity for Joeshmoe
11/1/12 - 12/5/12
12/9/12 - 1/12/13
9/12/11 - 11/30/11
There is your inactivity.
You will be allowed the last word as I am done responding. Each time I respond I give the same answer and you are unable to process the information being given.
If you would like me to post the dates of your penalties and ban dates let me know.
I can also post the posts that got you banned and ruined a league as well.
-
The true question is are we, the RC, voting on tenure, and what we perceive as the best GM or best for the league? Let's answer that with each of our votes.
We should vote first on how to make our decision and then decide who wins the job.
-
IMO, if we want to change the rules than the RC should be involved. Otherwise this is really a matter for the commish.
-
Im not in favor of a team getting extra cap space to please their prospective owner, many teams would want the same treatment.
I completely agree with this sentiment, 100%
-
First off, its not a personal vendetta. Its purely simple for the 5th time, since you cant comprehend. The Padres have not improved. 1) Your cap continues to fall because you fail to put a team out there to even win 35 games. 35 games would keep your cap constant but you failed to do that.
2) You claim no talent? Where is agonz or better yet where is the return? Where is Chase Headley or the return...
The team has not got better. I dont care if it was Dan Wood who was running the Padres, I would say he should not the Dodgers because the team has done nothing.
Im sorry you take everything personal by thinking its a vendetta. 3) That must happen to you a lot.
4)Record of inactivity for Joeshmoe
11/1/12 - 12/5/12
12/9/12 - 1/12/13
9/12/11 - 11/30/11
There is your inactivity.
You will be allowed the last word as I am done responding. Each time I respond I give the same answer and you are unable to process the information being given.
5) If you would like me to post the dates of your penalties and ban dates let me know.
I can also post the posts that got you banned and ruined a league as well.
It's a nice narrative but I have to fix this.
1) Continues to fall? No it goes up for the next two seasons. The only fall under my tenure occurred this year and I already explained. I had no pieces to trade no way to compete and no way to win outside of AGON. I cashed in on AGON and picked up any decent prospect I could. I have 60m to spend divide that by 40 players and thats only 1.5m per player. Add on that you have to spend big money through bonuses to get the best prospects. My timetable wasn't to go trade for vets to just barely win and stay mediocre for the next infinity. I drafted and those guys take time. But the spects I picked up are certainly quality. Then I started signing guys to score points and compete during the weeks, which people know I'm competitive M-F and don't have the depth for Sa Su. Happens to me week in and out. Just this past week with the Royals. So the cap flex is expectable. Explain the Mets cap and how the Padres should be more like that if you have a real point. I did well with what I had. I'm still paying for Junk-Arm Peavey (6m!). The returns offered to the Padres when I took them over were junk mostly, trying to take advantage of them. I didn't have the pieces to land Trumbo or whoever...I had Donavan Tate as a 1st overall...yuck!
2) Where is the talent? Where was Headley? When I had gotten there he had already been picked cleaned from the bones by Colby from Greg a guy who couldn't even find the forums. Here was the doosey of a deal (http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=4205.msg18666#msg18666):
I like Chase Headley a lot... the Padres could use some more players, so here we are...
:PIT: to :SD:
CI Bowker, John, $0.5m (P-2011)
MI Eckstein, David, $0.5m (2010)
RP Karstens, Jeff, $0.5m (2011)
:SD: to :PIT:
CI Headley, Chase, $0.5m (P-2011)
Greg got nothing of real value to me when I took over. The Pirates 5th starter, Eckstein retired after the season, and Bowker is now out of the MLB and any affiliate team of it. A terribly bad trade by GREG.
A little on how comfortable Greg was at the time of the deal, with just the site in general, I have no clue about his abiliites; but Colby made out on it, can't hate Colby.
I would like to get this thing taken care of, Colby to you have the agreement in a PM?
Yes I do... Greg even responded to me today saying he could not find it. Apparently, he was looking at Fantrax and didn't realize that all moves are done here.
The Agon return was Rondon, Perez, and Mat Gamel. Gamel unfortunately has been injured two years but his bat looked good and he should have been the Brewers 1B. Bad bounce but not foreseeable at the time. At that time his bat had a (?) but it wasn't his health holding him and his bat looked good. Rondon looked solid to open the season and Perez should be the Rangers 5th man this year when he returns in 2-3 weeks...still looks nasty and he's only 22 now. And I took both those guys when pitchers were handicapped but IP was yet to be implemented. Still going to be a good Pen guy and a solid starter with a high ceiling. Not bad, even better considering it was basically the Pujols return.
3) Adds nothing to this conversation...detracts from it...it's those comments that are the reason I think you are using this opportunity to hate on me personally.
4) My inactivity during the holiday season? I was inactive for 34 and 35 days but with a 4 day period in between.we I'm sorry, I checked in and there was no activity. I then checked back in to reassure this during the 5th-9th. But I knew no activity in the FA market would happen until the turn of the year. That's why it's not okay to blanket 30 days. It was holiday season and offseason for two of my leagues. I had no reason to be on the site. It didn't hurt my team and I'm sure there were others who had they no obligation on profsl wouldn't check in. But it's clear I was ontop of it because I was active for drafting and Free Agency. I don't know what more one could realistically expect. A thirty day policy is unrealistic to begin with.
As for the inactivity in 2011 I admitted to it. There were extenuating circumstances. I don't need to repeat it all.
5) Where does it end Corey? Are you trying to escalate an issue? I've had my problems, outside of this league.