Author Topic: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal  (Read 2290 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Anthony

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Posts: 10065
  • Bonus inPoints: 10000
    • :CHI:
    • :CHI-NBA:
    • :CHI-NHL:
    • :Minnesota:
    • :CHC:
    • View Profile
60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« on: November 20, 2019, 03:14:41 PM »
I’d like to formally propose the removal of the 60 day waiting period to trade players. If you take a look at our previous vote (http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=325462.0) as many people voted to abolish the rule as there was to keep the rule, so after a year and having new members, I believe it’s worth bringing back up. The following reasons are points of why this rule change is needed:

1. Easier for the commissioner
    1. Not having to check trades to make sure players who fall into this rule saves Flash time, as well as not having to put the “sign date” on the rosters for every player

2. Mirrors the MLB
    No reason to keep a rule that they don’t abide by in the MLB which really has no affect on our league

3. Hurts Activity
    This one is self-explanatory. More restrictions = Less trading

4. In a free league, simpler is better
    Why make anything harder than it has to be.

5. It’s not achieving what it’s supposed to prevent
    Players subject to the rule will be traded regardless, it will just delay it from happening. These players will be judged with the same criteria whether it’s today, or in 60 days.

I can expand more on my thoughts. I believe this is the best route of action and I'm sure I'm not the only one who believes that.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline Flash

  • *ProFSL Staff
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2010
  • Posts: 23232
  • Bonus inPoints: 319
    • :SFO:
    • :GS:
    • :SJ:
    • :California:
    • :UnitedStates:
    • :SF:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2019, 08:55:09 PM »
Since this is a discussion thread, I want to offer this:

1. Easier for the commissioner
I think it is safe to say I will not be Commissioner forever, so leaving me out of it, if thinking about future Commissioners, abolishing the 60 day rule will not be a significant change it terms of time saved.  Although I whined about it in another thread, entering and removing signing dates is not a big deal and should not even be considered when weighing the merits of the 60 day moratorium.

2. Mirrors the MLB

This facet of FGM really needs to be seriously considered because it is something our league has always prided ourselves on.  I agree that in MLB, contracted players can be traded at any time (except between the trading deadline and the end of the World Series).  With that, MLB got rid of August waiver trades and so did we—and there wasn’t any pushback on that issue.  I know we all run our teams differently, but are we acquiring free agents to improve our teams or are we acquiring them as trade bait?  Either way, waiting 60 days to trade them away doesn’t seem like a giant obstacle.  Given injuries, roster changes, and whatever else happens on the MLB level, all of the players on our 40 MLB/20 MiLB are not limited by a 60 day moratorium.

As for players acquired in the FYPD, our 60 Day trade moratorium does mirror MLB, but is not nearly as stringent.  MLB teams abide by the rule and it is certainly enforced.  However, since we hold our FYPD in November and not June, we have modified the rule because if we held our draft in July (after the June draft), the FYPD would drastically affect our competitive rosters (in-season as opposed to off-season).  So our 60 day moratorium is a compromise of a sort and upholds the spirit of the current MLB rule of 90 days or after the World Series.

“A player who signs after being selected in the MLB Rule 4 Draft (First-Year Player Draft) or who was eligible for selection in the Rule 4 Draft but was not selected and who signs with an MLB club as a Non-Drafted Free-agent (NDFA) cannot be traded for at least 90 days or until after the conclusion of the World Series (no earlier than 9 AM on the day after the final game of the World Series), whichever comes last.
NOTE: Previously, a player signed after being selected in the MLB Rule 4 Draft could not be traded until the first anniversary of the player signing his first contract.”

In the last vote I advocated for the abolition of the June 1st free agent freeze because it did not mirror anything in MLB.  Abolishing the June 1st date and keeping the 60 day trade moratorium was a compromise to be sure, but I still don’t agree with the premise that it isn’t warranted because of the inevitability of a player being traded.  Interrupting immediate gratification isn’t really a solid reason for a rule that has worked for the 11 years this league has been in existence.  This is free league but not a free for all when it comes to league participation.

Finally, as far as activity, trading is great, but looking back throughout the years, only a limited amount of GMs actually negotiate trades.  Some are very active and some have never been a part of any trade in FGM.  Activity in free agency during the off-season and throughout is a gauge of actual activity.  Changing Fantrax lineups and monitoring MiLB promotions to the MLB are other forms of activity. 

Getting rid of the 60 day rule for FYPD players is not warranted from my perspective.  As for newly signed free agents, I am still on the fence.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
🏆 2021 FGM World Series Champion - :SF:
🏆 2017 WCB2 World Series Champion - :SD:
🏆 2021 BSN Football Mt West Champion :UNLV:
🏆 2021 BSN Football Big 10 Champion -  :Nebraska:
🏆 2021 BSN Football Pac-12 Champion :California:

Offline Yeagg

  • The Bush League
  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Dec 2017
  • Posts: 2484
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Tennessee:
    • :blank:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2019, 11:27:38 PM »
I'll give my support on this as 1 of the 8 required GM's to back a vote on a rule change
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
:ARZ: 2021 Bush League World Series Champion
:NYY: 2021 FGM AL Wild Card
:ARZ: 2019 Bush League World Series Champion
:ATL: 2019 Armchair FB NL East Champion
:NYY: 2019 FGM AL Wild Card
:PIT-NFL: 2018 NFLC Divisional Series Winner
:TB: 2018 WCB2 East Coast Wild Card

Online Anthony

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Posts: 10065
  • Bonus inPoints: 10000
    • :CHI:
    • :CHI-NBA:
    • :CHI-NHL:
    • :Minnesota:
    • :CHC:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2019, 01:22:57 AM »
“A player who signs after being selected in the MLB Rule 4 Draft (First-Year Player Draft) or who was eligible for selection in the Rule 4 Draft but was not selected and who signs with an MLB club as a Non-Drafted Free-agent (NDFA) cannot be traded for at least 90 days or until after the conclusion of the World Series (no earlier than 9 AM on the day after the final game of the World Series), whichever comes last.

At the moment I only want to address this current point, and it has been previously bought up: our draft happens after the world series, so I would feel that we're already kind of waiting the 90 days as is.

that being said, I wouldn't be opposed to making FYPD ineligible to be traded until after the draft, in the spirit of not trading draft picks if that makes things easier.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline Flash

  • *ProFSL Staff
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2010
  • Posts: 23232
  • Bonus inPoints: 319
    • :SFO:
    • :GS:
    • :SJ:
    • :California:
    • :UnitedStates:
    • :SF:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2019, 02:34:08 AM »
At the moment I only want to address this current point, and it has been previously bought up: our draft happens after the world series, so I would feel that we're already kind of waiting the 90 days as is.

that being said, I wouldn't be opposed to making FYPD ineligible to be traded until after the draft, in the spirit of not trading draft picks if that makes things easier.

How are we already waiting 90 days when we haven't even completed the draft and we don't know who will end up on our teams?  Trading the FYPD draftees immediately after the draft is simply saying there is no 60 day trade moratorium at all.  Is that the current point--the complete elimination of the 60 day draft moratorium?
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
🏆 2021 FGM World Series Champion - :SF:
🏆 2017 WCB2 World Series Champion - :SD:
🏆 2021 BSN Football Mt West Champion :UNLV:
🏆 2021 BSN Football Big 10 Champion -  :Nebraska:
🏆 2021 BSN Football Pac-12 Champion :California:

Offline nerwffej

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2010
  • Posts: 6324
  • Bonus inPoints: 6
    • :CHI:
    • :CHI-NBA:
    • :CHI-NHL:
    • :Illinois:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2019, 04:40:32 AM »
I am good with doing away with the 60 day for drafted players. The 60 day for free agent and resigning I feel should stay.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline kidd5jersey

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2016
  • Posts: 2544
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2019, 09:15:12 AM »
The whole premise of the FYPD is to supply teams with a good farm so that every team can compete long term. If you look at other leagues, owners are not committed for 3yrs let alone ten. The 60day rule protects teams from themselves.  Because teams don't do grueling rebuilds, they get desperate and trade top talent for playersin deals that seriously affect the future.

However, I will agree with the majority of the vote. If you guys feel this will improve the league then I'm for it.

funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Online Anthony

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Posts: 10065
  • Bonus inPoints: 10000
    • :CHI:
    • :CHI-NBA:
    • :CHI-NHL:
    • :Minnesota:
    • :CHC:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2019, 12:24:11 PM »
The whole premise of the FYPD is to supply teams with a good farm so that every team can compete long term. If you look at other leagues, owners are not committed for 3yrs let alone ten. The 60day rule protects teams from themselves.  Because teams don't do grueling rebuilds, they get desperate and trade top talent for playersin deals that seriously affect the future.

However, I will agree with the majority of the vote. If you guys feel this will improve the league then I'm for it.

That's not what the rule does, it only stops them from trading them for 60 days, once day 61 hits those prospects are as good as gone. Protecting GM's from themselves should be the job of the TC and voting on trades with the good of the league as priority number 1
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Online Anthony

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Posts: 10065
  • Bonus inPoints: 10000
    • :CHI:
    • :CHI-NBA:
    • :CHI-NHL:
    • :Minnesota:
    • :CHC:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2019, 12:35:20 PM »
How are we already waiting 90 days when we haven't even completed the draft and we don't know who will end up on our teams?  Trading the FYPD draftees immediately after the draft is simply saying there is no 60 day trade moratorium at all.  Is that the current point--the complete elimination of the 60 day draft moratorium?

Our version of waiting 90 days is the fact that our draft happens more than 90 days after the real MLB FYPD. I believe that the timing of our draft upholds the spirit of the MLB rule.

The current point is the complete elimination of the 60 day no-trade rule and its entirety, including free agent signings, extended players, and drafted players.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline WestCoastExpress

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2016
  • Posts: 4316
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :blank:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #9 on: November 21, 2019, 06:19:23 PM »
The current point is the complete elimination of the 60 day no-trade rule and its entirety, including free agent signings, extended players, and drafted players.

Is this what the vote would be on?

Or would there be differing stipulations between FYPD, FA, and Re-Signs...?

I would say if there's a vote, to avoid all confusion, do away with the whole "can't trade players for 60 or 90 days" thing.

Which I think Anthony, is what you're going for here.

Seems like others are okay with eliminating one thing, but not the other.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

 

Forum Search


Quick Profile

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • ldsjayhawk: Trading should be a win-win situation for both teams.
    Yesterday at 01:00:32 PM
  • dbreer23: Agreed. I think the Devers deal in FGM is a good example of that. Devers gives SD some now (and future) pop, giving up substantial pieces to get him (Mayo, Keith, and one other).
    Yesterday at 01:03:48 PM
  • Brent: I had Holliday in FGM before I stepped away.
    Yesterday at 01:24:07 PM
  • Brent: I am glad I cut back on leagues, I was spread too thin.
    Yesterday at 01:24:25 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: @idsjayhawk i understand that. To be clear, i wasnt judging anyone. I just know in NFL Live, you cant just draft 1-7 rds every year and sign a few FAs and be the champion. It wont happen
    Yesterday at 01:52:08 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Trading isnt easy. But neither is winning
    Yesterday at 01:52:22 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: If you made a list of the most aggressive gms to have stepped foot in nfl live, you will notice the champions will be among them
    Yesterday at 01:53:06 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: You arent gonna win every trade and you HAVE to have a plan. Ive made some horrible trades. I have every year
    Yesterday at 01:53:50 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Carolina has kyren williams right now cause i traded him for a 2nd and a 4th. Id rather have kyren today lol
    Yesterday at 01:54:28 PM
  • Brent: Agreed.  I have Amon Ra St. Brown and Aiyuk because I traded JJ.  I couldn't have acquired a player like ASB where I was picking in the 1st so I down tiered at WR to make a trio of Chase, ASB and Aiyuk instead of JJ, Chase and fill in the blank.
    Yesterday at 02:09:02 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: That is probably even more true in baseball since your drafts don't payoff for 5 years or so.  And I will admit my conservatism may be the reason I only have one championship here at ProFSL
    Yesterday at 02:10:04 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: jwalkerjr88 is right
    Yesterday at 02:25:49 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: on that u havat trade a bit here and there
    Yesterday at 02:25:57 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: although my last draft class and fa class kinda lead me to a run so it can happen
    Yesterday at 02:27:21 PM
  • Brent: Yeah, it does help to have a big draft class and available cap.
    Yesterday at 02:36:56 PM
  • Brent: I'm contemplating doing a complete tear down in NFL Live and rebuild.  Honestly, I probably should have postered for it to be this season.  I still might, but I would legit need to go into the draft with 3-4 top 10 picks/+ many others.
    Yesterday at 02:38:21 PM
  • Brent: postured
    Yesterday at 02:38:35 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Yea nailing drafts and some key FAs helps too. But if you remember BAB you traded alvin kamara for the rams 1-7 draft picks. So the extra picks helped you nail the 2023 draft the way you did
    Yesterday at 03:13:02 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Its the combination of all three that is required is what im saying
    Yesterday at 03:13:31 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: And brent a tear down with you assets would look interesting. Personally i just think you need break one big asset down into 3 good ones and move carr and go from there. But you have an A1 nfl mind so im sure you will nail whatever it is you decide
    Yesterday at 03:14:39 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: *your
    Yesterday at 03:14:50 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: very good pt yes i did gain lot of capital which propelled me to make more moves from that trade
    Yesterday at 03:34:25 PM
  • Brent: Thank you.  Yes, I agree.  I do need to break one asset down to 3.  I did that with JJ, went from S tier to 2 A tiers.  Now I need to potentially go from an A tier to 3 Bs or something like that.  I've had some inquiries on Carr, but nothing worth moving him.
    Yesterday at 03:48:17 PM
  • Alpha5: Guarantee I know who he traded Kamara to for 1-7 without even looking
    Yesterday at 05:22:42 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: alpha it was a good trade at the time
    Yesterday at 05:29:49 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: my team was in the Crapter at that pt
    Yesterday at 05:29:58 PM
  • Brent: Who did you draft with the 1st acquired in that trade?
    Yesterday at 05:36:34 PM
  • Daddy: Whoever it was, he got six more choices on top of that. The "win win" scenario.
    Yesterday at 05:53:04 PM
  • Daddy: At that time i had no RB1. So i traded an entire draft class to get one.
    Yesterday at 05:54:10 PM
  • Daddy: SF doubled up his pick haul and went to work, using them in trades & draft return.
    Yesterday at 05:54:46 PM
  • Daddy: Then beat me in the NFC Title game.
    Yesterday at 05:55:32 PM
  • Daddy: RB is a hard position to nail down. If someone wants to trade me 1-7 for Kamara. Step right up.
    Yesterday at 06:02:30 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I gotta see what I did
    Yesterday at 06:05:04 PM
  • Daddy: You got better
    Yesterday at 06:13:59 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: i did so many moves trades and draft that i honestly dunno
    Yesterday at 06:18:48 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: This is the way
    Yesterday at 06:21:33 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I could teach how I did what I did
    Yesterday at 07:33:36 PM
  • STLBlues91: ill be around for a few hours today. Wont be around tomorrow until late
    Yesterday at 07:37:07 PM
  • TheGOAT: Thank God that there are 3 really good qb options in the draft. Can't imagine a world with Bo Nix as my frachise qb
    Yesterday at 08:12:51 PM
  • TheGOAT: Not that hes bad
    Yesterday at 08:13:06 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: think rn my qb room is minshew dobbs wentz
    Yesterday at 08:22:37 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: We look forward to your return to the playoffs @Thegoat
    Yesterday at 08:22:51 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: You and your brother camw in guns blazing a few years back. The NFC is not the gauntlet the AFC is. Once you make the title game, all bets are off
    Yesterday at 08:23:33 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: nfc is still tough
    Yesterday at 08:25:23 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: i had a tough road
    Yesterday at 08:25:37 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: to get to teh ship lot of good teams i knocked out
    Yesterday at 08:25:50 PM
  • Brent: Carr is OTB for those who don't want a rookie.
    Today at 08:17:12 AM
  • Daddy: The NHL LIVE sign up sheet in the bullpen has nearly 87,000 views. Which is insane.
    Today at 11:47:58 AM
  • Daddy: Whats more insane is we still have 3 open teams
    Today at 11:48:37 AM
  • Daddy: NHL LIVE [link] start new, start from today, sign up.
    Today at 11:49:27 AM