“Hmm...”

[Flash]

Flash, I have nothing but the utmost respect for you and what you do for this league and for this site as a while. In no way am I ever trying to disrespect you or belittle you or the commissioner powers. The fact that you have lasted this long, implemented that many changes, and dealt with troublesome to downright awful GMs is a testament to your leadership abilities.

As League Manager I will have to respect what decision that you make because I know it will be for the good of the league and not a selfish attempt to help yourself.

That being said, all I am asking for is a vote on the rule with the GM's reasons on why that voted that way. If this idea is in the minority then I'll drop it because the health of the league is more important than getting what I want.

I don't know about y'all but I'm here for the long haul. I love this BooYah! .

Under Rules Committee Protocol any GM is welcome to initiate a referendum for a rule change by doing the following:

8.) Any GM in the league may propose a general referendum to be considered by the entire league if at least eight (8) member co-sponsor the referendum.  A referendum must receive at least 16 votes to be implemented—this would be a simple majority of 15 + 1.

[Anthony]

The draftees are going to get traded regardless, the 60 days are just delaying the inevitable. I don't think it protects any bad GM's from making moves outside of any added on in December/January.

I'm fine with whatever the best for the league. I feel as if my voice is the voice of the simplest route.

Note* not sure how easy this would be, but the rosters might benefit by instead of a "signed by" note next to players, a "Can't be traded until" instead. Simple aesthetic change might be all the change we need if it's decided.

[Flash]

The draftees are going to get traded regardless, the 60 days are just delaying the inevitable. I don't think it protects any bad GM's from making moves outside of any added on in December/January.

I'm fine with whatever the best for the league. I feel as if my voice is the voice of the simplest route.

Note* not sure how easy this would be, but the rosters might benefit by instead of a "signed by" note next to players, a "Can't be traded until" instead. Simple aesthetic change might be all the change we need if it's decided.

Although I enjoy what I'm doing, adding a "draft date" is just something more I have to do.  Then when it expires I have to erase it.  No problem, just something more to do.  Seems like a blanket day, the end of the draft is something that is easy, but I guess not. 

As for protecting the league, I guess you're right.  Let's make it easier because it's going to happen anyway.  Seems logical. Let's clutter up the Transactions Board with trades that aren't going to be processed for 60 days and in the meantime, watch some GM spend money he doesn't have because he "forgot" that his cap was going to be affected by the impending 60 day trade.  I think it's a little more involved than simple aesthetics, but hey, I could be wrong. 

At this point, I guess the issue is mute and there is no way around it.  I will post the trades with the eligible date and let them sit around until they can be processed.  But, I'm going to stick to the original plan of the 60 day moratorium beginning at the end of the draft because I'm not going to go through each transaction to get a particular date.

FYI, the elimination of the 60 day moratorium was put up for a vote last year and it was defeated.  We did get rid of the June 1st prohibition, but the 60 day moratorium was upheld by those voting. 

[Anthony]

Although I enjoy what I'm doing, adding a "draft date" is just something more I have to do.  Then when it expires I have to erase it.  No problem, just something more to do.  Seems like a blanket day, the end of the draft is something that is easy, but I guess not. 

As for protecting the league, I guess you're right.  Let's make it easier because it's going to happen anyway.  Seems logical. Let's clutter up the Transactions Board with trades that aren't going to be processed for 60 days and in the meantime, watch some GM spend money he doesn't have because he "forgot" that his cap was going to be affected by the impending 60 day trade.  I think it's a little more involved than simple aesthetics, but hey, I could be wrong. 

At this point, I guess the issue is mute and there is no way around it.  I will post the trades with the eligible date and let them sit around until they can be processed.  But, I'm going to stick to the original plan of the 60 day moratorium beginning at the end of the draft because I'm not going to go through each transaction to get a particular date.

FYI, the elimination of the 60 day moratorium was put up for a vote last year and it was defeated.  We did get rid of the June 1st prohibition, but the 60 day moratorium was upheld by those voting.

You already add a signed by date next to players, correct? Changing the wording wouldn't do much, but I don't do the spreadsheets so I'll defer to you there.

Also leaving the transactions on the board is the opposite of what I said. I proposed to remove the rule altogether. With some new members and new ideas, and the vote being close last year, worth another shot.

[Flash]

You already add a signed by date next to players, correct? Changing the wording wouldn't do much, but I don't do the spreadsheets so I'll defer to you there.

Also leaving the transactions on the board is the opposite of what I said. I proposed to remove the rule altogether. With some new members and new ideas, and the vote being close last year, worth another shot.

Then you need to muster the necessary support for such a rule change if “worth another shot”.

Under Rules Committee Protocol any GM is welcome to initiate a referendum for a rule change by doing the following:

8.) Any GM in the league may propose a general referendum to be considered by the entire league if at least eight (8) member co-sponsor the referendum.  A referendum must receive at least 16 votes to be implemented—this would be a simple majority of 15 + 1.

[WestCoastExpress]

Solid conversation. I see both sides of the coin here.

From my brief experience in MLB leagues, it seems like any drafted players we get, are usually years away from the MLB, are they not? At least 2 years, maybe more?

It's not like NFL or NBA where drafted guys, especially 1st rounders, jump right in and contribute. Or you at least know they're going to contribute something right away. It seems like it's more of "who knows what will happen" with these drafted players. Obviously if you're in the first round you have a pretty good shot at turning into something, but you're still a ways away.

As someone else said, if they're going to get traded, they'll get traded eventually anyways. I guess the only thing it's protecting from is if a new GM comes in (like me) during the draft and wants to make trades right away, then he/she will be within that 60-day period and can't do so. If a new GM comes in well after that, then it doesn't matter as much.

I get the point though of having trades made with cap implications, and having to wait it out that bleeds into FA and not knowing exactly how much cap a team has, unless they're really on top of things and paying attention to their cap.

Either way, I didn't mean to start a big fuss. I can already see that this league is very well run. Even the rules and headings are a lot neater and more organized than the ones I've made up for my leagues, and I'm pretty OCD, haha.

Would it be nice to make trades right away? Yeah sure. But hey I'm the new guy. Had I taken over in 2 months this would be a totally moot point anyways. Like I said in my post, I can wait 60 days for a trade to be voted on, it's not a big deal to me.
I think Flash took my comments the wrong way there (can never tell reading things online what tone the sentence is put in). I was pretty much saying it doesn't matter to me when the trade is voted on. Tomorrow, or in 60+ days, so long as it's before the MLB season (April) I'm cool with it.

All good here any way she goes

[ldsjayhawk]

Can I ask a question?

If the rule is that we cannot trade within 60 days, why are these trades not declared invalid?  It seems like this could start a bigger issue.  Say someone who has posted a trade and then wants to go back on it because it's still in the 60 day window.

[BHows]

Can I ask a question?

If the rule is that we cannot trade within 60 days, why are these trades not declared invalid?  It seems like this could start a bigger issue.  Say someone who has posted a trade and then wants to go back on it because it's still in the 60 day window.

Very good question. If I'm not mistaken that's what used to happen in such cases. Not sure when/how we changed.

[Flash]

After venting, and thinking about the ramifications of this issue, it seems like a definitive course of action is required.  We can’t keep dancing around the central issue and be satisfied with massaging something that is really an established rule within this league.  A player who is subject to a 60 day trade moratorium simply cannot be traded.  It doesn’t need to be a slippery slope, if a player cannot be traded for 60 days, then post-dating trades only circumvents the rule and makes a mockery of things.

The argument that they are rostered players and we should be be able to do with them as we please is not viable.  We have a variety of safeguards that monitor roster decisions, such as our Trade Committee, and the 60 day moratorium is simply another one.  With that, the argument that FYPD players will be traded regardless of any moratorium may be true, but they will have to wait to be traded until after the moratorium is lifted.

So I am going to remove the post-dated trades on the board and rule them invalid because they violate the spirit of the rule.  I will go through the list of FYPD draftees, give them a roster date, and repost all the ProFSL rosters, so there will be no question as to when they are available.

While this may not be a pleasant ruling for all, as the league moderator, I am entrusted with the responsibility of insuring we maintain a degree of stability.  I wavered for a bit, but I believe this is the proper course of action for FGM.  The recourse for those who disagree is to initiate a referendum.  Find 8 GMs who support changing the rule, create a referendum, and call for a league wide vote. 

I will also post this on the Transactions Board in a News Flash. 

[WestCoastExpress]

After venting, and thinking about the ramifications of this issue, it seems like a definitive course of action is required.  We can’t keep dancing around the central issue and be satisfied with massaging something that is really an established rule within this league.  A player who is subject to a 60 day trade moratorium simply cannot be traded.  It doesn’t need to be a slippery slope, if a player cannot be traded for 60 days, then post-dating trades only circumvents the rule and makes a mockery of things.

The argument that they are rostered players and we should be be able to do with them as we please is not viable.  We have a variety of safeguards that monitor roster decisions, such as our Trade Committee, and the 60 day moratorium is simply another one.  With that, the argument that FYPD players will be traded regardless of any moratorium may be true, but they will have to wait to be traded until after the moratorium is lifted.

So I am going to remove the post-dated trades on the board and rule them invalid because they violate the spirit of the rule.  I will go through the list of FYPD draftees, give them a roster date, and repost all the ProFSL rosters, so there will be no question as to when they are available.

While this may not be a pleasant ruling for all, as the league moderator, I am entrusted with the responsibility of insuring we maintain a degree of stability.  I wavered for a bit, but I believe this is the proper course of action for FGM.  The recourse for those who disagree is to initiate a referendum.  Find 8 GMs who support changing the rule, create a referendum, and call for a league wide vote. 

I will also post this on the Transactions Board in a News Flash.

 

Is what it is and every league has different quirks. No harm done.
Making things as black and white as possible makes things easy in the long run