That has always been the down side. However the upside is the activity level. This league is way behind Bush in activity. There is no doubt the issue of someone trading everything away and quitting but that is why we have a TC. Trades should be evaluated and looked at if someone is bleeding a franchise.
We also have teams in this league that are seriously neglected without even trading draft picks. Horrible farms and barely a starting lineup. I just don’t see the sense in being able to trade the drafted player after 60 days but can’t trade the pick before drafting.
At the end of the day the reason I bring this up is an idea to invigorate the league a little. It’s run extremely well and has a good history. I just think we need to evolve a little and not get stale.
I would agree that there are some teams in the league that don't have very active members, and yes, some are in sad shape, but step back and look at the situation. Does that mean that the league is stale and unappealing? Does it mean that it's in a state of decline? Does it mean that the league is out of step with the times and is now irrelevant? Is trading draft choices going to change the activity of the league?
To all those questions I would offer-No, no, no, and no--and here is why I say this.
Our league has gone through a variety of leadership phases--from it's founding by Colby, to Dan Miller, to rcanskoy, to Shooter47, to the present team of BHows and me. Through the years, we have had a lot of turnover and there have been examples of GMs who have destroyed franchises by disregarding the future and simply neglecting to re-stock their teams. During our years, we have undergone a lot of changes to stay relevant and some of the changes came slowly (like getting rid of the FYPD signing bonuses), and at times an issue reached a critical level (like the approval of trades or changing teams) and created a definite schism in the league.
So when Rick and I took over as co-commissioners in January 2015, we had some decisions to make--and one of the first ones was to tackle a variety of issues to make the league run more efficiently. I am not trying ask for a pat on the back, but I think we have done a lot of things to promote activity by making things more efficient. We streamlined the Trade Process, updated the League Rules, replaced our EDR system an MiLB roster that can be utilized as a working roster, instituted a yearly update of the Extension Value Scale, got rid of the Type A & B free agent system and replaced it with a system that less debilitating and helps less competitive teams keep their picks. I believe the FYPD runs pretty smoothly and we keep the rosters updated so that GMs know what their rosters and cap dollars look like at all time.
I'm not sure what can be done to improve activity beyond what we are already doing. There have been instances where we have removed GMs for a lack of activity, and sought more enthusiastic replacements, but this is a free league, and as such, there is only so much we can do to promote activity. If you all recall, there have been a variety of long standing members who had to be removed for inactivity, one of which resurfaced to reclaim his team, but with that he is not active in free agency, or the FYPD and does not respond to trade offer PMs. Would trading draft picks get him to be more active?
We have a few former commissioners who quietly restock their teams with a few free agents and have teams that have been very competitive over the years, but they don't seem to be interested in trades and usually don't respond to trade inquiries. Will trading picks change their activity?
Many of you might also recall, as a drastic measure, we had to place one team in receivership last season because of neglect. That team was taken over my a more active GM, but only after we helped revive the roster to make it more appealing. We may have to that again in the future, but I sure hope not.
Our league had to endure a mass exodus to DynastySportsHQ, but we survived. Some have come back to take over some needy teams and one is destroying the NL West. Another has GM has come out of retirement and taken over a team from a GM who was simply overwhelmed by the rebuilding process--but many of you probably didn't know that I reached out to that GM to see if he wanted to continue or step aside, and to his credit, he thought it best to let someone more capable run the team.
All this points to a league that is by no means stale. FGM is relevant because we have adapted to the times and tried our best to mirror MLB. MLB, beyond some compensatory picks and international money, does not allow teams to trade draft picks because they fear teams will squander their future by failing to re-stock their farm systems. We all know baseball players take longer to develop than rookies in the NBA and NFL, but for our purposes, I sincerely disagree with the premise that trading picks will improve league activity.
As for the Trade Committee policing the situation, may I remind all who read this about the turmoil and bad feelings that surface whenever there is a veto. "We should be able to run our teams as we see fit" is a common argument, so from my vantage point, opening up another path where we have to "protect" GMs from themselves is simply not something I wish to support.
Thanks for reading my babble.
