0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
OK strike #7... but I remember more than several times a TC member making a smarmy comment - I guess offer X was better than my offer. That kind of talk is not needed because already you have devalued your opinion.
I think it is needed because if an explanation is given, then it may not get a veto. If a GM gives their own perspective on a trade, it might give the members of the TC a different way to look at the trade, than they would have originally thought. I'm not suggesting 'War and Peace', just a brief summary. I do this because X is expensive, and I think Y will turn into a solid player. ETC.
I think I have had a change of heart. I think sending it out of house may cause more problems than it solves. I propose the following.1. 6 members on the TC - one from each division2.Any divisional rival that makes a deal cannot have his trade approved or vetoed by the mebers of the TC that are in his division.3. 3 approval votes or two vetoes4. Past trades should not be considered. Values fluctuate over the course of a season and team needs change. Just because so and so was trade for player X two months ago, doesn't mean he merits that return now. Plus situations vary.Example - I couldn't give Adam Lind away last year5. a short summary as to why you are making this trade, and what you expect it will do for your team.6. No one but the TC and the trading partners can post within a trade posting. It turns into pure chaos. 7. Any member of the TC that was involved in trade talks with a team involving a player that was dealt to another team may not vote on a trade - it is a conflict of interest.8. Any trade vetoed needs to have an explanation why, and both GMs should be given a chance to defend their move.That is just my two cents. Since we are already mid season - we already a system in place. I would more than happily represent the NL Central
I am still behind the idea of a ProFSL Baseball TC. We could have some good candidates on this such as MillerTime, Paul S., Mr.TradeKing, Corey, Jon, papps, BHows, JMACisBACK, and perhaps some others. This would remove a lot of bias from the process and require more explanations from the parties involved in the trade as well as the TC.
I still prefer Colby's idea as well. I think it is the best solution for this league and the site as a whole.
I'm not a fan of TCs but this seems to be the best suggestion. We need to ensure that trade voting is as unbiased as possible. Great post Dan!