Franchise GM


Author Topic: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal  (Read 318 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anthony

  • *Senior Staff
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Posts: 8724
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :CHI:
    • :CHI-NBA:
    • :CHI-NHL:
    • :Minnesota:
    • :CHC:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2019, 06:42:57 PM »
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.

Yes, abolish the rule entirely. I don't think my proposal unintentionally specifies a group and is meant to be taken as getting rid of the entire rule.
:win: Title Town 2011/12 Stanley Cup Champion

:win: Dynasty NHL 2012/13 Stanley Cup Champion

Online Paul S.

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 19739
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #11 on: November 21, 2019, 08:14:05 PM »
The rules in place now are working well.  I see no reason to give GMs the opportunity to trade away their assets earlier in order to win and leave a mess for others to clean up.

Offline kidd5jersey

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Aug 2016
  • Posts: 2168
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #12 on: November 21, 2019, 08:19:53 PM »
What if we set a date that drafted players could be trade? Like midseason?

Online Flash

  • *ProFSL Staff
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Join Date: Sep 2010
  • Posts: 18597
  • Bonus inPoints: 319
    • :SFO:
    • :GS:
    • :SJ:
    • :California:
    • :UnitedStates:
    • :SF:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #13 on: November 21, 2019, 09:16:52 PM »
What if we set a date that drafted players could be trade? Like midseason?

We used to have a June 1st trade restriction for free agents signed during the off-season and 60 days for free agents signed during the season, but we got rid of that June 1st tag last season.  We kept the 60 day moratorium for newly signed free agents, free agent extensions, and FYPD players.

Anthony is proposing the total elimination of the 60 day moratorium in all circumstances. 
🏆 2017 WCB2 World Series Champion - :SD:

Offline WestCoastExpress

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2016
  • Posts: 3049
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :NE:
    • :TOR-NBA:
    • :VAN:
    • :Blank:
    • :Canada:
    • :TOR:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #14 on: November 21, 2019, 09:27:50 PM »
Anthony is proposing the total elimination of the 60 day moratorium in all circumstances.

 :iatp:


The rules in place now are working well.  I see no reason to give GMs the opportunity to trade away their assets earlier in order to win and leave a mess for others to clean up.

Isn’t that how championships are won?
I feel like a team that just won a championship wouldn’t up and leave a league...

Offline BHows

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 11339
  • Bonus inPoints: 3
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Kentucky:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #15 on: November 22, 2019, 03:46:54 PM »
I'm against changing any of the moratoriums particularly the FA one.
This league is built around long term GM involvement developing a team. Trading or buying a team doesn't work. Our draft, much like MLB's, is set up to help the less fortunate teams get a leg up. Trading away assets to "rebuild" is counter productive to this theory. Why rush the process.
As far as FA are concerned allowing them to be traded immediately is a slippery slope I con't think anyone wants to go down. Too many opportunities for "side-deals", etc.

Online game162

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2012
  • Posts: 1035
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :TAM:
    • :Blank:
    • :TBL:
    • :SouthFlorida:
    • :TB:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #16 on: November 22, 2019, 07:53:33 PM »
I'm in favor of keeping the 60 day rule in place.

IMO, if you're going to draft/sign a player, you should be committed to him for a certain period of time. 

I don't know that removing the rule would necessarily hurt the league, but I don't have a problem with how it operates today.  So opening an unknown can of worms seems unnecessary to me.

The draft and flip seems excessive...like Jerry Dipoto on PEDs.
:LAA: 2019 FGM World Series Champions

Offline Anthony

  • *Senior Staff
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Posts: 8724
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :CHI:
    • :CHI-NBA:
    • :CHI-NHL:
    • :Minnesota:
    • :CHC:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #17 on: November 23, 2019, 03:28:06 AM »
If you have a problem with GM's trading away assets, that should be handled by the trade committee. If an owner wants to trade a prospect, they'll do it, regardless if it's December 1st or February 1st. I wouldn't be any less likely to trade a guy in my minors 60 days from now.

I don't see a problem with a player being signed just to be flipped to another team, it's no different than if a player is traded to Team A, and then Team A goes ahead and trades that player the next week, and I don't think it'll happen as much as you think. If I have time I'll take a look at some past trades 60 days after the draft/FA and see how many players included were new additions to the team.
:win: Title Town 2011/12 Stanley Cup Champion

:win: Dynasty NHL 2012/13 Stanley Cup Champion

Offline WestCoastExpress

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2016
  • Posts: 3049
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :NE:
    • :TOR-NBA:
    • :VAN:
    • :Blank:
    • :Canada:
    • :TOR:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #18 on: December 04, 2019, 08:29:21 PM »
If you have a problem with GM's trading away assets, that should be handled by the trade committee. If an owner wants to trade a prospect, they'll do it, regardless if it's December 1st or February 1st. I wouldn't be any less likely to trade a guy in my minors 60 days from now.

In thinking about it a bit (since I'm bored and read thru this thread), the one "good" thing that comes of this rule as it stands now, is there should be somewhat of a trading frenzy come late January/early February when all of the recently re-signed players, as well as recently drafted rookies become "available" for trade.

I guess for that matter, there will be another trading frenzy that may occur a bit after that, when any signed FA becomes eligible to get traded in March and April, depending on position.


Overall though, as Anthony did point out, if a trade is going to happen with a certain player, it'll happen anyways. I'm sure as heck going to be trading Tim Anderson, Ryon Healey and Taylor Rodgers. All the rule does is delay that.
But as mentioned, it could be seen as a "good" thing in that it creates a bit more activity during the MLB off-season for us in fantasy land.

The other thing I agree with Anthony on is that despite Flash saying it isn't, it has to be a bit annoying and a little more time consuming writing beside each player when he was re-signed, or drafted (or signed in FA when FA rolls around). [It also messes with my OCD in seeing all those different dates beside each player, especially from the FYPD where they are a day to a week apart haha]

Offline Anthony

  • *Senior Staff
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Posts: 8724
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :CHI:
    • :CHI-NBA:
    • :CHI-NHL:
    • :Minnesota:
    • :CHC:
    • View Profile
Re: 60 Day Trade Restriction Rule Proposal
« Reply #19 on: December 04, 2019, 11:09:51 PM »
Since this has been sitting for a while, I'd like to move to vote on if the referendum can move to a formal vote process. It sounds like I need 8 members to cosign. By the looks of it, it seems that some owners support one rule and not the other, so I'd like to have a vote on each one separately.

#1. Removing the 60-day wait period rule on first-year player drafted players, players become eligible to be traded once the FYPD has concluded.

#2. Removing the 60-day wait period rule on recently signed players, regardless of whether it's an extension or a free agent.

This should make it easier. Just respond saying you support #1, #2, neither or both.
:win: Title Town 2011/12 Stanley Cup Champion

:win: Dynasty NHL 2012/13 Stanley Cup Champion

 

Forum Search


Quick Profile

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

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • Brent: What's up guys?
    December 07, 2019, 10:11:20 PM
  • janesvilleaces: Are the badgers really going to pull this off
    December 07, 2019, 10:15:07 PM
  • Vik: No rush Brian
    December 07, 2019, 10:17:38 PM
  • Brent: It's still early.
    December 07, 2019, 10:21:43 PM
  • Brent: It would be awesome if they did.
    December 07, 2019, 10:24:51 PM
  • janesvilleaces: Buckeyes would stop get in playoff
    December 07, 2019, 10:29:50 PM
  • janesvilleaces: Still
    December 07, 2019, 10:30:20 PM
  • Brent: oh, yeah, they'll get in.  Hell, that might be why the CFP committee put them in 1st and kept them there when they didn't deserve it so they can overcome a loss to Wisconsin.
    December 07, 2019, 10:32:37 PM
  • janesvilleaces: If you can't win your conference you have no business in imo
    December 07, 2019, 10:37:05 PM
  • janesvilleaces: 2nd half all calls will go vs wisky
    December 07, 2019, 10:39:12 PM
  • Brent: Agreed.  You have to win your conference.
    December 07, 2019, 10:48:15 PM
  • Yeagg: At the very least I don't think you should be in the playoffs if you lose the conference and the conference winner is not in the playoffs
    December 07, 2019, 11:32:08 PM
  • Yeagg: Like LSU is in the playoffs so Georgia would be acceptable
    December 07, 2019, 11:32:30 PM
  • Yeagg: But if Wisconsin wins this they still won't make the the playoffs, so Ohio State should not make it
    December 07, 2019, 11:33:19 PM
  • Brent: A lot of wheelin and dealin in Bush League today,
    December 07, 2019, 11:52:35 PM
  • Vik: Yeah I'm part of 3 of those and Bush always super active
    December 07, 2019, 11:58:10 PM
  • Brent: I've been building the A's since I took them over in summer of 2018, now I am at the point where I want to see them produce.  I can make a move here or there,but overall I like how my team is looking.
    Yesterday at 12:17:08 AM
  • Vik: You've got nice young talent Brent. See you also got plenty of cap to play with come FA
    Yesterday at 12:21:24 AM
  • Vik: Looks like Chris Sale is hitting FA in Bush
    Yesterday at 12:23:35 AM
  • Brent: Thanks.  Yeah, but as a small market team I need to watch what I spend in FA.  I need to get some winning seasons and have my cap increase.
    Yesterday at 12:27:26 AM
  • indiansnation: Yeagg pm
    Yesterday at 12:46:33 AM
  • indiansnation: Opps vik pm
    Yesterday at 12:46:43 AM
  • indiansnation: No pm yeagg
    Yesterday at 12:46:49 AM
  • indiansnation: Vik where did u go
    Yesterday at 12:58:49 AM
  • Vik: I'm here just thinking of counter. that offer is solid but lots of moving parts and  few of those guys I don't want to move
    Yesterday at 01:03:15 AM
  • Vik: PM Brian
    Yesterday at 01:08:20 AM
  • indiansnation: Pm vik
    Yesterday at 01:39:36 AM
  • Vik: ok np
    Yesterday at 01:43:11 AM
  • Vik: Anyone want to help with some football start/sit advice? I'm alive in 3/4 leagues and pretty set with 2 lineups, but league with buddies is a headach to pick lineup
    Yesterday at 01:46:01 AM
  • Brent: I am not sure if you are still awake, but I am around.
    Yesterday at 02:35:34 AM
  • Vik: Thanks Brent just sent PM
    Yesterday at 02:45:01 AM
  • Brent: I am looking at it now.
    Yesterday at 02:53:06 AM
  • Vik: Cool, calling it a night in a few so I'll check and make final decision tomorrow
    Yesterday at 03:05:03 AM
  • Brent: cool
    Yesterday at 03:10:00 AM
  • Brent: Reply sent
    Yesterday at 03:11:38 AM
  • Thecliff: :judge: WCB2 draft :COL: on clock to 9 p.m.
    Yesterday at 10:48:42 AM
  • WestCoastExpress: Cliff aren’t any teams who auto picked round 1 just on auto from now on. We know SF and COL are MIA anyways..
    Yesterday at 11:11:31 AM
  • Mets Donations Accepted: COL will pick today
    Yesterday at 11:22:04 AM
  • janesvilleaces: How many teams are available inb
    Yesterday at 12:14:37 PM
  • janesvilleaces: Bush
    Yesterday at 12:14:42 PM
  • Thecliff: ! opening in Kansas City Royals...BUSH
    Yesterday at 01:37:44 PM
  • Thecliff: Orange Country left site in a huff  :doh:
    Yesterday at 01:38:48 PM
  • janesvilleaces: 10-4
    Yesterday at 02:14:24 PM
  • janesvilleaces: Padres in bush around to talk deqks
    Yesterday at 02:31:44 PM
  • janesvilleaces: Nats bent over tanks in that deal
    Yesterday at 05:45:27 PM
  • janesvilleaces: Yanks
    Yesterday at 05:45:32 PM
  • blkhwkfn: Hey can we up date the top 500 list? Cheers
    Yesterday at 08:06:58 PM
  • indiansnation: Looking to move puello of and white ci with a 2020 3rd pick to get it done
    Today at 12:03:43 AM
  • indiansnation: Yeagg pm
    Today at 12:39:40 AM
  • indiansnation: Vik pm
    Today at 01:10:08 AM