General Message Board
you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the posts
They could be making a $$$ deal...thats why all trades shouldn't go through...ie: Player a) says, i'll give you Longo and Kinsler for Loopo and Klinger, just toss $50 my way...lopsided trades the majority don't like suck....it should be commish pushes everything through until two players suggest the deal looks or smells fishy...then a vote is needed.
I love your set-up...just not the trade part
Yeah that is essentially what I meant for it to be. I wrote a summary in the commish note in the league adding the caveat that trades will go through UNLESS it becomes obvious someone is giving away players/collusion. In this case I will have the power as commish to question it and/or hold a vote and potentially void the trade.
An example is if a team has no chance of finishing in the money and is trading with a top 5 team a few days before the trade deadline or whatever.
The problem with having a policy where a few ppl question it then a vote is held is people will attempt to veto anything that can strengthen another team so you end up never being able to get a trade through.
- 2 Replies to AMT
Not everyone sees a trade the same way....you may see someone trade a good of'er for a fair to good closer...but the guy really needs saves and puts his team in a better position to gain points by making the trade and the guy who trades the closer is set there but dearly needs some offense, yeah, the deal should go through...but having you as the only one to decide makes me skeptical...