|
Post by Admin on Oct 23, 2017 4:31:23 GMT -5
Should language be added to the rule book (likely in section 4.8) requiring traded players to be dropped from the scoring site (Fantrax) before a trade can be approved? If accepted, the TC will check that players have been released before approving the trade. Discussion can be found here: mlbbaseballleague.proboards.com/thread/2247/rule-change-discussion#
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 30, 2017 2:21:53 GMT -5
Option 1 wins 11-10.
All traded players must be dropped by their current team before a trade is approved
|
|
|
Post by Mariners GM (Travis) on Oct 30, 2017 13:43:06 GMT -5
How did we get 21 voters?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 30, 2017 14:05:52 GMT -5
I wish we could’ve gotten to 29.
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 30, 2017 17:03:57 GMT -5
I wish we could’ve gotten to 29. +1 Disappointing that the whole league didn't vote.
|
|
|
Post by gepetto69 (Stuart, LAD) on Oct 30, 2017 18:32:12 GMT -5
So let me understand this, once a trade is posted between 2 or more teams each team must drop their players from their Fantrax teams right? Then we wait for the TC to approve the trade which may take 2-3 days before we get enough votes. This means for those players involved in a trade their stats would not count because they are no longer listed on Fantrax right?
So what's the penalty if one team fails to drop their traded player(s) and that player(s) accumulates stats on that given day??
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 30, 2017 18:45:34 GMT -5
Rule 6.4 would apply:
6.4 Accumulating Stats with Ineligible Players If a player has accumulated stats on the scoring website whilst they are not legitimately on your Proboards roster (including unprotected arbitration eligible players or traded players before a trade has been fully approved) you will be given a loss in any category impacted by ineligible players. If the same player accumulates stats in multiple matchups (whilst continuously being ineligible for the same reason) then losses will only be applied in the first and last matchups where he is identified as having had any impact on any category. For example: if you play an ineligible player in your active lineup for one day and they go 0-1 with a Run (but no HR, RBI or SB) then you will automatically forfeit R and AVG for that matchup. HR, RBI and SB (as well as the pitching categories) will continue to be contested as normal.
In practice, I anticipate that any player involved in a trade would be dropped from Fantrax by the player's owner either prior to them posting the trade or prior to them accepting it.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 30, 2017 19:34:59 GMT -5
I wasn’t under the impression that 6.4 would apply. Are we sure that it’s applicable?
The way it was discussed indicated that the TC would need to check that the players had been dropped in Fantrax before processing a trade. If they haven’t all been dropped, then the trade will take that much longer to process.
Yes, this means that some players will not accumulate stats for any team during this process. However, many GMs already held this practice. Now it will just be uniform.
If someone has difficulty releasing his players in a timely fashion, I’d imagine that could affect relationships and future trades.
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 31, 2017 6:35:25 GMT -5
I wasn’t under the impression that 6.4 would apply. Are we sure that it’s applicable? The way it was discussed indicated that the TC would need to check that the players had been dropped in Fantrax before processing a trade. If they haven’t all been dropped, then the trade will take that much longer to process. Yes, this means that some players will not accumulate stats for any team during this process. However, many GMs already held this practice. Now it will just be uniform. If someone has difficulty releasing his players in a timely fashion, I’d imagine that could affect relationships and future trades. I think this fails to solve the problem it originally attempted to - that some owners would sneakily stretch an extra game or two out of a player by delaying dropping them. That possibility will still be available here. To me it seems simple - post a trade or accept a trade, and drop any player involved immediately from Fantrax. Sent from my SM-A310F using proboards
|
|
|
Post by Reds GM (Kyler) on Oct 31, 2017 8:53:17 GMT -5
Does Fantrax have the ability to have a league admin take guys off rosters? Like say if an hour after a trade is posted/accepted the TC can take them off the roster when they review if they haven't been dropped in a timely manner
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 31, 2017 12:05:35 GMT -5
Does Fantrax have the ability to have a league admin take guys off rosters? Like say if an hour after a trade is posted/accepted the TC can take them off the roster when they review if they haven't been dropped in a timely manner Ideally, the Commissioners want to have the lightest possible touch on the league - especially when the season is in full flow. I don't think that this is an acceptable solution. What is the issue with dropping a player when you post or agree to a trade with them in. Isn't that the same as pulling them from your lineup after a real life trade? Yeah it might take a day or two longer, but is it really that serious?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 31, 2017 13:36:00 GMT -5
6.4 is one of our sharpest penalties. In the initial discussion, the requirement to drop players from Fantrax was simply described as “part of the process for trade approvals”. In other words, if your player hasn’t been dropped, then the trade doesn’t get processed. Travis did raise the question of 6.4, but it was never answered.
If 6.4 does need to be applied, that’s fine with me, but I can also see issues in strictly enforcing this. If a trade is posted at 4:55, rosters lock at 5:00, the the player is released from Fantrax at 5:05, and the trade gets its third approval 48 hours later, it would be very hard to enforce a penalty in which categories are forfeited for the sleight error. Posting a trade in the proper sequence would become extremely important.
If 6.4 is not applied, then there are still penalties. If a GM hasn’t dropped his player, then the trade doesn’t get processed. In turn, if the processing takes too long, then he’ll upset his trade partner, who may think twice before trading with him again.
Again, I’m confident that I could avoid the 6.4 penalty, but it could be tough to avoid yielding to sympathy in cases of simple and minor errors.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 31, 2017 16:38:38 GMT -5
It could also be viewed similarly to other issues the TC may catch. If a trade puts a team over the cap, the common practice is to point it out and await the correction by those involved. In this circumstance, the TC could do the same. “Hey, we can’t get to this trade until all players are dropped.”
Looking closely at 6.4, it was intended to prevent using players who weren’t legitimately owned by the team using them. Until the trade is approved, the players would officially still be the property of their initial team.
I know it sounds like I’m arguing against the very rule we just voted in. However, this is not the case. I love this new rule. But I don’t want us to have to worry excessively about the sequence of listing the trade, as well as a very severe penalty that may not always match the crime.
|
|
|
Post by gepetto69 (Stuart, LAD) on Oct 31, 2017 16:44:35 GMT -5
Another angle is the timing of the trade. What I mean is before the official trade dead line the dropping of a player or three won't be as important as say on SEP 15 or so when teams are in the playoffs. You figure early in the year a team could afford to lose a category but later in the season that same category might be more important to a team who is looking to compete.
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 31, 2017 18:05:09 GMT -5
I think not voting on trades until the players have been dropped risks making the scenario we're trying to avoid even worse.
|
|