Poison Pills Draft is running...

[YountFan]

[quote:d69e3dfeb2="the icemen"]one problem i see arising is the penalty for the Mckeon team....this is a pill the Chief thought up. I like the concept but what happens if he has not traded 8 people. There has to be a penalty...This is almost no pill if he doesnot trade and has no penalty. The poison in theory is that nobody will trade with him unless they are getting a real good deal and he will have to make some bad trades because in the beginning he will be loaded. We need more definition as to just what this pill is before we draft. What does everyone else think?

We need to put in deadlines and penalties if not compliant.

do we see any other pills that need clarification?[/quote:d69e3dfeb2]

Sean is a trader by nature (and a backstabber too, but I digress). He'll make the trades and somehow get the better of it

[YountFan]

[quote:f982584218="the icemen"]Ugly...why don't you PM yount fan with your first pick...or just post it here...you are first so nobody can pick ahead of you....and we will se how far we get

ice[/quote:f982584218]

Just let TRich set up the site and we can draft normally. Maybe even starting toinight. But if UJ wants to advertise his pick that is OK. It will allow is to ridicule him.

[the icemen]

there still needs to be a rule if not...the poison is he has to make 8 bad trades...what is his motivation? there has to be a clause stating that 2 of his players will have to be dropped by the 42 game mark if he has not made two trades...2 more by 81 games...2 more by 108....and 2 more by 142. If he doesn't trade them then the 3 teams in his division determine his cuts to be compliant.... if they are smart they won't help him by trading with him....and if we are smart we will milk him for the best deal. This will really be an intersting pill....as the 42 game mark approaches he will be more despperate....he will be the only team that has not been penalized to that point.

however, reputation aside he has to have parameters in place

[YountFan]

Let see what sean says but I agree that waiiting until game 139 is in violation of the spirit of the rules. I propose the following:

4 trades by game 50
8 trade by game 100

I could do 8 trades the first day. Do pre-season trades count? I would say in-season trade only.

Sean, what is you input on the rules?

I think we need a general penalty for rule breakers. I would say releasing your highest priced player or something generic like that. The people will forget and the rule is not broken unless games have been played with the violation on your roster.

[the icemen]

I would say that for every player not traded he would lose his highest OPS player or best era starting pitcher over 33 innings again division rivals would vote....especially since they probably won't trade with him because they want to see him miss his #

it is sort of like hearts...where he is bidding 8....or is that spades?

if he has just 1 player to lose than why make any trades? just lose 1 and keep 8. each poison may have to have its own unique penalty

Like my poison...i can't have the same penalty if i use a improper starter for 1 game and someone points it out and the mckeon team doesn't trade a single player and just ends up losing 1 guy also....we have to make sure everyone is agreed on each poison...look them over. I like the way this is shaping up...2 teams have cheap pitching in hitters parks. 2 teams have 7 teams to choose from but 3 overlap. it will make drafting interesting. And Pat sajak can't pick robin yount but just about everyone else is avail

[the icemen]

i would say a severe penalty if i somehow started a wrong pitcher...except if HAL overules me....i should have to sit my best starter for 5 starts.


the 750 sp team should have to sit their best starter for 5 also...

[PaddyLanePounders]

When does the draft start and how are stadiums being determined? :?:

[seanreflex]

After the poison is picked is not the time to begin to "add on" new rules to the poison. I selected this poison with the understanding that I will have to make reasonable trades with people. It forces me to be thinking trade from the very first moment after waivers.

I am confident that I can trade 8 players through the course of 142 games. If rules and conditions are going to be added after I've already selected, I don't think it is fair. If rules and conditions are applied after I select it, then we need to back up the draft to my pick, and make any of the poisons selected after my pick available to me so that I can pick a different poison with all the information regarding penalties available up front so that I can make a decision.

I am not going to accept the poison with any conditions that I must drop my highest OBP player if I don't make the requisite number of trades, etc. I have played with most of you in many leagues, I know there's never been any reason for anyone to question my sense of fairness, and I, like everyone else, am capable of "self-policing" my poison.

I don't see where the benefit would be for another manager to purposely not trade with me if I offer fair trades, which I will do. If a penalty clause is imposed on me, it gives other managers much greater incentive to not deal trades with me. I'll make the trade offers, and I'll negotiate and counter until the deal gets done.

YountFan, I know you were kidding about the backstabber comment, but I think you were right on about the "wheeler dealer" comment. It's fun to move players around, shake things up. If I need to give up good talent to fulfill my obligation, I'm prepared to do that.

Sean

[UGLYJERRY]

Well for my first pick I am taking Tim Raines. If I understand my poison correctly the player must have at least one W on it correct? It is not going to be easy to select corner infielders with a B rating and a W. I am not complaining just wondering where my head was when I selected this poison. Also can I choose any ballpark, I did not see anything on my poison. Just curious.

Ugly

[PaddyLanePounders]

I agree with what Seanreflex is saying. Adding penalty conditions to a poison after it has been chosen is unjust. :evil: Any penalties applying to a poison should be stated prior to it's selection.

If the penalty is to remain then the selection process would be most fair to backtrack to Seanreflex's turn with all the options open that were at that time and continue on from that point. Changing the rules as we go, without at least a consensus on a need for that change, is setting a bad precedent.

That's my humble opinion. :wink: