Please evaluate the following 2 trades...

[OakAth72]

[quote:a880bd66da="River Field View"]


you are accusing me of not being allowed to have
an opinion that you yourself insist you are allowed to have.

[/quote:a880bd66da]

Well said.

[Valen]

[quote:bb3f00bb20]I could have also suggested if you are willing to trade Ruth just to
get a 1 CF, a Ruth for Mantle, Ruth for Speaker or Ruth for Charlton
would all qualify as better than the proposed trade[/quote:bb3f00bb20]
I agree. These would be better trades. But sometimes people who own the preferred players are not willing to part with them and you have to make compromises.

I have not at any point said anyone could not have their opinion that this is a bad trade. I have simply stated my opinion which is basically that I would want more information before deciding if I would have made the trade. Unless you are really insecure I do not see why me having an opinion should be such a problem.

[Valen]

[quote:26859ef5bc]But what you seem to be
saying is that you have the right to opinions like circumstances can
make many and all trades grey (with the tangible example at hand, its
kind of a whopper of an opinion). Also you have the right to never
consider a CF3e8[/quote:26859ef5bc]
Yes, I do think I have a right to have an opinion. :roll:

[quote:26859ef5bc]But at the same time, you think Salt, myself and
many other managers can't feel upset [/quote:26859ef5bc]
I NEVER said any of you did not have the right to that opinion. What I did do was disagree there is proof here that happened. Again, my opinion. You have yours. I have mine. Expressing them is a discussion between adults.

[quote:26859ef5bc]I am not saying (not in this post, anyway) that this is a dumping
trade, but discussing whether it is or isn't, well, thats one of the
reasons why we have the threads. [/quote:26859ef5bc]
And discussing is all I have been doing. If I can only discuss if I agree with you might want to post that in the opening of the thread. Something like I want to complain about this situation but anyone who does not agree it is a problem please stay quiet. Then I will understand it is just a gripe session and not an invitation for discussion and move on.

[Valen]

[quote:48e6242be0]..and PS...I dont know if you remember a certain manager by the name of Zak who publicly claimed I was in 'cahoots' with my 'buddies' because I picked up Mathewson on waivers after someone released him who shouldnt have. [/quote:48e6242be0]
I do not remember Zak. But that is a good point for discussion. How did that make you feel? Did you feel unjustly accused? How do you think Zak felt? He probably felt he had a right to call out someone he thought was tainting the league. You can probably guess how I would have responded to Zak had he asked me what I thought about Salty's actions.
:lol:

I remember once making a trade of a 2.5? mil reliever for a 1.2? mil reliever back in ATG1. Don't remember exact amounts. Both were lefties. Some manager slammed me telling me how stupid I was for trading one of the best lefties in the set for such a terrible reliever. Accused me and the other manager of cheating, etc. I made one attempt to explain before telling him to mind his own business. I had my reasons for making the offer feeling what I could do with my team after would overall make me better. I had 3 good lefty relievers and felt I could afford to downgrade one for cap money to make other moves. In other words circumstances and details.

Perhaps that experience colors somewhat my perspective when I see people judging trades or accusing someone of dumping or taking advantage.

There is another vet here (not you salty for the record) who complains a lot about unequal trades and how wrong it is for vets to take advantage. That vet once had a pitcher I liked for personal sentimental reasons. So I offered him another clearly better starter. I knew the advantage was going his way but I wanted that specific card in that league and knew I would have to overpay. He accepted with no hesitation. No this would be bad for the league or any such that he often rants about if someone else makes such a trade. That was hypocrisy. Had he seen that trade made with a different manager he probably would have been posting here something like this thread asking what everyone thought of this trade.

[Salty]

V-
I dont think Zak used much of his grey matter. He was angry and went on a number of tirades against other managers for his percieved injustices in trade offers- without much basis.
As to weather he felt justified or not I have no idea- but had he simply written to me saying he thought something I did wasn't fair in a decent manner, I would have responded cordially with my thoughts.

Also, I think you are really missing on what RFV is saying.

...and I also draw a distinction between someone 'accepting' a trade rather than selling one.

[nevdully's]

[quote:1badbb0840].and I also draw a distinction between someone 'accepting' a trade rather than selling one. [/quote:1badbb0840]

Well said.

[216 Stitches]

[quote:732f136e93="wjanssen"]Trade 1 is one of those deals that is really, really frustrating to see in a league... unless you happen to be manager getting Ruth and Cash.[/quote:732f136e93]

I have seen many variations of this comment in LIVE leagues from
ATG3, ATG4, ATG5 and the current version. The common idea appears
to be while some trades are win-win or simply mildly one-sided, others
reach the level of frustrating the league balance (I have also called
this undoing the draft-talent dispersion model, since there are no
talent checks and balances after the draft).

But how lopsided does it have to be to reach this level?
I haven't found much agreement here, and some differences of
opinion on what "valuation" should be applied.

If I put out 3 valuation criteria: salary, TSN ranking, average
draft position, the average draft position IMHO is the best
valuation of the 3. Aside from the other short-comings of the salary
and TSN ranking valuations, the avearge draft position takes
into account both (1) positional scarcity, and (2) actual experience
of the strat managers after league competition. But its not
the only way managers look at things.

So is a 1st for 3rd round pick reach the frustration level for you?
Its kind of borderline for me. The team getting the 1st round pick
would than have a 1,1 and 2 on his roster (but no 3). A nice
concentration of talent and a nice advantage, but not neccesarily
an unasailable advantage (IMHO). But its a subjective threshold
and my gut tells me most experienced LIVE managers would get
frustrated to see this level of trade pulled off in their league...

[Valen]

You are right, it is a subjective threshold. Which has been my point that fairness of many trades and evaluation thereof is a subjective thing based on circumstances. That subjectiveness is the reason I have said I would need more information before declaring the trade good or bad. It could be that if I had complete information I would agree it was uneven. Though in the absence of evidence of collusion would still believe it the right of the individual to make the trade.

But does it really matter if we agree or not? Is the solution just for the other managers to blow off some steam here on the boards? You can probably guess my opinion on what that accomplishes. But if blowing off steam is the objective I might do some of my own. I have used Ruth several times and have yet to have one of the monster seasons I read about. :evil:

Much of this discussion though points to why I choose not to play live draft leagues.

Perhaps if someone believes such things really destroy leagues they should form private leagues and exclude those whom they perceive as preying on the newbies. Or perhaps you create a private league that requires a certain experience level to avoid having newbies to take advantage of.

Or perhaps you create a league where all players are assigned some point value and trades that do not have the similar point values exchanged would not be allowed. Of course that is what salaries are supposed to do but then some believe that is unreliable. And any point system would beg the question who sets all the values and what if someone disagrees those values are off for certain players?

Perhaps one of the side benefits of Bernie rewriting the site will be an improved live draft with salary caps. That should help reduce these iffy trade situations. At the very least someone getting a Ruth would have to trim somewhere else to fit him in.

[Valen]

Just curious. Is the concern about this trade partly tied to occurring in a no cap live league? I know more context. :lol: Would concerns be less if it were in a cap league where person getting Ruth would have to make roster concessions somewhere else to afford him.

[Valen]

Another curiousity item:

Suppose the guy getting Ruth used him exclusively as a pitcher. Would this change your mind about this trade? Or would you consider the guy trading him away and the guy using him as a pitcher as both a few fries short of a happy meal?

Speaking of happy meals has anyone seen the size of the fry order with one of those lately?