Major League Keeper League (MLKL)

Regardless of the rule, which I think is a terrible one and should be changed for the FA draft as well, Roscoe and I have undone the deal in question and made one that fixes the problem and is clearly within the rules.

The advantages for both sides are clear, so, unless you look at it in a vacuum, it's not an unbalanced trade.

Bullshit, you took a loophole in the rules, you made an unbalanced deal a 5 for 1 deal plain and simple, just crazy. You should have just dropped 5 players and promoted 5, just as you would have done when drops were made.

How is it unbalanced? I get roster flexibility and Roscoe gets a couple of decent players. Teams in every league do these kinds of deals ALL THE TIME.

Nothing we did is against the rules.

Guys!

There is nothing in the rules to prohibit this trade and nobody but the trade partners can decide if a trade is fair. The commish doesn't have the power to veto trades and neither do the owners.

So... I don't really know why this discussion is occurring. Want to pass a new rule? Let's have a discussion and vote on an amendment.

Bullshit, you took a loophole in the rules, you made an unbalanced deal a 5 for 1 deal plain and simple, just crazy. You should have just dropped 5 players and promoted 5, just as you would have done when drops were made.

I feel I must defend Ted. It's not a loophole. It's just the rules. We can vote to change em, but there's no reason to suggest that Ted is skirting the law. He's totally within his rights as an owner.

Bullshit, you took a loophole in the rules, you made an unbalanced deal a 5 for 1 deal plain and simple, just crazy. You should have just dropped 5 players and promoted 5, just as you would have done when drops were made.

I feel I must defend Ted. It's not a loophole. It's just the rules. We can vote to change em, but there's no reason to suggest that Ted is skirting the law. He's totally within his rights as an owner.

I hope Peter doesn't mind, but I agree with him

The trade was certainly unusual, but was also perfectly within the rules. In addition, it avoided the issue I had raised about the prospects in the first place -- congrats to the two managers involved on figuring all that out!

In any case, I still propose that we actually have a rule about it:

* * * * *

You cannot trade prospect picks that you do not own. For example, that means that if you have 10 prospects already, then you have no prospect picks available to trade. If a manager wishes to make one or more of his standard new prospect picks in such a case, then enough current prospects must be promoted or traded in order to make space available.

1 - tcochran - YES
2 - alk58 - YES
3 - Turtle - YES
4 - Rosco - YES
5 - Peter - Unequivocal No - what a joke
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Wow just wow.There isnt anybody in a bigger rebuild than I am, If I knew I could do something that is not allowed in every other keeper league I am in and kept all my prospects and picks then drafted a full 40 man roster and before my 1st prospect pick traded the 5 players I liked least to someone ..............WOW JUST WOW

Wow just wow.There isnt anybody in a bigger rebuild than I am, If I knew I could do something that is not allowed in every other keeper league I am in and kept all my prospects and picks then drafted a full 40 man roster and before my 1st prospect pick traded the 5 players I liked least to someone ..............WOW JUST WOW

Yes, it would have been simpler if Ted had just dropped those guys before the FA draft and promoted some prospects. That said, it still does not mean that the final trade broke any rules.

The only real difference is that the players who were dropped were not available in the FA draft, as they otherwise would have been.

I'm not sure what this rule accomplishes with regard to the situation in question. I feel like it's already covered with the rule about the FA draft. Even if it's not, we undid the trade where I was sending picks that I wouldn't have and made one that is clearly legal. Also, I don't understand where all this negativity is coming from. I get that people are upset because those extra players would have been available in the FA draft and will now be pushed to the supplemental draft, but is that something to get so worked up over?

There is no rule against cutting prospects at any time, so, worst case, I would have had to make a cut before making these picks, the picks would not be dropped or skipped as they might in the case of a FA draft. Does anyone not think that this is the case? If you agree with my assessment, then obviously making a trade to clear room is completely fine. If you don't, please make your case, because no one has done so yet.

Here's my vote:

You cannot trade prospect picks that you do not own. For example, that means that if you have 10 prospects already, then you have no prospect picks available to trade. If a manager wishes to make one or more of his standard new prospect picks in such a case, then enough current prospects must be promoted or traded in order to make space available.

1 - tcochran - YES
2 - alk58 - YES
3 - Turtle - YES
4 - Rosco - YES
5 - Peter - Unequivocal No - what a joke
6 - Ted - No
7
8
9
10
11
12