Re: Lucky17's Yahoo! FBB H2H League: 2012 Preseason: Constitution Up!

[fairweatherfan]

I am willing to trade the right to swap my 2nd round pick with anyone's 1st, provided I can get some decent value in return.  Think of how much you'll save on guaranteed contracts!

[Lucky17]

Regarding "Swapgate," as commissioner, it's a little bit of a pain, but I'm not at the point where I feel a ban on swaps is necessary. (Actually, at the risk of opening a can of worms, I have more issue with conditional picks: when picks end up protected, it's possible that one team ends up with very little or nothing to show for a trade, and I find that problematic.)

As a GM, I recognize that 2nd rounders do have value. A difference of 5 or 6 slots in the 2nd round can be a big difference. Squeezing the right to potentially move up 1 or 2 slots in the late 30s seems a little extreme to me, though, especially when many of these picks end up on the chopping block at the roster cut deadline.

And, as FWF points out, nesting potential swaps within potential swaps to four or five scenarios seems to invite confusion on draft day.

Bottom line: save all of your trade confirmation PMs, as BFM suggested. I am doing my best to keep records, and GC has graciously put in a lot of effort as well, but better safe than sorry.

[jgod213]

I've given it some more thought and I still don't understand why we have to put a ban on swapping the second rounders. Maybe its just me, but the swaps are not as confusing as GC is trying to make it sound...it increases Lucky's workload, but that's the only drawback. Save the emails/PMs when you offer to swaps picks in a deal...keep a trail instead of relying on Lucky to do it for you..shouldn't be hard and will avoid any confusion if it arises.

Any other GM want to weigh in?

I dont think anyone is saying we HAVE to ban the trading of picks, i think people are just asking for a gentleman's agreement to limit the amount of swapped, conditional picks so that, for example, when GC offers me a deal including one of these, i don't need to pm him back and say "so wait, if we did this deal how would this draft pick work again?"

Actually the more I think about it I wouldn't mind if we banned the right to swap 2nd round picks.

My intended suggestion was not to ban the *TRADING* of 2nd round picks, it was , to disallow the *OPTIONS TO SWAP* them.

Does that sound like "limit the number of swaps"? Disallow =\= limit as far as I understand. And GC did use the word ban..not limit. He suggested a ban on swap of picks..what am I missing? Please explain.

I guess i just don't understand why you're so passionate about this; ultimately GC and Lucky are just asking for a bit of help from us.  i agree with you in that i dont think there should be a ban or a hard cap on it, but i do think we can all use a bit of discretion to ease up on layering draft picks with numerous conditions.  

Should we all keep track of our own picks and their respective conditions? yes of course. But ultimately there needs to be a centralized place where all this information is kept so that it is transparent and easily referenced when other GMs are looking to include these picks in their trade talks.

[barefacedmonk]

I've given it some more thought and I still don't understand why we have to put a ban on swapping the second rounders. Maybe its just me, but the swaps are not as confusing as GC is trying to make it sound...it increases Lucky's workload, but that's the only drawback. Save the emails/PMs when you offer to swaps picks in a deal...keep a trail instead of relying on Lucky to do it for you..shouldn't be hard and will avoid any confusion if it arises.

Any other GM want to weigh in?

I dont think anyone is saying we HAVE to ban the trading of picks, i think people are just asking for a gentleman's agreement to limit the amount of swapped, conditional picks so that, for example, when GC offers me a deal including one of these, i don't need to pm him back and say "so wait, if we did this deal how would this draft pick work again?"

Actually the more I think about it I wouldn't mind if we banned the right to swap 2nd round picks.

My intended suggestion was not to ban the *TRADING* of 2nd round picks, it was , to disallow the *OPTIONS TO SWAP* them.

Does that sound like "limit the number of swaps"? Disallow =\= limit as far as I understand. And GC did use the word ban..not limit. He suggested a ban on swap of picks..what am I missing? Please explain.

I guess i just don't understand why you're so passionate about this; ultimately GC and Lucky are just asking for a bit of help from us.  i agree with you in that i dont think there should be a ban or a hard cap on it, but i do think we can all use a bit of discretion to ease up on layering draft picks with numerous conditions.  

Should we all keep track of our own picks and their respective conditions? yes of course. But ultimately there needs to be a centralized place where all this information is kept so that it is transparent and easily referenced when other GMs are looking to include these picks in their trade talks.

I'm not trying to make Lucky's or GC's work harder. But I also don't want the inability to swap picks to be a deal breaker. Yes, some GMs do value second rounders as well...and the chance to move up a few slots in a draft can be used as a trading asset. You can call it passion or whatever you want, but that's where I stand.

[barefacedmonk]

Should we all keep track of our own picks and their respective conditions? yes of course. But ultimately there needs to be a centralized place where all this information is kept so that it is transparent and easily referenced when other GMs are looking to include these picks in their trade talks.

And this is not even part of the debate. I suggested saving emails/PMs to avoid any confusion...but I didn't suggest it as a replacement to what Lucky and GC are doing.

[Gainesville Celtic]

Swapgate is dead.

Long live swapgate.

Fin.

 

(cant' we all just get move along???!?!?!)

[Gainesville Celtic]

Should we all keep track of our own picks and their respective conditions? yes of course. But ultimately there needs to be a centralized place where all this information is kept so that it is transparent and easily referenced when other GMs are looking to include these picks in their trade talks.

And this is not even part of the debate. I suggested saving emails/PMs to avoid any confusion...but I didn't suggest it as a replacement to what Lucky and GC are doing.

Until Lucky says otherwise, he as the commish is the final arbriter of any question/dispute over picks. It should go without saying that the more you can keep up with your own picks the better if there ever is an issue.

I simply told him I'd keep a backup list (in my maze of excel sheets).

It probabably won't be until early Jan. till I can get it into a Google Doc... we'll see.

[barefacedmonk]

Should we all keep track of our own picks and their respective conditions? yes of course. But ultimately there needs to be a centralized place where all this information is kept so that it is transparent and easily referenced when other GMs are looking to include these picks in their trade talks.

And this is not even part of the debate. I suggested saving emails/PMs to avoid any confusion...but I didn't suggest it as a replacement to what Lucky and GC are doing.

Until Lucky says otherwise, he as the commish is the final arbriter of picks.

I simply told him I'd keep a backup list (in my maze of excel sheets).

It probabably won't be until early Jan. till I can get it into a Google Doc... we'll see.

I'd already told you a while back that it was a very good idea and as a participant in the league, I thank you for volunteering. Saving emails/PMs was only a suggestion to help avoid any confusion if it arises...3 backups are better than 2. It wasn't intended to replace what you and Lucky are doing...and frankly, I have no idea how jgod reached that conclusion.

[Gainesville Celtic]

It's cool.... we're all ubuntu, i was just reminding everyone else...

Time for me to cook the Salmon & Mashed Potatoes!! and like i said....

Swapgate is dead.

Long live swapgate.

Fin.

 

(cant' we all just get move along???!?!?!)

[jgod213]

Regarding "Swapgate," as commissioner, it's a little bit of a pain, but I'm not at the point where I feel a ban on swaps is necessary. (Actually, at the risk of opening a can of worms, I have more issue with conditional picks: when picks end up protected, it's possible that one team ends up with very little or nothing to show for a trade, and I find that problematic.)

As a GM, I recognize that 2nd rounders do have value. A difference of 5 or 6 slots in the 2nd round can be a big difference. Squeezing the right to potentially move up 1 or 2 slots in the late 30s seems a little extreme to me, though, especially when many of these picks end up on the chopping block at the roster cut deadline.

And, as FWF points out, nesting potential swaps within potential swaps to four or five scenarios seems to invite confusion on draft day.

Bottom line: save all of your trade confirmation PMs, as BFM suggested. I am doing my best to keep records, and GC has graciously put in a lot of effort as well, but better safe than sorry.

perfect

[The Walker Wiggle]

(Actually, at the risk of opening a can of worms, I have more issue with conditional picks: when picks end up protected, it's possible that one team ends up with very little or nothing to show for a trade, and I find that problematic.)

I'm fine with disallowing the conditional trading of picks.

Also, time to move on to a poll on expanding the number of roster moves allowed in the postseason from 1 to 2? Not that we had a vote when we cut it down to 1.

And all this pick talk is making me want to trade my 2012 1st, which is the better of my own or the Webskins', get in touch if you're interested.

[Roy H.]

Also, time to move on to a poll on expanding the number of roster moves allowed in the postseason from 1 to 2? Not that we had a vote when we cut it down to 1.

Right now there's as much support for eliminating moves in the playoffs as there is support for increasing the number of moves.  If we do have a vote, we should have zero moves as an option.

[hpantazo]

I apologize if I started some of this trouble with my last trade, but I was just taking a hint from Roy about the fact that some of the picks I traded for recently may not be as high as I am expecting and as he said, he would have gone for the old swapping of picks deal, so I did. Actually my last two trades were for swapping of picks, one for a 1st and the latest for a 2nd, so that I can make sure I get the picks I was aiming for when I made these deals. I think as long as we have a lottery or are trading for picks well before the draft, adding the right to swap picks is very reasonable and should not be banned.

As for moves during the playoffs, I am in support of 1 move max per week, which would basically allow teams to pick up a guy if someone is injured. The team that got you there should be the team that wins it for you, not the guys you pick up during the last few weeks of the season when the scrubs of the league play 40 minutes a game and go for career highs and you were lucky enough to guess on which scrub is the most selfish.

[The Walker Wiggle]

I apologize if I started some of this trouble with my last trade...

Nah, you didn't start any trouble. What else were we doing?

The team that got you there should be the team that wins it for you, not the guys you pick up during the last few weeks of the season when the scrubs of the league play 40 minutes a game and go for career highs and you were lucky enough to guess on which scrub is the most selfish.

What does that mean though when you can turn over 80%-100% of your roster three weeks before the playoffs? Is that the team that brought you to the dance?

[hpantazo]

I apologize if I started some of this trouble with my last trade...

Nah, you didn't start any trouble. What else were we doing?

The team that got you there should be the team that wins it for you, not the guys you pick up during the last few weeks of the season when the scrubs of the league play 40 minutes a game and go for career highs and you were lucky enough to guess on which scrub is the most selfish.

What does that mean though when you can turn over 80%-100% of your roster three weeks before the playoffs? Is that the team that brought you to the dance?

Thanks WW. That's a good point about trading deadline deals, and myself I'm not too happy with having the trading deadline that close to the playoffs, but I guess that's a whole other subject.