Lucky17's Yahoo! FBB H2H League: Trading picks/Playoff roster moves

[barefacedmonk]

As for roster moves, one move per week is more than enough. Have confidence in the team that got you to the playoffs.

[Roy H.]

Regarding roster moves, I have no problem with completely eliminating the moves cap in the regular season.  However, the playoffs are a different animal, and the anti-cycling rule preserves the integrity of playoff matchups.

Please see my early reply. Would you really say that our first two seasons weren't fun and lacked integrity?

They were less fun than last year. 

Wdleehi was making trades up until the deadline last season. I gave up my Points League team this summer because I just don't relish the format.

So, the first real opportunity that the replacement GM gets to take over the team is draft day, and he's immediately handcuffed by not being able to trade future picks (which in many instances will be one of the only assets left to a new GM).  I think at least one new GM ran into this issue this year, when he was trying to trade next year's #1, only to be told it wasn't allowed.

Did you trade your draft pick in the points league?  If so, the replacement manager took over a team, but didn't have a draft choice.  If that GM coveted a player in this year's draft, they would have had to go backwards by trading a rotation player for a pick, rather than building on the roster that is in place by trading a future #1 for that pick.

[Roy H.]

As an aside, I'm always fascinated by the numbers of guests we get following these threads.  Do our lurkers form allegiances to certain GMs?  If so, I'm giving free beer and hot dogs to the first 1000 fans who show up at the Naturals home opener.

[barefacedmonk]

The GMs who will be helped the most by allowing the trading of draft picks are the league's middle class.  Let's say a team is perpetually somewhere between 6th and 10th place in the draft.  It's going to be hard to turn their team around, because they're not getting high draft picks, and probably don't have star players.  However, let's say that 10th place team uses its #1 and it's 2012 #1 to jump up to 5th in the draft, where it can potentially land a star player.  All of a sudden, they jumped from mediocrity to contender.

+1 to that.

[The Walker Wiggle]

Regarding roster moves, I have no problem with completely eliminating the moves cap in the regular season.  However, the playoffs are a different animal, and the anti-cycling rule preserves the integrity of playoff matchups.

Please see my early reply. Would you really say that our first two seasons weren't fun and lacked integrity?

They were less fun than last year. 

Cop out. 

[Roy H.]

Regarding roster moves, I have no problem with completely eliminating the moves cap in the regular season.  However, the playoffs are a different animal, and the anti-cycling rule preserves the integrity of playoff matchups.

Please see my early reply. Would you really say that our first two seasons weren't fun and lacked integrity?

They were less fun than last year.  

Cop out.  

In all seriousness, though, I did find last year's playoffs to be a more accurate representation of the strengths of the various teams involved in the playoff matchups.  It wasn't a lot of fun losing in the Finals two years ago, when literally half of my team ended up injured in the last two weeks, and my opponent was cycling in players to give himself a probably 20 game advantage in terms of games played.  

Every league I've been Commissioner in over the last several years has capped moves to 1 or less during the playoffs, because cycling simply saps the fun out of the league.  And yes, that includes when the players being cycled are Zaza Pachulia and Dontae Greene.

[barefacedmonk]

If one or few GMs don't like how I'm trying to rebuild my team, does that mean I need others to intervene and protect me from myself? I find that very insulting. If you can't run the team the way you like, why even bother. I would rather quit the league than have to constantly answer why I'm trying to rebuild the way I am.

Some GMs really need to get off their high horse. Only 8 teams can make the playoffs...and only one will win. This is for fun...but having others try to decide what's best for my team takes away that fun.

[The Walker Wiggle]

If you'll indulge me, I can only point to one playoff match-up that was swung by cycling: my semi-finals match-up with the MK. I had a significant games advantage early in the week that he managed to close with some shrewd F.A. plays. Theo Ratliff comes to mind. He stayed close enough to take the lead Saturday, and I signed and played two hot F.A.s Pargo and McRoberts on Sunday instead of Ibaka and whoever else. Pargo went 0-7 or some such and McRoberts barely played. I lost by a block, two blocks? And one FTM? It was that close, it was a blast, and he deserved to win. And I still remember it two years on.

Which is just to say a long-winded way of arguing, different strokes for different folks. But hey, no offense intended to anybody involved in this late night debate. Over five years, it's been a lot of fun for me, far be it for me to spoil a good time.

[mkogav]

If you'll indulge me, I can only point to one playoff match-up that was swung by cycling: my semi-finals match-up with the MK. I had a significant games advantage early in the week that he managed to close with some shrewd F.A. plays. Theo Ratliff comes to mind. He stayed close enough to take the lead Saturday, and I signed and played two hot F.A.s Pargo and McRoberts on Sunday instead of Ibaka and whoever else. Pargo went 0-7 or some such and McRoberts barely played. I lost by a block, two blocks? And one FTM? It was that close, it was a blast, and he deserved to win. And I still remember it two years on.

Which is just to say a long-winded way of arguing, different strokes for different folks. But hey, no offense intended to anybody involved in this late night debate. Over five years, it's been a lot of fun for me, far be it for me to spoil a good time.

delete

Mk

[Kwhit10]

I've changed my mind, and I voted to allow trading next years picks starting on draft day.

[Roy H.]

I've changed my mind, and I voted to allow trading next years picks starting on draft day.

Wahoo!  A convert!

[hpantazo]

So far, it appears that there's no momentum to allow additional playoff roster moves (unless, perhaps, of injury).  There does seem to be an early consensus for allowing the trade of the next year's draft picks on draft day.

As for the other topic at hand, I'd rather not allow the trade of next year's draft picks on draft day. This is a case, where system we have in place has been working well. What's the argument for?

For:  It's fairly arbitrary to not allow the following year's draft picks on draft day, but to allow them the day following the draft.  The rule doesn't really serve any purpose, rather than to restrict people from maximizing their trading assets during one of the biggest trading windows of the year.

Let's say there's a lotto team that ends up with the #3 pick in the draft.  That #3 pick might not be enough to land a star caliber player from a contender.  However, allow that GM to package that #3 pick with a pick next year, and all of a sudden they're potentially able to land a player who can help turn their team around quickly. 

Also, of course, it allows teams that have traded their #1 away to be active on draft day.  The last couple years, numerous GMs have essentially been non-participants in the draft, because they didn't have picks.  Having the following year's picks available would remedy that by allowing people to make speculative moves.

My thought is that if a GM is still in control of their team on draft day and actively wishes to make trades, then the risk of a Ted Stepian situation is essentially nil; what GM is going to actively participate in the draft, but then suddenly give up his team?  And again, I reiterate that current rules allow that same GM to trade his #1 pick the day after the draft; he's just not allowed to use it when it's actually useful to him.

I fully agree with Roy and barefacedmonk on this subject. There is really no reason at all to prevent teams from trading next year's draft picks on draft day. it is a very arbitrary rule with no real purpose and just restricts movement on the biggest trading period of our league. Allowing the trading of next year's picks on draft day would indeed create more GM participation in the draft and go a long way in helping teams rebuild and/or improve. The NBA allows this, why shouldn't we allow it?

A for my rebuilding strategy, it's a risk I am willing to take and one that I am convinced will pay off. Sure there is a lottery in this league, but the next draft is very deep, and the odds that I don't land at least 1 top 5 pick are very slim. For comparison, look at my team in the pts league. I had a team just as bad as this one at the end of last season with some good draft picks. I didn't believe in that draft class so I traded my picks and a few players and totally revamped my roster to a point where I'm already pretty happy with it. If I could have traded a 2012 1st rounder though, I could have improved even more. The poll pretty much ends this argument though, it's a strong majority in favor of allowing to trade next year's picks on draft day.

[hpantazo]

If one or few GMs don't like how I'm trying to rebuild my team, does that mean I need others to intervene and protect me from myself? I find that very insulting. If you can't run the team the way you like, why even bother. I would rather quit the league than have to constantly answer why I'm trying to rebuild the way I am.

Some GMs really need to get off their high horse. Only 8 teams can make the playoffs...and only one will win. This is for fun...but having others try to decide what's best for my team takes away that fun.

Agreed, I'm happy to run my team the way I chose, and my strategy depends heavily on the roster i inherited and the opportunities that present themselves. In this league at this time, I'm all in for the 2012 draft class, whereas in the pts league I pretty much traded out of the 2011 draft completely and improved my team that way. I'm happy with both strategies so far.

[barefacedmonk]

Also, we have to keep in mind that not every GM follows college basketball as diligently as others. I don't follow college basketball at all...and being in Canada, I get very few opportunities to do so. I'm more comfortable trying to acquire a NBA player that I follow and know about than to try and draft an unknown commodity...and if trading picks is what will get me that player, then I would like the opportunity to do so.

[barefacedmonk]

Which package would be easier to deal and land a solid player come 2012 draft day?

Tim Duncan

or

Tim Duncan + 2012 first +2013 fist