Post by Quintin - Alexandria Beetles on Jan 31, 2011 16:45:40 GMT -8
I have a concern trading players for picks during the time between the World Series and when the keepers have to be declared.
I believe trading players for picks prior to the keeper declaration point dilutes the draft. The ability to profit by moving a player that you probably aren't keeping for a draft pick helps both owners making the trade, but weakens the overall league by not enforcing the check/balance option/gamble of declaring keepers before trading picks.
The concern lies in the fact that the captain receiving the pick doesn't need to realize equal value in the trade. That captain simply is moving dead weight for a draft pick. Related, the captain getting the player isn't paying full value that would occur if the deal were a player-for-player trade, especially a keeper-for-keeper trade.
Right now, I can trade away a player I'm not keeping (Jason Bay for instance) to another owner for a 20th round (for example) draft pick. I'm not keeping him, so any extra pick is a bonus. The other captain would love getting Bay for a 20th pick, and probably not mind one bit he has to give up his 3rd round pick to keep him. Basically, this would allow me to keep my $250 Keeper limit intact while also allowing me to profit by obtaining a draft pick while not really giving anything up (the opportunity cost of the other owner keeping the player versus his other options of using the draft pick or keeping some other player(s) isn't my cost).
The ultimate harm in these trades is the fact that the $250 salary cap constraint is circumvented. A player can be had for much less value the day before the keepers are to be declared than the day after.
You say "everyone can do it, so why isn't fair?" My answer is that we can all be cheating the single best event of fantasy baseball, the draft. To keep the draft as meaningful as possible, we need to insure the salary cap constraint is fully valued which will strengthen the decision making strategy process of the draft (aka fun).
I propose we eliminate player-for-pick trading between the trade deadline of one season and the keeper designation time of the next.
BTW, I don't think pick for pick trading is involved in this discussion nor do I think post keeper designation trades are as well. I think player-for-player trades are fine, but should be voted on upon by the league.
One possible caveat, if a player were traded for the designated keeper round value, then that trade seems to be a fair trade from the perspective that the draft remains intact. In that example above, let's say I can keep Jason Bay by giving up me 3rd round pick. I think having another captain trade me his 3rd round pick for Jason Bay is really just shuffling deck chairs, not really changing the chemistry of the draft. After the draft, the 3rd round essentially remains that one captain kept Jason Bay, the other drafted a player with a pick. The order of that sequence may be off, but that is probably nitpicking.
I hate snow. Thinking about fantasy baseball helps take the sting off that fact.
I believe trading players for picks prior to the keeper declaration point dilutes the draft. The ability to profit by moving a player that you probably aren't keeping for a draft pick helps both owners making the trade, but weakens the overall league by not enforcing the check/balance option/gamble of declaring keepers before trading picks.
The concern lies in the fact that the captain receiving the pick doesn't need to realize equal value in the trade. That captain simply is moving dead weight for a draft pick. Related, the captain getting the player isn't paying full value that would occur if the deal were a player-for-player trade, especially a keeper-for-keeper trade.
Right now, I can trade away a player I'm not keeping (Jason Bay for instance) to another owner for a 20th round (for example) draft pick. I'm not keeping him, so any extra pick is a bonus. The other captain would love getting Bay for a 20th pick, and probably not mind one bit he has to give up his 3rd round pick to keep him. Basically, this would allow me to keep my $250 Keeper limit intact while also allowing me to profit by obtaining a draft pick while not really giving anything up (the opportunity cost of the other owner keeping the player versus his other options of using the draft pick or keeping some other player(s) isn't my cost).
The ultimate harm in these trades is the fact that the $250 salary cap constraint is circumvented. A player can be had for much less value the day before the keepers are to be declared than the day after.
You say "everyone can do it, so why isn't fair?" My answer is that we can all be cheating the single best event of fantasy baseball, the draft. To keep the draft as meaningful as possible, we need to insure the salary cap constraint is fully valued which will strengthen the decision making strategy process of the draft (aka fun).
I propose we eliminate player-for-pick trading between the trade deadline of one season and the keeper designation time of the next.
BTW, I don't think pick for pick trading is involved in this discussion nor do I think post keeper designation trades are as well. I think player-for-player trades are fine, but should be voted on upon by the league.
One possible caveat, if a player were traded for the designated keeper round value, then that trade seems to be a fair trade from the perspective that the draft remains intact. In that example above, let's say I can keep Jason Bay by giving up me 3rd round pick. I think having another captain trade me his 3rd round pick for Jason Bay is really just shuffling deck chairs, not really changing the chemistry of the draft. After the draft, the 3rd round essentially remains that one captain kept Jason Bay, the other drafted a player with a pick. The order of that sequence may be off, but that is probably nitpicking.
I hate snow. Thinking about fantasy baseball helps take the sting off that fact.
