Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Do We Need A Cash-In-Trades Official Policy?

zbrent recently tc'd me with this question, and I promised to poll the world on it.

Can't say the question has ever registered high on my attention scale, but I agree it's worth asking.

Here's what I think I can accurately report about it:

1.  There seems to be some kind of world-chat disagreement about it almost every year. This year's seemed to me to be civil and respectful, but it hasn't always been. Regardless of the tone, the discussion seems to be one that few people enjoy, and the purpose of the World Chat (imho) is to be a forum for comments that people DO enjoy.

2.  We had 2 owners depart this year who cited either our laissez-faire treatment of cash in trades, or the resulting WC discussion of it, as their reasons for leaving.  Personally, I take this with a few grains of salt; I've never seen anyone with a winning record, or a big jump in winning percentage, or a loaded farm system depart and cite cash in trades as a reason. Nonetheless, 2 departing GM's did give me that as a reason, so I feel obligated to report that in any discussion of the subject.

The big reason for having a C-I-T policy, I think, would be so we can have right up front how we handle it for anyone considering coming into the world.  If someone knows that we limit C-I-T to the salary of the highest-paid player in the trade (just to use an example), they can't exactly complain about it later or use that as a reason for leaving.  It would also theoretically end the WC discussions about it.

There certainly may be better reasons for having one.

The negative, I suppose, is it's one more little admin detail for the commish to keep up with, although I"m sure there are other arguments against it as well.

I'd welcome comments here or on the WC from anyone who has something to add.

Please vote in the poll.  Note that the question is whether we should even have a C-I-T policy, not what it should be.  If the world votes to have one, we'll move on to deciding what it should be later.


pstrnutbag44 said...

FWIW, the game has rules that exist already, including a cap ($5M) on cash in trades. It always amazes me that people forget or conveniently dismiss this fact. Unless you have people outright buying all-stars, which the Veto system is in place to take care of. The simple cash for depth trades are fine, as are the trades that free up money to be spent on IFA (as there IS an existing rule for this in MLB too, which they do allow for the trading of cap space for players. To me, this is almost always the case in these types of trades). For there to be any rule otherwise, I think the fact that we are deviating from accepted MLB and HBD practices (read the rules on both if you're unclear here) demands some sort of logical reasoning beyond "I don't like it! It's unfair!". There should be VALID reasons based in actual FACT as opposed to slippery slopes and anecdotal musings. IOW, if you don't like it, present an actual, factual case as to why we should separate ourselves from pre-existing rules that govern most organized baseball, real or otherwise.

cwaldenj said...

If it will prevent Board drama, I am agreeable for some type of cash in trade rule. My biggest caveat is if you are going to have a rule, it must be enforceable.

jclarkbaker said...

I voted no. Simply, a trade is imbalanced based on the trade in general, not the amount of players or money involved. Also, full disclosure, I have no interest in being in a league that institutes such a policy.

cyben5150 said...

I voted yes, there should be some clear stance on it. While I think the stance should be no additional restrictions, letting this be known upfront should prevent a good bit of fuss that seems to come up more and more often.

crabman said...

I voted no, not sure why we care so much about it in every world. What difference is a few extra million dollars going to do...and if an owner wants to help out another owner for some silly reason then who am I to tell a PAYING customer how to spend their money?

Anonymous said...

there should be no such rule in my opinion. this is guru