Re: 2009 Draft discussion

[abuck1220]

so what's the deal with in-draft trades? allowed? what do they have to include?

 

tim's not going to like this, but i don't see how his in-draft trade of martin is any different than him just getting to keep 11 guys. the trade didn't involve anyone that had been drafted...what's the difference between that trade and him doing that trade prior to the roster deadline?

I gave up the #22 pick in the draft, my 9th rounder, a top prospect and my first pick in the prospect draft. How the hell is that the same as me just being able to keep him as an 11th guy and still having all those other things, as well?

 

btw - Juan said that we can trade picks as long as they are worked out before the pick is on the clock.

 

because you wouldn't have had those things had you done that trade on 2/13. you couldn't have done that trade on 2/13 because you had to limit your roster to 10 guys. but you can do it on 2/16 just because the draft has started? kinda makes the roster deadline pointless if you can just blow by the roster/points limit the day after the deadline by trading a bunch of stuff you had before the deadline.

 

i'm not arguing that you ripped him off or anything...i think it was a fair trade.

[rawaction]

so what's the deal with in-draft trades? allowed? what do they have to include?

 

tim's not going to like this, but i don't see how his in-draft trade of martin is any different than him just getting to keep 11 guys. the trade didn't involve anyone that had been drafted...what's the difference between that trade and him doing that trade prior to the roster deadline?

I gave up the #22 pick in the draft, my 9th rounder, a top prospect and my first pick in the prospect draft. How the hell is that the same as me just being able to keep him as an 11th guy and still having all those other things, as well?

 

btw - Juan said that we can trade picks as long as they are worked out before the pick is on the clock.

 

because you wouldn't have had those things had you done that trade on 2/13. you couldn't have done that trade on 2/13 because you had to limit your roster to 10 guys. but you can do it on 2/16 just because the draft has started? kinda makes the roster deadline pointless if you can just blow by the roster/points limit the day after the deadline by trading a bunch of stuff you had before the deadline.

 

i'm not arguing that you ripped him off or anything...i think it was a fair trade.

 

I agree. We were also told that rosters legal before trades could be made. No rosters are legal at this point.

[BigbadB]

I'm not going to pick a side at this point, but since I love sharing my opinion, I'll go ahead and do that now.

 

The decision to allow trades during the draft is something that should be discussed and voted on. These aren't the kinds of things that should just be implemented without everyone having some involvement.

 

Without a lengthy discussion, you don't get the option of hearing the bad that can come from the decision to quickly implement a new idea.

 

Adam certainly makes a strong case here. If you are limited to 10 players, you should be limited to 10 players. You shouldn't be able to hold off on a trade until the start of the draft to do a 2 or 3 for 1 deal.

 

And with the extremely short notice on changing to an extended draft, which people like DeShawn didn't even know about, it's really hard to justify allowing even more changes to the league structure without more input from everyone who has an opinion on the matter, and then a strong vote to implement the rule after that.

 

Can someone trade a 1 for 1 or a 2 for 1? Can someone trade 3 draft picks for 1? There are a whole lot of questions that aren't answered, which makes it hard for me to support allowing trades of any kind at this time. Making it up as we go along also really isn't fair to the people who aren't here right now. These are things that need to be published in the rules, and probably include a sticky explaining how the rule will work if it's something new.

[NCCubFan]

1. Beltran

2. McCann

3. E. Santana

4. AJ Burnett

5. Cain

6. McLouth

7. BJ Upton

8. Vlad

9. Burrell

10. Magglio

11. Roberts

12. Lowe

13. Atkins

14. Hawpe

15. C. Pena

16. Harden

17. Dempster

18. Phillips

19. Bradley

20 Abreu

21. Michael Young

22. Huff

23. Dye

24. Ibanez

25. Lilly

26. Doumit

27. DeRosa

28. Tooters

29. Adam

30. Buddiga

31. Tootie

32. Bukie

 

I'm in da house (briefly) and take Mark DeRosa.

[NCCubFan]

I tend to agree with BBB. There's nothing wrong with making changes, but I think maybe we're doing too much too soon. In hindsight maybe these changes are ones we should have discussed for next year rather than first bringing them up, talking about them, and implementing them within a matter of a few hours.

[abuck1220]

if you're trading guys involved in the draft, i feel that's a little different. but there was nothing in tim/todd's trade that couldn't have been done on 2/13.

 

not saying i think the trade should be disallowed, just think we need a little clarity.

[UK1679666180]

Fwiw, if I knew Huff would be gone I would not have made the trade.

[BigbadB]

If I had a vote, I'd probably vote to allow the trades that have happened at this point to stand, because they weren't told they couldn't make those trades.

[tadowdaddy]

Matt is on his way home from work and should be here within the next 30 mins. He'll pick when he gets back.

[Guest]

If people want to disallow the trade and go back to #22, that's fine. I'll make my pick at that spot and we can begin again from that point.

 

I've got no problems with that at all. Personally I think I overpaid for Martin, anyway.

[abuck1220]

i'm not saying i want to disallow it, i just wanted some clarification since i'm trying to work on some trades.

[tadowdaddy]

Matt is home and has chosen Brett Myers

 

1. Beltran

2. McCann

3. E. Santana

4. AJ Burnett

5. Cain

6. McLouth

7. BJ Upton

8. Vlad

9. Burrell

10. Magglio

11. Roberts

12. Lowe

13. Atkins

14. Hawpe

15. C. Pena

16. Harden

17. Dempster

18. Phillips

19. Bradley

20 Abreu

21. Michael Young

22. Huff

23. Dye

24. Ibanez

25. Lilly

26. Doumit

27. DeRosa

28. B. Myers

29. Adam

30. Buddiga

31. Tootie

32. Bukie

[bukie]

I'd agree that allowing trades for keepers not involved in the draft kind of invalidates the roster paring that was done Saturday. However, I don't see the point in rolling back trades that have already been made, either. I'd vote to either not allow further trades, or not allow trades involving someone that was a keeper from this point forward.

[tadowdaddy]

But what if it's a keeper for a keeper + a draft pick?

[Guest]

I'd agree that allowing trades for keepers not involved in the draft kind of invalidates the roster paring that was done Saturday. However, I don't see the point in rolling back trades that have already been made, either. I'd vote to either not allow further trades, or not allow trades involving someone that was a keeper from this point forward.

That would be really unfair, though. IMO, it's gotta be yes or no.

[MembersOnlyJacket]

Matt is home and has chosen Brett Myers

 

Punk!

[tadowdaddy]

Buddiga in the house! If Adam picks soon we can get the next 3 out of the way!

[bukie]

I have a feeling Adam's working on a trade and waiting on a ruling to see if that's OK or not.

[tadowdaddy]

I have a feeling Adam's working on a trade and waiting on a ruling to see if that's OK or not.

The trade he may have been working on with me won't happen this round....

[bukie]

That said, even if the next 3 picks get in, I'm leaving the office.....now.

[BigbadB]

At this point, I'd say what's done is done. Obviously, my vote only counts as 1 of 16, but I can't see undoing trades that have already happened. Might as well make whatever trades people want to make and then we can re-evaluate these rules for next year's draft.

[BigbadB]

That said, even if the next 3 picks get in, I'm leaving the office.....now.

 

PM your picks to me if you aren't going to be around.

[abuck1220]

vernon wells

[abuck1220]

I'd agree that allowing trades for keepers not involved in the draft kind of invalidates the roster paring that was done Saturday. However, I don't see the point in rolling back trades that have already been made, either. I'd vote to either not allow further trades, or not allow trades involving someone that was a keeper from this point forward.

That would be really unfair, though. IMO, it's gotta be yes or no.

 

yeah, you can't allow one and then say no to the rest.

[bukie]

I'd agree that allowing trades for keepers not involved in the draft kind of invalidates the roster paring that was done Saturday. However, I don't see the point in rolling back trades that have already been made, either. I'd vote to either not allow further trades, or not allow trades involving someone that was a keeper from this point forward.

That would be really unfair, though. IMO, it's gotta be yes or no.

 

yeah, you can't allow one and then say no to the rest.

I wasn't really clear. I mean I'd say just allow them for this draft since precedent was set, but I'd be in favor of disallowing draft day trades in the future, or only allowing them among non-keepers.