Commissioner Ruling Advice

Whats up guys,

After the urging of a couple friends, I started a free keeper league on ESPN with strangers this year that I commission. First of all,let me say that I believe in letting managers run their own teams, but at the same time I feel that its my duty to protect the integrity of competition in the league so that two years down the road, there arent 3 overloaded teams that destroy the chance of regular competition. Now, there have already been a half dozen trades, including one I posted advice for on here(My Frazier+Samard for his Arrieta) and im getting concerned with the competitive balance if the pace continues. One owner in particular is taking advantage. He has made two trades: 1. His Salazar for their Upton and 2. His Kipnis, H.Ramirez, Cueto, Fiers, for their Cain, Carrasco, Wong, and Fister.

The first trade I let go through because I can see how someone MAY think Salazar is worth an Upton if they are high on him, but the second trade I just dont see as fair. And yes, trades arent always fair, but I feel like this is too much. Given that its the start of a league, I think I have to really establish where the boundaries are so people dont go crazy with unfair offers. Any one else ever have this problem? and what would you do if you were in this situation. I dont want to have to be a judge of whats acceptable because obviously everyone has biases, but Im jest not sure what to do.

Thanks for the advice,
James

[fuhrdog]

Obviously I like side 2 in the 2nd deal but it is nowhere close to a trade you can stop imo. If this trade bothers you I think you are going to get miserable real fast with other deals. I'd suggest replacing owners over vetoing trades. Now if someone trades Trout for Fister, I would agree with a veto and then replace the owner at the end of the year. This trade is not even but far from horrible and I'd be pretty upset if this was my trade and was not allowed. Good luck.

[kawaise]

Umm .... what's wrong with the second trade? If someone is willing to do the deal allow them to do so. Your role as a commissioner is to let managers run their own teams as you stated. DO NOT start a league with your micromanagement. You will drive people away.

I've been a league commissioner for 25 years and have only once vetoed a trade. Yes, there have been plenty of trades that have been made that aren't fair - but in whose eyes? Mine? Yup - they hurt me; cost me a pennant once. We don't have rules in place that allow teams to vote to block trades. I vetoed the trade when more than one owner approached me with valid concerns.

If you haven't set up a league where members can vote to block a trade then I don't think it's your role to play "trade police."

[jamesfredette]

Thanks for the input. I agree with you guys by the way. Like I said, first and foremeost, I think owners should make their own decisions, but Im not trying to replace 3 owners a year because they make uneven trades and ruin the squad they have.

[kawaise]

... but Im not trying to replace 3 owners a year because they make uneven trades and ruin the squad they have.

You simply can't fix stupidity - it'll drive you nuts. Trust me ..... I've been an educator for the same amount of time that I've been a commissioner.

As a concerned owner you can offer advice, ask leading questions, and engage in dialogue; as a commish you could suggest teams post players available for trade and/or wants/needs to improve their team.

Good luck with your league.

[jamesfredette]

I just posted a LM Note reassuring owners not to panic after the first few weeks, as most MLB players come close to fulfilling to their year-end projections (barring injury). Thats all I can do, I suppose.

[james33]

Only other thing I'd suggest is to encourage all owners to shop their talent around. Especially if there's a guy who constantly seems to be making dumb trades.

[Pauly]

I realize you want the league to be competitive, but especially in a free league just for fun, you shouldnt be stopping any trades at all. There is no money on the line, guys just want to run their own teams. Let them. And remove the veto system entirely.

And for the record, that second trade you posted is pretty fair I can see being on either side of it.

[jamesfredette]

I realize you want the league to be competitive, but especially in a free league just for fun, you shouldnt be stopping any trades at all. There is no money on the line, guys just want to run their own teams. Let them. And remove the veto system entirely.

And for the record, that second trade you posted is pretty fair I can see being on either side of it.

The record shows... that you are wrong. Im not going to do anything about it, but it is NOT even. Fiers, Fister, wash. Kipnis, Wong, wash. Cain, Hanley, NOT a wash. Cueto, Carrasco, NOT a wash. If they were even players for the last two, one sides wouldnt be moving up 4 or 5 rounds on 2 of his players. Anyway im done in this thread

[Sour Masher]

The record shows... that you are wrong. Im not going to do anything about it, but it is NOT even. Fiers, Fister, wash. Kipnis, Wong, wash. Cain, Hanley, NOT a wash. Cueto, Carrasco, NOT a wash. If they were even players for the last two, one sides wouldnt be moving up 4 or 5 rounds on 2 of his players. Anyway im done in this thread

Kind of an aggressive way to drop the mic on a thread you started and in which folks have posted trying to give you helpful feedback.

[DMT]

Kind of an aggressive way to drop the mic on a thread you started and in which folks have posted trying to give you helpful feedback.

Seriously!

[jamesfredette]

Kind of an aggressive way to drop the mic on a thread you started and in which folks have posted trying to give you helpful feedback.

Cry about it. I stand behind what i said with my REAL name, unlike most of you. For those of you suggesting I should allow ANY trade because its a free league is just stupid. Just because its free doesnt mean that it shouldnt have rules in play to protect competition. Granted, this PARTICULAR trade isnt Trout for Souza, and I should have used a more thorough screening process in hind sight, but its clearly one sided. Thanks for your HELPFUL feedback Masher

[DMT]

Cry about it. I stand behind what i said with my REAL name, unlike most of you. For those of you suggesting I should allow ANY trade because its a free league is just stupid. Just because its free doesnt mean that it shouldnt have rules in play to protect competition. Granted, this PARTICULAR trade isnt Trout for Souza, and I should have used a more thorough screening process in hind sight, but its clearly one sided. Thanks for your HELPFUL feedback Masher

Find somewhere else to troll jerkoff.

[jamesfredette]

Find somewhere else to troll jerkoff.

Blow it ya burnout

[Hornsby]

LOL...well, THAT took an unexpected turn. Alright gents, no harm no foul...let's go about this civilly, you know, like I always do.

Anyway, I'm with the camp of not vetoing trades...it WILL drive you crazy as a commish, and some deals are fairer than you as a commish might think. I also lost a league title to what I was convinced was a lop-sided deal, but as commissioner, I didn't do anything about it, because I shouldn't have. I know both guys were on the up and up, and one valued prospects over established guys. that's the way the deal when down and I lived with it just fine.