My Status.

Discussions for the Mark Fidrych League.

Moderator: carlyaz

blumer5
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 8:40 pm

My Status.

Post by blumer5 »

"IMPORTANT: Please remember that not all trades are equal, and not all inequal trades should be overturned. A trade should only be overturned if there is bad faith on the part of one or both of the teams involved. If both teams get something they need out of the trade and neither party is taking advantage of an unaware trading partner, the trade should stand. Overturning a trade may not be used as a strategic option."

I wont be rebuilding in this league. Once my run is complete, I will be gone.
daytonjake
Posts: 558
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 2:50 pm

Re: My Status.

Post by daytonjake »

Why not trade Colorado a viable prospect, like Perring, for Walsh? I think the problem was that Colorado is rebuilding and the trade did nothing for them.

This is just a suggestion, Blumer. I do not want to open up an argument or discussion about the original trade itself. Admin doesn't want that. Just a thought to see if you'll change your mind and stay in the league, if you can rework a Walsh trade for prospects or picks to Colorado.
blumer5
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 8:40 pm

Re: My Status.

Post by blumer5 »

I don't mind adding stuff to the trade at all. I also don't mind discussing trades, as this is just a game and I am not going to get bent out of shape and think people can disagree and still be respectful.

That being said, my opinion, and the rules state that unless its collusion (bad faith) a trade shouldnt be overturned. Just because you (not you specifically, just the general you) dont like the trade, or think its unfair, doesnt mean a trade should be reversed. I dislike any situation where another owner thinks they can impose their idea of fairness onto my team. Trade fell within the rules of the league, and i disagree with the reversal. So I won't stay in a league that something like this has happened, to anyone. I have left other leagues that have reversed trades that I was not apart of.
blumer5
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 8:40 pm

Re: My Status.

Post by blumer5 »

daytonjake wrote: Fri Mar 22, 2019 12:39 pm Why not trade Colorado a viable prospect, like Perring, for Walsh? I think the problem was that Colorado is rebuilding and the trade did nothing for them.
This is what I mean, you are determining what another owner puts value on. You said it did nothing for him, but if you read his reasoning for proposing this trade to me, was he valued the mentoring that he received in return.

I have no problem with you thinking I got a deal, a steal or whatever. But everyone is not going to value things the same way as another person, and that is ok, and they should be able to manage their team as they see fit, they paid the money for it.

Again, I am not angry or anything. I have had fun with this league and if someone were to ask me about it, I would recommend this league, as long as they were ok with this type of situation.
Bugz
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 8:26 pm

Re: My Status.

Post by Bugz »

As we have been asked not to discuss the specifics of this trade, I won't but I will comment on the principle of trade disputes as that seems to frame not only this thread but blumer's rationale for leaving. As a league, it is important to acknowledge.

Although everyone has the right to value things differently, the overturn rule should be seen not only about preventing explicit collusion but also to prevent (intentional or not) exploitation of new players. How players are valued by someone who hasn't learned how to value players should be no excuse to profit at their expense (and I am speaking generally here, about past and future trades that we should see this system as a defense of).
ptech
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:14 pm

Re: My Status.

Post by ptech »

Bugz wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 7:42 am As we have been asked not to discuss the specifics of this trade, I won't but I will comment on the principle of trade disputes as that seems to frame not only this thread but blumer's rationale for leaving. As a league, it is important to acknowledge.

Although everyone has the right to value things differently, the overturn rule should be seen not only about preventing explicit collusion but also to prevent (intentional or not) exploitation of new players. How players are valued by someone who hasn't learned how to value players should be no excuse to profit at their expense (and I am speaking generally here, about past and future trades that we should see this system as a defense of).
Here's the whole text of the trade reporting page:

"You are filing an abuse report against a recent trade. Abuse reports may only be filed against trades completed within the last 96 hours.
Abuse reports against trades are not part of the game simulation. They are an appeal to the Admin, outside of the game, that one or both of the owners involved in the trade are cheating or dealing in bad faith.

IMPORTANT: Please remember that not all trades are equal, and not all inequal trades are abuse. A trade should only be reported as abusive if:

You believe both teams are being controlled by the same owner;
You believe an experienced owner is taking advantage of an inexperienced owner;
You believe a departing team is giving away talent for almost nothing in return;
Some other collusion is taking place to make one team better at the expense of another team.
If both teams get something they need out of the trade and neither party is taking advantage of an unaware trading partner, the trade is not abusive and should not be reported as such. Reporting a trade as abusive may not be used as a strategic option.
IMPORTANT: If your league allows CP trades, please check the CP trade thread in your league's forum to make sure CP's aren't involved in this trade, as many apparently abusive trades either include CP's or are returning a player after a CP trade. This is almost always the case when one or two minor leaguers are being traded for apparently nothing in return.

You will be recorded as the initiator of this abuse report. Although Admin does not review all abuse reports, Admin reserves the right to review any abuse reports, and cancel those that are not actually abusive. Owners found to be abusing the trade abuse reporting process may lose their ability to report trade abuse."


...and the pertinent line within...

You believe an experienced owner is taking advantage of an inexperienced owner

I gotta say, from my standpoint, I can imagine that this was the rationale for the votes to overturn. I agree with Bugz. It looks like the option was used properly by the league.

Exploitation doesn't need to be intentional or malicious, but It should be something that the MFL has the right to police.
CJefcoat
Posts: 1002
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:23 pm
Location: Your Mom

Re: My Status.

Post by CJefcoat »

Just wanted to chime in here and reiterate at no point in this deal did I feel it unfair. I proposed the trade in an attempt to gain some mentor value for some of the younger players. I agree that I should have gained at least a prospect or a pick but as this part of the guideline states...

“If both teams get something they need out of the trade and neither party is taking advantage of an unaware trading partner, the trade is not abusive and should not be reported as such“.

Thats the presumption I was operating under.

I consider the matter closed and have moved on, I just wanted to reiterate my position.

Thanks,
Craig
blumer5
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 8:40 pm

Re: My Status.

Post by blumer5 »

ptech wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:21 pm
Bugz wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 7:42 am As we have been asked not to discuss the specifics of this trade, I won't but I will comment on the principle of trade disputes as that seems to frame not only this thread but blumer's rationale for leaving. As a league, it is important to acknowledge.

Although everyone has the right to value things differently, the overturn rule should be seen not only about preventing explicit collusion but also to prevent (intentional or not) exploitation of new players. How players are valued by someone who hasn't learned how to value players should be no excuse to profit at their expense (and I am speaking generally here, about past and future trades that we should see this system as a defense of).
Here's the whole text of the trade reporting page:

"You are filing an abuse report against a recent trade. Abuse reports may only be filed against trades completed within the last 96 hours.
Abuse reports against trades are not part of the game simulation. They are an appeal to the Admin, outside of the game, that one or both of the owners involved in the trade are cheating or dealing in bad faith.

IMPORTANT: Please remember that not all trades are equal, and not all inequal trades are abuse. A trade should only be reported as abusive if:

You believe both teams are being controlled by the same owner;
You believe an experienced owner is taking advantage of an inexperienced owner;
You believe a departing team is giving away talent for almost nothing in return;
Some other collusion is taking place to make one team better at the expense of another team.
If both teams get something they need out of the trade and neither party is taking advantage of an unaware trading partner, the trade is not abusive and should not be reported as such. Reporting a trade as abusive may not be used as a strategic option.
IMPORTANT: If your league allows CP trades, please check the CP trade thread in your league's forum to make sure CP's aren't involved in this trade, as many apparently abusive trades either include CP's or are returning a player after a CP trade. This is almost always the case when one or two minor leaguers are being traded for apparently nothing in return.

You will be recorded as the initiator of this abuse report. Although Admin does not review all abuse reports, Admin reserves the right to review any abuse reports, and cancel those that are not actually abusive. Owners found to be abusing the trade abuse reporting process may lose their ability to report trade abuse."


...and the pertinent line within...

You believe an experienced owner is taking advantage of an inexperienced owner

I gotta say, from my standpoint, I can imagine that this was the rationale for the votes to overturn. I agree with Bugz. It looks like the option was used properly by the league.

Exploitation doesn't need to be intentional or malicious, but It should be something that the MFL has the right to police.
you know, I can honestly say i didnt see that part you underlined. I guess its been so long since i have been in a league to vote on a trade that I didnt notice it.

Is the guy i traded with new?

Well i just looked and yeah, this is his second season, so I can see y'all reasoning for voting against the trade. Doesnt really change my stance.
ptech
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:14 pm

Re: My Status.

Post by ptech »

Fair enough man. And I certainly wasn’t trying to call you out or give you a hard time.
Bugz
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 8:26 pm

Re: My Status.

Post by Bugz »

Happy we can move on, and hope you'll stick around blumer
Post Reply

Return to “Mark Fidrych League”