RFP Trades 2014 (Post accepted trades here)

Should Trades be Allowed in the RFP?


  • Total voters
    21

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,977
Yes, but I'd like some clarification.
 
Is this just player for player trades? Or are we allowing draft picks to be dealt?
 
I worry about picks for two reasons: 1 is I don't want to be responsible for keeping track of picks being dealt left and right. I'm sure it can be done, but I don't want to keep track of all of that. 2 is I worry that we'll have some Ted Stepiens who will deal all of their picks to try to win now and then we'll lose interest from these owners when they don't have any picks to build their team in future years. 
 

Eck'sSneakyCheese

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2011
10,515
NH
ElcaballitoMVP said:
Yes, but I'd like some clarification.
 
Is this just player for player trades? Or are we allowing draft picks to be dealt?
 
I worry about picks for two reasons: 1 is I don't want to be responsible for keeping track of picks being dealt left and right. I'm sure it can be done, but I don't want to keep track of all of that. 2 is I worry that we'll have some Ted Stepiens who will deal all of their picks to try to win now and then we'll lose interest from these owners when they don't have any picks to build their team in future years. 
 
I would probably err on the side of player(s) for player(s.) I agree that dealing with picks would be too frustrating and some owners might be inclined to blow their entire draft on a GFIN approach.
 

Phragle

wild card bitches
SoSH Member
Jan 1, 2009
13,154
Carmine's closet
Yes if it's done right. I think picks have to be involved somehow. There's a reason trades involve picks IRL. We also probably need trade approval by the commish or veto ability by the GMs, or both. 
 

wibi

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,956
I'm good with trades.  Optimally I'd like to see the commissioner group (assuming we are still going that route) provide a judgement or setup some small group of 3 to 5 owners who rule on the trade for fairness.  Also agree with the no picks  trading for the reasons stated above
 

Dollar

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2006
11,478
I voted 'no' above, but that's what happens when I don't take much time to think about things.  With the right system in place (commissioner group approval, no trading of picks), I'd be open to the idea.
 

Eck'sSneakyCheese

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2011
10,515
NH
Well, so far it looks like a resounding yes. I suppose we can get the intricacies worked out in this thread as well.
 

mascho

Kane is Able
SoSH Member
Nov 30, 2007
14,952
Silver Spring, Maryland
One thing to consider is that we should eliminate three-team trades.  If we are going to use the Group of Five to rule on proposed trades, I can envision a scenario where three Owners/Commissioners enter into a three team deal and either ram through the deal if allowed to vote, or if they recuse themselves the two remaining owners vote differently resulting in a tie.  
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,717
Philadelphia
ElcaballitoMVP said:
Yes, but I'd like some clarification.
 
Is this just player for player trades? Or are we allowing draft picks to be dealt?
 
I worry about picks for two reasons: 1 is I don't want to be responsible for keeping track of picks being dealt left and right. I'm sure it can be done, but I don't want to keep track of all of that. 2 is I worry that we'll have some Ted Stepiens who will deal all of their picks to try to win now and then we'll lose interest from these owners when they don't have any picks to build their team in future years. 
 
I have the same Stepien related worries about draft pick trades.  What if we said that you could only trade picks from the next draft (ie, 2015 for this year) and that you couldn't trade more than two of your first five picks?  This way teams would have the ability to make deals but Stepien potential would be curtailed.
 

Eck'sSneakyCheese

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2011
10,515
NH
When should the trading period start? I'm guessing immediately.
 
Player(s) for player(s) should be proposed through a pm. If accepted the one who proposed the trade should then post it here I guess. (I'll change the title.)
 
People with access to the Google Doc can change the players after the committee votes on the trade and approves.
 
Only two teams can trade at a time. 
 
All trades should be equal in quantity so that rosters remain even.
 
I'll propose that the trade deadline coincides with the RL one.
 
People seem to be iffy on the picks so unless we can come to some sort of agreement I say we don't include picks, at least this year, to see how this trading period goes.
 
Any other questions or comments please feel free to speak up.
 

JerBear

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 11, 2006
1,590
Leeds, ME
Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
When should the trading period start? I'm guessing immediately.
 
Player(s) for player(s) should be proposed through a pm. If accepted the one who proposed the trade should then post it here I guess. (I'll change the title.)
 
People with access to the Google Doc can change the players after the committee votes on the trade and approves.
 
Only two teams can trade at a time. 
 
All trades should be equal in quantity so that rosters remain even.
 
I'll propose that the trade deadline coincides with the RL one.
 
People seem to be iffy on the picks so unless we can come to some sort of agreement I say we don't include picks, at least this year, to see how this trading period goes.
 
Any other questions or comments please feel free to speak up.
I think trading period should be somewhat limited.  I don't think the owners are in this for a 52 weeks of the year thing.  We discussed doing the supplemental draft in the season and people were down on that.  I know trades are a "as much as you want" type thing but I'd rather err on the conservative side to start.  I also think player-only, 2-team, numbers even trades are a good stepping off point and we make changes after we see how they go.
 

Phragle

wild card bitches
SoSH Member
Jan 1, 2009
13,154
Carmine's closet
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
 
I have the same Stepien related worries about draft pick trades.  What if we said that you could only trade picks from the next draft (ie, 2015 for this year) and that you couldn't trade more than two of your first five picks?  This way teams would have the ability to make deals but Stepien potential would be curtailed.
 
This sounds good to me.
 
Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
When should the trading period start? I'm guessing immediately.
 
Player(s) for player(s) should be proposed through a pm. 
 
PMing people could be a lot of work.
 
JerBear said:
I think trading period should be somewhat limited.  I don't think the owners are in this for a 52 weeks of the year thing.  We discussed doing the supplemental draft in the season and people were down on that.  I know trades are a "as much as you want" type thing but I'd rather err on the conservative side to start.  I also think player-only, 2-team, numbers even trades are a good stepping off point and we make changes after we see how they go.
 
I mostly agree but I think picks have to be involved in some way. 
 

Old Fart Tree

the maven of meat
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2001
14,382
Boulder, CO
We are looking to move our surplus of D-Line talent, possibly for secondary help or linebackers more wide receivers.
 

Eck'sSneakyCheese

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2011
10,515
NH
phragle said:
 
This sounds good to me.
 
 
PMing people could be a lot of work.
 
 
I mostly agree but I think picks have to be involved in some way. 
 
If you want picks involved, throw out a plan with details. Can't hurt?
 
Not sure how else to make trade proposals not clutter the thread aside from PMing. We don't need a million posts in here asking this guy for this guy? No, then how about this...
 

Phragle

wild card bitches
SoSH Member
Jan 1, 2009
13,154
Carmine's closet
Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
If you want picks involved, throw out a plan with details. Can't hurt?
 
I think what MMS suggested is fine. No picks more than a year away and no more than two picks in the top five rounds.
 
Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Not sure how else to make trade proposals not clutter the thread aside from PMing. We don't need a million posts in here asking this guy for this guy? No, then how about this...
Let's not worry about clutter. If someone is available I want to know about it.
 

Eck'sSneakyCheese

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2011
10,515
NH
phragle said:
 
I think what MMS suggested is fine. No picks more than a year away and no more than two picks in the top five rounds.
 
But if you're ok with rosters not expanding how many rounds do you expect there to be next year?
 
 
phragle said:
 
Let's not worry about clutter. If someone is available I want to know about it.
 
Availability I understand posting here, but trade proposals would be ridiculous.
 

Eck'sSneakyCheese

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2011
10,515
NH
I've PM'd WNW twice about a possible trade which he's read and I've had no response. I can't fucking stand when people do that shit. A simple no would suffice.

If he's not interested in continuing with this exercise then new ownership should be put in place.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
9,087
Philly
Have a need for a center. I can offer you hookers, blow, green, herb, edit: oh wait, that's Johnny Football, and linebacker/secondary help. PM me if you have any sort of starting caliber center available.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
9,087
Philly
121... I have no depth at G or C and frankly I don't have a passable starting C as Stork's ETA will be next year (hopefully). I like both my guards but I realize Rinehart is inferior to Asamoah. I want to look at the possibility of swapping depth at LB or secondary for, again, a C or a G/C.
 
Edit: As always KFP is going to need to approve. This is just putting in some DD to see what offers exist.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
SMU_Sox said:
121... I have no depth at G or C and frankly I don't have a passable starting C as Stork's ETA will be next year (hopefully). I like both my guards but I realize Rinehart is inferior to Asamoah. I want to look at the possibility of swapping depth at LB or secondary for, again, a C or a G/C.
 
Edit: As always KFP is going to need to approve. This is just putting in some DD to see what offers exist.
 
Sweezy, Adams or Ricky Wagner can be had for a linebacker. Any linebacker. None of these guys are good but they all seem to have starting jobs so someone other than their mother likes them.
 

RhaegarTharen

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2005
2,769
Wilmington, MA
With Chris Clemons apparently a cap casualty in Houston, I'm in the market for a new FS.  I'd be willing to potentially move some D-Line in return.