WXV Trade Talk

[GoLions]

Also, it seems we at Karen have a very tough decision to make. NY didn't trade us Tex in exchange for Nige, so we have to neg all their trades. BUT, that means we not only don't get Adams, but we're stuck with that spud Cotchin as well.

Decisions, decisions.

[Nige]

The rest of Karen's boys do not endorse the above message.

[Jukes]

Purps should publish lists of who negs trades when they're negged

Maybe then they'll stop being so nitpicky at risk of receiving hate

[DazBurg]

Purps should publish lists of who negs trades when they're negged

Maybe then they'll stop being so nitpicky at risk of receiving hate

jukesy this is why
your not allowed to pay with the big kids mate

[Ringo]

Purps should publish lists of who negs trades when they're negged

Maybe then they'll stop being so nitpicky at risk of receiving hate

jukesy this is why
your not allowed to pay with the big kids mate

These are the rules that we have in existence.  We have to give valid reasons why trades are negged which we do and Purple publishes them in his summaries.  I am probably one of the nit picky ones as I analyse every trade for fairness and do not mind admitting that as I take my vote seriously and will continue to do so. But the bottom line will always be coaches will have differing opinions on trades and values of players.

[Holz]

Can we have some vote or discussion on trading now its over.

1. I would like precedent to be set and for trades to pass unless they are really really unfair. Soo many trades have passed because one team is winning by a little. It should be only terrible trades getting rejected and that should be 2-3 a trade period, not the 13 that went down.

2. voting I do think needs to be taken out of the hands of the people i think. not sure whats the best scenario. I basically pass all trades unless im not sure then ask the same 3-4 people's opinion and unless 3-4 say its really unfair i pass it, if note i talk to the winning coach and ask them to pay more.

[Ringo]

Can we have some vote or discussion on trading now its over.

1. I would like precedent to be set and for trades to pass unless they are really really unfair. Soo many trades have passed because one team is winning by a little. It should be only terrible trades getting rejected and that should be 2-3 a trade period, not the 13 that went down.

2. voting I do think needs to be taken out of the hands of the people i think. not sure whats the best scenario. I basically pass all trades unless im not sure then ask the same 3-4 people's opinion and unless 3-4 say its really unfair i pass it, if note i talk to the winning coach and ask them to pay more.

Fair comments Holz. I will give an example and this trade passed but only two people voted against it and it was between 2 teams. One team was losing 120ppg and the other team gained that many.  In my opinion that was reason for unfairness even taking ages into consideration so you can see the different views on fairness as well. 

[RaisyDaisy]

I like the idea of all teams voting on 4 coaches to join Purps to make up the voting committee

The 4 coaches would vote on every trade (and discuss when necessary), and in the event of a 2-2 deadlock Purps is the decider

We all have a good idea about how each coach in Worlds votes on and reviews trades - so we should be able to nominate the 4 coaches that we think will give the most fair assessments without being too lenient or too stringent

In addition to this, some sort of guideline/bible could be established outlining what the committee is looking for when reviewing each trade. PPG, Age, Potential, Postion etc etc

With a transparent guideline in place, and a set coaching committee I think this would make things much better and eliminate close to all problems we have seen previously

[Ricochet]

Can't set guidelines, each player/pick has too many attributes that distinguish their value.

Don't mind the trade committee idea



Also i wouldn't mind chucking up the idea that trades are voted on a little earlier than weekly. Sometimes we were waiting 10-12 days before knowing the results of trades and it can hold up other talks

[Nige]

I do agree we need to be a tad stricter on the deadline to get votes in.

That committee idea isn't bad actually, but it would definitely have to be coaches within Worlds and not an external one like BXVs has.

[Holz]

Can't set guidelines, each player/pick has too many attributes that distinguish their value.

Don't mind the trade committee idea



Also i wouldn't mind chucking up the idea that trades are voted on a little earlier than weekly. Sometimes we were waiting 10-12 days before knowing the results of trades and it can hold up other talks

If we have 3-4 coaches voting it will go much faster.

the snails from Paris, probably shouldn't be on the panel :P

[Nige]

Actually, if the committee was to happen, I think I'd rather Purps picks his people instead (if he's happy to) rather than it being a vote from all coaches. Just like the voting on trades, there's a bit too much potential for bias, popularity etc.

[Purple 77]

Yeah trade committee could work; but I still guarantee you there will be a lot of complaining.

I don't necessarily have to be on it you know :P if you guys feel like I don't deserve to be on it, I'll take no offence.

But yeah. Like the discussion about alternative trade vote processes! Keep it going, get the ideas out there, and we'll have a vote probably after drafting  :)

[RaisyDaisy]

Can't set guidelines, each player/pick has too many attributes that distinguish their value.

Yeah it's not so much to say "X = Y" and if you're giving up X you have to receive Y. It's more just outlining to sort of things the committee takes into consideration and looks at when reviewing trades

Things like age, PPG etc are pretty straight forward, but something like evenness of the comp which is is one thing that gets thrown up from time to time is something that clarity could be provided around, because some people take that into account and some don't so that's a good example of something that needs clarification

It would be quite high level to be honest, and not in depth at all because of the reasons you mentioned

[Ricochet]

Just on this

Also i wouldn't mind chucking up the idea that trades are voted on a little earlier than weekly. Sometimes we were waiting 10-12 days before knowing the results of trades and it can hold up other talks

I meant that instead of votes going out every Sunday, maybe the committee could vote on them every 3 days or whenever.

Even if the committee is quicker than everyone else at the moment, its still 7 days + 1-2 days