Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2015 11:36:58 GMT -5
Just a thought:
Trades cannot be allowed that would render a team unable to field a full roster. This of course would just be for trades that occur AFTER the FA period. I don't know a real life team that would be able to trade their 3B if they did not have another 3B available to play their games.
Just throwing this one out there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2015 18:40:50 GMT -5
Not a bad idea, but I think the new minimums rules have that type of issue covered already.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2015 19:05:31 GMT -5
I agree that the rule change did a great job in creating a "punishment" aspect to tanking. However, we have a TTC group that does a great job, can't they look to see if a trade creates a incomplete roster? If not I will drop it... No worries.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2015 6:57:58 GMT -5
I believe it up to each owner to manage their roster composition as they see fit. There are tough penalties in place for those not achieving minimums or for failing to achieve 50 points. Beyond that I think an owner should be able to do whatever the heck they please as long as they believe it to be in the best interest of their team.
|
|
saltman
Administrator
Posts: 1,161
Favorite Baseball Team: Atlanta Braves
|
Post by saltman on May 6, 2015 9:14:03 GMT -5
i agree
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2015 14:46:55 GMT -5
Fine! I hate all of you. I'm never going to discuss this issue again! On a side note - I'm right. You are all wrong...
|
|