Sign and Trade Clarifications

dejota · (This post was last modified: 03-24-2011, 06:54 PM by dejota.)

From now on the 1 year rule is mandatory. You simply cannot trade a player during the 1st year of a multi-year deal. Players signed to 1 year deals may only be traded at the deadline and may still be subject to a veto if the mods determine the player was signed with solely the intent to trade him at the deadline. Players on a 1 year deal may only be dealt if the following 3 circumstances are met:

-The player being traded must be on the major league roster in a non-reserve role (Bench for hitters, Middle/Long relief for bullpen)
-The player being traded must have been productive (subject to mods interpretation of productive)
-The team trading the player has fallen out of contention

That way, if you sign a player and "he just not working out as anticipated" you don't have a choice but to cut him a la Luis Castillo.

GMs trading or acquiring a player that may be considered a sign and trade must note it in the trade submission. If they do not and any of the mods do it's considered a sign and trade it will result in an automatic veto.

Sign and Trade rulings NEVER SET PRECEDENT. In other words, every potential sign and trade is judged purely in a vacuum. I think mods are meant to judge and interpret rules, not make them. If they're setting a precedent every time they rule on a sign and trade they're the lawmaker and the judge. That's not right for them or other GMs.

Mods reserve the right to approve any sign and trade they deem appropriate at any time. However, if they veto under the sign and trade policy I reserve the right to punish your team under the Don't Be An Ass rule.

GENERALLY, punishment will be limited to vetoing the deal and agents being much more difficult and unwilling to sign long-term deals. Teams who regularly trade players shortly after giving them a long term deal will now have a noticeably more difficult time with the agents, especially if the deal included a NTC.

Lastly, any player on a one year deal who passes through waivers may also be traded. Multi-year deals do not qualify until the final year of the contract under this exception.
Feedback is appreciated.

***mattynokes*** · 03-24-2011, 05:38 PM

I like the rules for sign and trades, but I think players signed to one year deals should be able to be traded before the deadline. Many teams want to make deals to make a run before the deadline and it's very realistic to see a player, who was signed in the off-season, to be dealt at an earlier time. Russell Branyan is a good example of a player traded well before the deadline after signing a one year deal. I'd say something between Sim 4 to Sim 6 would be better.

dejota · (This post was last modified: 03-24-2011, 06:56 PM by dejota.)

I was going to write about how citing one example and passing it of as logic is happening far too frequently and why it's not important. But frankly, if you can't see that exceptions are no justification for changing the rules then I'm wasting my time before even starting.

So instead, I'll just clamp down a bit so your exception still fits but the spirit of the guidelines remain.

dejota · 03-24-2011, 06:55 PM

Updated.

psbaseballfan27 · 03-24-2011, 07:59 PM

I'm disappointed on all parties here and I guess I have the floor. I think Dj you are very annoyed at the sea trade and made a decision based apon that trade. I think the mods also forced your hand on this one. The mods didnt want to hear complaints about vetoing and that could of been a factor in their decision to approve. I blame seattle for doing this trade as now other gm's are hurt by this action. I think were headed to a point where every signed player is not allowed to be moved. This trend was started by the sign and trade rule, now its blocked trades til the end of one year. In a season or two will see players traded after one year of a contract and they'll be another rule about it. I'm not going to argue anymore because I dont have the time or interest to care.

rockybull · 03-24-2011, 08:12 PM

I think the agents should eat Seattle alive for a few years until he has proven to learn his lesson. You won't even need these rules if you get BOTH agents to be extremely hard on the teams that do stuff like this, I guarantee you those damn GM's will wise up or be in the cellar.

dejota · (This post was last modified: 03-24-2011, 08:18 PM by dejota.)

What I'm not annoyed with: The Mods, they're doing an incredible job that's pretty much thankless.

What I'm annoyed with:
-Feeling obligated to make rules
-Being made out to be a monarch for asking/making/forcing you guys to play ball when I've avoided doing so for 8 seasons
-Having to justify every real-life transaction ever made, usually out of context or merely an exception
-Having my points constantly taken out of context
-GMs abusing BBM/FCM rules to get out of stupid deals
-GMs giving out stupid deals
-GMs giving out 3yr deals for unproven/injured commodities
-GMs outbidding each other by pennies because they've made so many other stupid deals 100K is suddenly relevant
-GMs thinking contracts "not working out as planned" as an excuse for bailing on said deals a year or two later
-The complete disregard of the seriousness of ANY and EVERY multi-year deal. If you're trying to forecast more than a year down the road for anything but a prospect or superstar YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG
-GMs only being concerned about the rules AFTER they've broken or bent them. You should be doing it the opposite way. You should hesitate going forward if there's a shadow of a doubt to the legitimacy of your actions
-GMs claiming the agent feature is broken ONLY when they're not getting their way

Scott · 03-24-2011, 08:51 PM

(03-24-2011, 08:12 PM)rockybull Wrote: I think the agents should eat Seattle alive for a few years until he has proven to learn his lesson. You won't even need these rules if you get BOTH agents to be extremely hard on the teams that do stuff like this, I guarantee you those damn GM's will wise up or be in the cellar.

Excuse me??? Worry about your own team

psbaseballfan27 · 03-24-2011, 09:01 PM

Dj let me rebuttle i'm not trying to make you out as a monarch. I'm sorry if my comments came out to sound that way. I just want to make that point that out here.

rockybull · (This post was last modified: 03-24-2011, 10:18 PM by rockybull.)

(03-24-2011, 08:51 PM)Scott Wrote:
(03-24-2011, 08:12 PM)rockybull Wrote: I think the agents should eat Seattle alive for a few years until he has proven to learn his lesson. You won't even need these rules if you get BOTH agents to be extremely hard on the teams that do stuff like this, I guarantee you those damn GM's will wise up or be in the cellar.

Excuse me??? Worry about your own team

hey I worry about what I want to when your stupid resigning and then trading of Kimbrel is a big deal in the league and basically made this clarification thread because of YOU. You were the moron who gave him that deal then turns around and trades him. I sure hope the agents clean you up for many years when dealing with you, because if I were a player I would not ever sign a longterm deal to play for you, because of this Kimbrel bullcrap. You showed absolutely no loyalty to Kimbrel, so why should a player show any kind of loyalty to you? Not sure if agents will do anything, doesn't sound like they will, but they sure should.