|
Post by Baltimore Orioles on Sept 16, 2017 15:22:22 GMT -5
I understand that people don't want to slow down the trades in this league, but I like that the members can vote if a trade should go through or not. It makes the league more credible in my opinion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2017 20:42:23 GMT -5
I say have to explain
|
|
|
Post by Oakland Athletics on Sept 18, 2017 9:16:22 GMT -5
Chicago White Sox would handle any PIT/OAK trades.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2017 19:34:03 GMT -5
Chicago White Sox would handle any PIT/OAK trades. Commish veto? NO TY I usually like it but considering the standard of trades that's gone down in this league...
|
|
|
Post by Oakland Athletics on Sept 18, 2017 19:51:09 GMT -5
Chicago White Sox would handle any PIT/OAK trades. Commish veto? NO TY I usually like it but considering the standard of trades that's gone down in this league... You do realize there's probably less of a chance a trade gets shutdown with the way we have it now right?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2017 6:22:37 GMT -5
With the veto process we have currently in effect weren't the non-votes counted as in favor of the trade? I know I saw one with more vetoes than in favor and it was passed under that assumption, so if that's the case then leave it like that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2017 9:05:23 GMT -5
I think there needs to be another trade arbitrator. Three is a good number. 2 of 3 approves or disapproves. And it can be done in one day. In the case of the Commish and Grey, the third party would make the call. As for reasoning out a "No" veto...It can always be sent to the arbitrators in hopes of influencing them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2017 9:48:47 GMT -5
Question though who are the arbitrators?
|
|
|
Post by Oakland Athletics on Oct 1, 2017 19:34:55 GMT -5
So from the feedback we have received this seems like the the best proposal at this point:
Keep the same process as last year, but require teams to send an explanation of why they vetoed the trade to the commissioner and co-commisioner at the time they place their vote.
|
|