Takin' A Dump

George Carlin doesn't understand that phrase. Why would anyone want to Take a Dump? He thinks it makes more sense to Leave a Dump.

We went ahead and bought a 3 month subscription to Shandler’s Baseball HQ. No one on their staff has any sense of humor. It’s like eating Grape Nuts dry. But we did it because we have to own something to allow me to take a break from tax returns periodically during the long weeks to come. Actually we did it because factoring in the purchase of Rotolab, it only cost another $29 net.

There just isn’t all that much baseball to write about during these weeks before P&C descend on Florida and Arizona. This has been a little of a blog problem for me as well, but I don’t make a living at this, not yet anyway, though I am still hoping a crisp Jackson will show up from Larry Dot Net to purchase an ad for his excess keepers.

Today BBHQ published a short piece on fantasy rules to limit dump trades. I believe teams should have the freedom to fix their team for the following season, and that dump trades are part of the game. I am concerned that some dumpers create a huge effect on the current race that they are no longer a part of, and don’t market their players widely enough. We really ought to do something.

Here is what BBHQ says, along with my take for BABI:

Salary Cap - Perhaps the most common in-season solution is to designate an in-season salary cap and/or floor. For leagues with a standard $260 auction budget, the in-season cap is usually $360-$400. This rule has the benefit of not micro-managing individual trades but, overall, should allow a league to prevent a team from amassing too many high priced players. The drawback, however, is that not all great players are high priced. In theory, a team could have several low priced players at the end of a contract and trading them for low priced keepers could easily allow for the type of unbalanced trade that the rule was put in place to prevent in the first place.

Mr. Leaguer has been pushing this on us for a few years. In theory, I am for it, but I fear its complications. I also know it will never pass. I don’t know how to factor in players picked up on waivers or purchased in FAAB, particularly some BUM with a huge FAAB budget might purchase for a Benji. I suspect this is the only real solution.

Trade Limitations - Other in-season rules include limiting the number of players which could be included in any individual trade, setting time constraints when trades can or cannot be transacted, limiting which teams others can trade with based on position in the standings or any combination of these. While these rules could have an impact on dump trading (though, the level of impact is probably not as great as desired), they also have the adverse effect of potentially limiting "legitimate" trades. For that matter, the in-season salary cap can also have this effect and, for that reason, some leagues look for other alternatives.

I would like to propose two limitations on trades. First, I would limit trades between 2 teams to 7 total players. The odd number allows a trade of someone on a reserve list. I just think that is enough players for someone to get a good keeper and the other team to get some quality. Second, I would allow only 1 trade between any two teams during the baseball season. Make your deal, make it a good one with a limit of 7 total players, and then you are done for this year.

Trade Vetoes - The ultimate trade limitation is the veto. It can be very controversial and often leads to harder feelings than the dump trades themselves. If you are going to look at an option like this, we suggest that the process must involve the support of an overwhelming majority of the owners not involved in the trade.

The Pecklers have always been against this unless it is formally codified and teams must go on record. I believe Mr. Leaguer’s LA league has trade vetoes, and most of the teams will vote based on their own self-interest rather than for fairness. My sense is those guys aren’t friends. For the most part, we are. Many of us socialize outside of BABI (though BABI is never outside of our socializing). Many of my best friends are in BABI, and I wouldn’t like any of them to end up on my permanent Shit List. And Kenny 9 is already going through a divorce. We wouldn’t want him to simultaneously have to get divorced and thrown out on the street by his new wife because he votes against our raping another team.

Punish Losers - If you create a reason not to lose, teams will make a greater effort not to do so. Rules which punish teams that finish at or near the bottom of the standings include decreasing the amount of keepers or teams' salary caps the following season. Still, if teams are not capable of competing through the draft or roster management, inhibiting their ability to improve the following season would seem to perpetuate losing.

Mr. Leaguer has proposed some of this as well. I think the stakes are high enough.

Make Keepers Less Desirable - If dumping teams are not getting much in trade value, they are less likely to give up too much to acquire it. Leagues could implement a rule which increases the salary and/or contract status of acquired players. This would inhibit the 4 for 1 type trades if the '1' becomes less attractive.

Larry Dot Net wants more keepers. That’s because he has a lot of them. We vote no. If anything, we’d vote for fewer keepers. An alternative I would propose is to eliminate extended contracts. Three years is plenty. I’d make everyone an “X” player.

On the other hand, if we have no rules changes, that would be fine by me.