Discuss 'conditional draft pick' trades.

[Cringer]

from my post in the finalized Pitt-Hou trade.

Conditional picks will be allowed, but it MUST be like this. Player A for Pick B, unless 'something' happens then it is Pick C.

I will make the trade using the lower pick. It is then the responsibility of the owner(s) to notify me once the condition of changing that trade has been met. You will need to tell me via PM or email, AND bump the thread of the finalized and confirned trade. I can then trade the draft picks in order to meet the trade agreement.

This will only be allowed with cases involving draft pick placement such as this, if the team picks in the top 20 of a round then we trade for Round 6, of in the bottom 12 then it is a 5th round pick. We will talk about if we want to open up the can of worms of having conditional draft picks that are based on player performance, player playing time, or anything else.

[Suicane]

I say as long as you, as the commish, are ok with the extra workload that i'm all for it. But I could see where having 10-15 conditional trades a year could be a big burden.

[Cringer]

let me add one thing. one conditional draft pick per trade, i forgot that.

Suica(i)ne, I don't see it as a big deal. Going in to swap two picks is fast work, and I would be surprised if these deals were done all that often

[MrBigglesworth]

Just so I'm clear on this, this thread is for discussing whether we will also allow conditionals for stats, right?

If so, I think as long as it is the individual's responsibility to keep track of his own trades. Buyer beware, so to speak. In other words, it isn't Cringer's job to make sure you have the right pick, it's yours.

[Cringer]

that is what the thread is pretty much for yeah. the whole topuc overall and that is a big part....

[roadrash]

Only thing that I ask is that the condition is quantifiable. Meaning, we don't want to see, if the the player gets injured, the player ends up with a cold but still plays, is he actually injured?

Instead, the condition should be, If the player starts or plays in 12 of the next 13 games.

Big difference between starts and plays as well. We just have to make sure their specific.

As far as stats go, no problems here. If player X reaches 1200 yards rushing for the season, then the 2nd round pick becomes a 1st round pick. Now if an owner sits the guy to avoid the stat, then that owner will be shot. This wil cut down on second time offenders.

[sovstar]

I don't like trades based on individual performance or stats one bit. I don't see any argument for allowing them and they could cause some pretty large problems.

[Cringer]

I don't like trades based on individual performance or stats one bit. I don't see any argument for allowing them and they could cause some pretty large problems.

This is pretty much how I feel, but wanted to get some other opinions. I see the big problem in players being benched to avoid giving up more for him, and that would just piss guys off at each other.

And roadrash, shooting them may be taking it a little too far.

[roadrash]

I don't like trades based on individual performance or stats one bit. I don't see any argument for allowing them and they could cause some pretty large problems.

This is pretty much how I feel, but wanted to get some other opinions. I see the big problem in players being benched to avoid giving up more for him, and that would just piss guys off at each other.

And roadrash, shooting them may be taking it a little too far.

I don't think it will be a problem, really. Let's say that in week 16, Player X has 1450 yards. That's 96.6 yards per game. Now let's say the condition is 2nd, changed to a first if player x reaches the 1500 mark.

Now the owner of player x says, well I don't want to play player x in week 17 for one of two reasons: 1) owner x is in the playoffs and doesn't want to risk player x getting injured or 2) owner x doesn't really want to pay the first round pick.

Well piece of cake. player x averages 96.6 yards per game, add that to the 1450 and he would have reasonably hit the goal. And therefore owner x has to give up his #1. How if owner x has no hope in the playoffs and sits the player to just avoid the payout. then we shoot him, errr, how about slap a fine of whatever was already given up. So instead of losign the first because of the condition and getting the seoncd back, he loses both.

I like the idea of conditional picks. For instance, I gave up a 5th and a 7th last year for a MLB who ended up getting beat out for the starting job, and retiring after the year. If I had set a condition of playing in say 6 games out of 10 left, and he missed it, the deal would have changed to a 6th and 7th. then I wouldn't have gotten burned so bad.

And with conditions, I'll monitor my former players more to see how they are doing.

[sovstar]

I don't think it will be a problem, really. Let's say that in week 16, Player X has 1450 yards. That's 96.6 yards per game. Now let's say the condition is 2nd, changed to a first if player x reaches the 1500 mark.

Now the owner of player x says, well I don't want to play player x in week 17 for one of two reasons: 1) owner x is in the playoffs and doesn't want to risk player x getting injured or 2) owner x doesn't really want to pay the first round pick.

Well piece of cake. player x averages 96.6 yards per game, add that to the 1450 and he would have reasonably hit the goal. And therefore owner x has to give up his #1. How if owner x has no hope in the playoffs and sits the player to just avoid the payout. then we shoot him, errr, how about slap a fine of whatever was already given up. So instead of losign the first because of the condition and getting the seoncd back, he loses both.

I like the idea of conditional picks. For instance, I gave up a 5th and a 7th last year for a MLB who ended up getting beat out for the starting job, and retiring after the year. If I had set a condition of playing in say 6 games out of 10 left, and he missed it, the deal would have changed to a 6th and 7th. then I wouldn't have gotten burned so bad.

And with conditions, I'll monitor my former players more to see how they are doing.

There's my argument.

[MrBigglesworth]

I can see the point about it creating problems (I still think buyer beware, be prepared to be screwed), but what about factors that would be out of the person's control? Like retiring at the end of the season, or being listed as 'out' for more than half the season?

[JesterBlaze]

I haven't given this a whole lot of thought yet but I'm currently against conditional trades. Performanced based conditions the most, but also others.




For one thing, Cringer will probably now have to hire outside contracters to change the name of the trades forum to "Semi-Finalized Trades" and the financial repercussions of such willy-nilly spending will ripple throughout the IFL. :P