I've avoided commenting on UNM trades for over a year (I think...), but I find the current system very severely flawed and vote to stop it until the system can be corrected.

First suggestions for improving it, then why it needs to be improved or dropped:


1) Before accepting ANY trade for a star player (or highly valuable player this season) on a UNM team a general post offering that player should be made and posted for AT LEAST 2 WEEKS to allow owners on vacation time to also see the post and make their best offer. This post should be made noting that a trade is pending and naming the UNM player(s) involved and that it will be accepted if better offers are not received but should not mention the exact offer or the team making it. The post ONLY needs to be made if you plan to accept the offer. If you are not sure or if you plan to reject, then no post is needed or advised.

2) Trades with UNM teams should NOT be allowed after the trade deadline when those trades can most affect tight pennant races or the playoffs.

3) Young stars should never be traded off a UNM team. Even if you think the trade is very one sided in favor of the UNM team, at least one other person disagreed with you [the guy making the offer...]

4)Round 1 rookie picks should not be traded from UNM teams.

5)Appoint someone to represent each UNM team - this can be a different person for each team or the same person for many teams. But this person should NOT be an owner in the same league as the UNM team. That person then can negotiate trade offers for that UNM team. Once an offer is accepted by both parties then AND ONLY THEN should the offer go to you to evaluate as the arbiter. You should not both negotiate the trade and be the arbiter of the trade.

6)I think it best if you continue to be the arbiter of UNM trades just as you are for all other trades. Doing this by committee or by some brainless computer program is not an improvement. Turning these evaluations over to other people is also not a great idea. I may disagree with your player evaluations (e.g. Jimmy Rollins is STILL more valuable than Juan Uribe!) but YOUR judgement still beats the other options as you see ALL the trade offers made and accepted and have a very good evaluation of player value (more times than not - UNM trades excepted).

I think you generally do a great and necessary job in relationship to most trades but for some reason many of the UNM trades do not fall into that category (necessary or a great job).

I think you are becoming too thin-skinned and not open minded relative to UNM trades. I think you take personal ownership of those trades and are not as subjective as you are with other trades where you are just the arbiter between 2 other owners. I think this is only natural, but I also think it prevents you from honestly assessing how you are doing with UNM trades.

The original statements made justifying UNM trades are no longer followed IMOP. It is hard to see how trading the most YOUNG valuable players in baseball off of UNM teams is justifiable, but it has been done. Pujols being just one example of many. Name your favorite 5 young players and most likely each of them has been traded away by at least one UNM team.

The first UNM trades were generally lopsided in favor of the UNM team (mostly) but that is no longer often true. It seems very arbitrary and almost like it depends on who it is making the trade offer rather than whether the trade is good for the UNM team. Some owners still seem to be required to make trades that favor the UNM team and other managers seem to be able to make trades of questionable benefit to the UNM team. I don't think you MEAN that to be the case, but I think it may BE the case - unconsciously on your part.

I have not made any UNM trade offers so this is not a complaint that I am not treated fai