Okay guys, I think Mike is looking for some help here. It sounded to me Mike, that you are also pressed for time and are being worn down by having to review all trades yourself... correct?

If this is the case, then the posts stating "Keep the status quo" aren't helping here because Mike doesn't really want to. He's looking for a concensus to see how we think it should be handled.

Here's what I think.

1. Each league should ELECT a representative from that league. The term for this representative would be ONE YEAR. Elections would be held in the off season.

2. That representative belongs to a "Trade Board" that would review ALL trades from all leagues. A member can only be voted to the Board ONCE. You cannot represent MORE than one league (i.e. have more than one vote).

3. Trades can only occur when games aren't being played, so all representatives would be required to log in to approve all trades before, say, Monday (isn't the robot supposed to be done on Monday?). That way Managers have two days to re-work rejected trades, manage their roster with newly acquired players.

4. The Board Representative CANNOT vote on trades from his/her own league (conflict of interest).

5. A SIMPLE majority is all that is required to carry a trade. If over half of the 36 board members voting would make the trade, it should carry. If less than half would make it, then there is something wrong with it and further investigation via Mike emailing the owners is required. (A 50% vote would be considered a success trade).

6. After voting closes, Mike can run a small utility to approve and push through all trades approved by the board, reject all trades rejected by the board, and investigate others.

Setting the above up would not be too difficult. In my experience with .php it should be fairly simple (maybe 2-3 weeks to create and implement and test?).

In this manner we have a large pool of independent people viewing each trade.

The only thing I'm waivering on is wether or not a trade should be "naturalized" when the Board Members view it. By this I mean that the offering teams / leagues be removed from view so that the Board members see only players and team records (for draft picks) in the deal. This further removes prejudice from decision making.

HOWEVER

It also removes some visibility as well. A team with two superstar shortstops might be willing to part with one to pick up an avarage closer and an average starter if they feel all they need is two solid starters to make a championship run. If you neutralize the trades, the Board Members would not be able to examine the rosters of the teams to see the full circumstances of the trade.

I'm leaning more towards the latter, but am interesting on other views...

RobG
W9 - Port Huron