I am totally against curtaillng multi-player deals for the lame reason that it may be possible that someone may get the better of the deal down the road. The fun of the game is pitting our own talent predictions against your opponents' and reaping the rewards when proven correct. Of course, when you are wrong, you sometime must enter into a re-building phase. But, it's all part of the game.

The "threat" of multi-player deals is minimized by the fact that we still only get to keep 27 players from year to year. So, for instance, I just made a deal in one of my leagues where I traded away Magglio Ordonez to another experienced owner for four players. I got Shannon Stewart, Sean Casey, Mike Cuddyer and Dan Wright. On the surface, I killed him in this one because although Ordonez is great, he isn't worth all four of those guys. BUT, he had more players who he wanted to keep than protective spots and if he didn't make some kind of deal, would lose them anyway, whereas, I had a bunch of holes to fill and if I didn't make a deal like this I'd be protecting guys who I really didn't want. It worked for both of us because he ended up with Ordonez and the three guys he now gets to keep and not cut in the deal. My point is that we have to look at the entire situation, not necessarily just the guys in the deal.