ATD 2013 - Planning
View Single Post
12-04-2012, 01:42 AM
Join Date: Aug 2006
Originally Posted by
I agree with your 1st part.
I don't really get the point of the 2nd part at all.
Nobody is going to bother vetoing a trade that affects only picks after 300 or so, so in that sense, there is no point in limiting trades to 3-4 assets or fewer. But I would still rather just ban trades with more than 4 assets going either way to make the draft list faster to update.
The first thing I noticed was that only 5 teams made more than 4 trades. a limit of 4 would have affected only the abusers - which is what we want.
seriously, if we're going to impose a limit, we want to say that 8 is acceptable?
Was there a single person who liked the 3 trade limit in ATD2011 by the end? It caused nothing but complaints and was in some ways worse than not allowing trades at all. How different is a 4 trade limit? If we're allowing trades at all, do we really want to add the added gaminess of "well I could trade up for the player I want now, but I might need to save a trade for later?"
you all are free to vote how you want. But I would vote for either loose restrictions on trades to prevent only the extreme cases or no trades at all, rather than allowing trades, but restricting them so much that you have to be strategic about them.
Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 12-04-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by TheDevilMadeMe