TB/LAD

[oldmancoffee66]

Sending Mitch Jebb SS PIT to LAD 

Need to release a player to make space and owe LAD from a previous deal.

[MasterShonuff]

Confirm.

We had Jebb rated high on our draft board and missed out on him

[SactoSolon]

Veto.

[tomviolence]

yeah i second this veto. Jebb is worth a pick at the least.

[MasterShonuff]

damn you all savage. so many trades done without the receiving teams sending something back. And yes, I know these deals are for all intense and purposes taking salary but there is ZERO guidelines in our rules for this.
I will be vetoing every trade like this moving forward. Don't care if I'm the only one vetoing.

[Scalious]

I think Ace required PC player dumps needing something back by default. So vetos are irrelevant.

You could dump a 300k player for nothing because you do gain salary clear. Where a PC deal has a minimum value and no salary liability.

TB cuts Jebb, you have to spend 300k at least to win him. You gained an advantage by offering nothing. Even it's trival value. It's illogical to allow.

If it was allowed I'd approve cuz it's not enough to veto over, but it's not allowed.

Have I been allowing PC only dumps? Mea Cupla if I have.

[Scalious]

More I'm thinking about it. This is a nessararry safe guard against collusion. Can't allow getting players for nothing.

Do I think you 2 are? No, and the value in the trade is not noteable but establishing precedent opens the door for it. As you are getting a player by merely favor and not merit. (Other then the merit of being an active GM)

There are a lot of ticky tacky rules here and I'm open to change, but I think aces way of doing this has a lot of value in this Case

There

[oldmancoffee66]

Ok... well I owed him for a concession he made on a previous trade.

I will hold onto Jebb for the moment.

Will announce a release of probably Whitley (IR) or Kieboom (sucks) by end of night