Doin' Work GM-A-Team Discussion

[Warriorfan]

I dont have the email is the trade deadline tonight

[Klomp]

give it up dude...the reporter is talking about shocking for the Nets after pressing for Melo for a year and quickly turning around and getting Deron...not Deron being traded.

Deron found out he was traded while watching SportsCenter. No one else saw it coming either.

[Karmaloop]

I dont have the email is the trade deadline tonight

Yes. A little over an hour left.

[SamBone]

Also guys, don't forget the deadline is here in about two and a half hours. So get your trades in. Like before, trades that aren't posted and agreed to by all parties before the deadline aren't counted. That means if the time stamp says 12:01 when the second party accepts the deal, the deal will NOT be approved.

isn't the deadline midnight on Thursday? 2.5 hours would be midnight on Wednesday

[SamBone]

wow...I guess Realgm isn't what it used to be. This hot potato trading like a bunch of kids running a franchise is stupid. Not asking for that many restrictions just things you wouldn't see in real life, and the actual rules the NBA sets lol. But this "let's change all the NBA rules" and make insaine trades that rearrange the face of every franchise in one offseason is a little too much. This is definitely my last time playing in something like this unless someone starts one that at least obeys the official rules of the league.

Edit: One more thing...I don't get why people are acting like it's crazy to have a little realism...isn't that what the Trade Board is all about..fair realistic trades? How is that out of the ordinary here? If people posted half of the things that went down in the game on that board...people would have heart attacks left and right lol.

I have been pushing for a few games for it to be more "realistic" the problem is everyone thinks of things differently. You can only control how you play. Don't worry about others or how they play. Look at my team. I kept the guy I think is Philly's franchise guy (Jrue) and built a young team around him that will be a playoff team now and has a bright future. Exactly the way, I would want the Sixers to build the team. Low payroll and very few moves. That being said, others look at it different and want to be the next Miami and trade for the biggest names they can get, and once they get a big name, try and trade him for a bigger name. Who is to say what "build" process os better? If anything, I think (without looking to much into it) the job ness has done in Charlotte seems pretty amaizing that he has taken a team that everyone (including espn rankings) view as the team with the least upside, and given it proven NBA players that will compete

[spree8]

give it up dude...the reporter is talking about shocking for the Nets after pressing for Melo for a year and quickly turning around and getting Deron...not Deron being traded.

Deron found out he was traded while watching SportsCenter. No one else saw it coming either.

I get your point..the trade itself may have been a little premature.. but all I'm saying is that you can't compare a trade to a star with one foot out the door already to guys coming off years like Rose and Dirk who are being dealt.

I have been pushing for a few games for it to be more "realistic" the problem is everyone thinks of things differently. You can only control how you play. Don't worry about others or how they play. Look at my team. I kept the guy I think is Philly's franchise guy (Jrue) and built a young team around him that will be a playoff team now and has a bright future. Exactly the way, I would want the Sixers to build the team. Low payroll and very few moves. That being said, others look at it different and want to be the next Miami and trade for the biggest names they can get, and once they get a big name, try and trade him for a bigger name. Who is to say what "build" process os better? If anything, I think (without looking to much into it) the job ness has done in Charlotte seems pretty amaizing that he has taken a team that everyone (including espn rankings) view as the team with the least upside, and given it proven NBA players that will compete

Don't give up lol...I understand where you're coming from. I guess the trade tournements I've been involved in in the past spoiled me.

[MadNESS]

Last minute deals?

Bobcats are up to date and listening.

Cantmesswithness8@yahoo.com
bness8888 - aim.... I will respond rapidly

[NBA Champs]

With just 5 minutes left, the Pistons are curious to know if there is any interest in a 1.5 million tpe and Michael Redd. I'd like to replace Redd as my 3rd string SG, if possible. I'm on standby, thanks.

Contact info:

drakevonz - aim
drakevonz@gmail.com

[nikkoewan]

just to add to the discussion, as i suggested before, we SHOULD describe what the market is and how the owner acts and reacts, i'm also very much with the idea of "franchising players".. list of teams that i think have a player to franchise

ATL - Horford
BOS - Rondo or Pierce
MIA - any of the 2
NOH - Paul
ORL - Howard
NJ - Deron
OKC - Durant
MIN - Love
etc...

those teams that don't have a chance to get a franchise changing player can just use the draft to build youth, not necessarily find a franchise player talent, but get young and talented first.

That way, teams are not limited with the amount of trades they make, but they ARE limited with what they can do because of the market and the owner.

[-Kees-]

just to add to the discussion, as i suggested before, we SHOULD describe what the market is and how the owner acts and reacts, i'm also very much with the idea of "franchising players".. list of teams that i think have a player to franchise

ATL - Horford
BOS - Rondo or Pierce
MIA - any of the 2
NOH - Paul
ORL - Howard
NJ - Deron
OKC - Durant
MIN - Love
etc...

those teams that don't have a chance to get a franchise changing player can just use the draft to build youth, not necessarily find a franchise player talent, but get young and talented first.

That way, teams are not limited with the amount of trades they make, but they ARE limited with what they can do because of the market and the owner.

I think what Klomp was saying was that every team choses a "Franchise Player" at the beginning of each game. So each team would have 1 franchise player. The only way you could trade your team's franchise player, is if you got another one back. So there would be no untouchable players in the league, just each teams best player can only be traded for anothers best player.

I, however, have found flaws with the franchise player idea:

-There will be no 'super teams' or even times when teams can have 2 franchise players. I.E. a team will never have Dwight and Dwill on the same team, because they are both franchise players.

-Young teams will run into the same problem. If ATL choses Horford, and IND choses George, there is no way that a team will ever have both, and that kind of limits the game in my mind.

-Some teams (MIA, NYK) have more than 1 superstar. So there will be a franchise type player out there, but can't be directly traded for another player of his level. Like if the Heat chose LeBron, and NYK chose Melo, then Dwade/Bosh/Amare could never be traded for another teams franchise player.


So after considering this a bit, I personally think that it would be best if we dont do it, but thats just me. If we still do it, Im not gonna quit or anything, but I am now against it after thinking abut it for a while.

[mtamasi]

just to add to the discussion, as i suggested before, we SHOULD describe what the market is and how the owner acts and reacts...

i think this is the key. as long as we're clear on how we want the game to go, things like trades and signings would have to follow suit. and we'd all be able to understand a trade/signing being denied because of the guildlines (or whatever) being discussed beforehand.

those teams that don't have a chance to get a franchise changing player can just use the draft to build youth, not necessarily find a franchise player talent, but get young and talented first.

i personally like the idea, but more than half the teams in the league would be in (re)building mode and that would limit what players are available to those teams, and there'd be too much competition for most teams to improve.

[mtamasi]

double post...

[supplyndemand69]

Hey guys I thought i would give my two cents about the upcoming game. For those who are unaware i was apart of the current game in progress but resigned due to the lack of realism.(excessive trades, players being reaquired then traded again,etc) I can see how putting a limit on the amount of trades could turn some people off but i have to agree with it. It seems like some people just trade out of boredom and not from a realistic stand point. When a gm has a vision for the future of their franchise they stick to it. Some of the teams seem to change direction a couple of times. Certain restrictions would maybe force someone to think about the trades they make. I also agree with a list of players that could not be traded. D Rose, Dirk, D wade, etc these are some of the players that wouldnt be traded. I think with some tweeks this game could be realsitic and fun.

[Klomp]

I think what Klomp was saying was that every team choses a "Franchise Player" at the beginning of each game. So each team would have 1 franchise player. The only way you could trade your team's franchise player, is if you got another one back. So there would be no untouchable players in the league, just each teams best player can only be traded for anothers best player.

I, however, have found flaws with the franchise player idea:

-There will be no 'super teams' or even times when teams can have 2 franchise players. I.E. a team will never have Dwight and Dwill on the same team, because they are both franchise players.

-Young teams will run into the same problem. If ATL choses Horford, and IND choses George, there is no way that a team will ever have both, and that kind of limits the game in my mind.

-Some teams (MIA, NYK) have more than 1 superstar. So there will be a franchise type player out there, but can't be directly traded for another player of his level. Like if the Heat chose LeBron, and NYK chose Melo, then Dwade/Bosh/Amare could never be traded for another teams franchise player.


So after considering this a bit, I personally think that it would be best if we dont do it, but thats just me. If we still do it, Im not gonna quit or anything, but I am now against it after thinking abut it for a while.

I think these two parts are related. Also, I would leave open the possibility for someone to change franchise players midseason. For example, if a trade involving Kemba and LeBron took place, Miami doesn't have to leave Kemba as their franchise player when Wade is also on the team.

[NBA Champs]

Hey guys I thought i would give my two cents about the upcoming game. For those who are unaware i was apart of the current game in progress but resigned due to the lack of realism.(excessive trades, players being reaquired then traded again,etc) I can see how putting a limit on the amount of trades could turn some people off but i have to agree with it. It seems like some people just trade out of boredom and not from a realistic stand point. When a gm has a vision for the future of their franchise they stick to it. Some of the teams seem to change direction a couple of times. Certain restrictions would maybe force someone to think about the trades they make. I also agree with a list of players that could not be traded. D Rose, Dirk, D wade, etc these are some of the players that wouldnt be traded. I think with some tweeks this game could be realsitic and fun.

Dude, I don't know how many times I hit you up inquiring about Mickael Pietrus! Haha--all good man.

[supplyndemand69]

Hey guys I thought i would give my two cents about the upcoming game. For those who are unaware i was apart of the current game in progress but resigned due to the lack of realism.(excessive trades, players being reaquired then traded again,etc) I can see how putting a limit on the amount of trades could turn some people off but i have to agree with it. It seems like some people just trade out of boredom and not from a realistic stand point. When a gm has a vision for the future of their franchise they stick to it. Some of the teams seem to change direction a couple of times. Certain restrictions would maybe force someone to think about the trades they make. I also agree with a list of players that could not be traded. D Rose, Dirk, D wade, etc these are some of the players that wouldnt be traded. I think with some tweeks this game could be realsitic and fun.

Dude, I don't know how many times I hit you up inquiring about Mickael Pietrus! Haha--all good man.

Sorry bro i was turned off by how everything was going. I posted that me leaving a while ago..

[NBA Champs]

It's all good man, really.

[NBA Champs]

I have a suggestion and I may be totally alone with this one, but I'm definitely OK with that. How about, for the first 7-10 days of the game..any and all trades are just "pending". Why? Because generally from what I've seen in just the few games I've played, the majority of people who quit this game, do it during that timeframe. So when a team makes any trade, whether good or bad, and decides to quit within that first 7-10 days; we don't have a team sitting there that no one wants to replace and that creates an inconvience for all the other gm's that may want to do a deal with that team. So with the 7-10 days pending, if a gm makes a deal during that period of time and then quits..that trade gets cancelled and the roster goes back to the default roster. That way, when reserves or new parties interested in playing aren't ran away by a roster they don't want to start with due to a "mess" the former gm left for them to take over. Now I know this causes an inconvience for the gm that traded with this team, but look at it this way, wouldn't you rather sacrifice your trade with a team if it created a higher probability of someone taking over that team and therefore allowing you to be able to do business with them in the future? Heck, you might even be able to pull off the same deal again, but that wouldn't be possible if a gm left a mess on a team and no other gm replaced that team for the entire game. Sorry, but that sucks imo. So, a minor sacrifice early in the game for a more fruitful and enjoyable game in the long-run is what I'm getting at.

[-Kees-]

I have a suggestion and I may be totally alone with this one, but I'm definitely OK with that. How about, for the first 7-10 days of the game..any and all trades are just "pending". Why? Because generally from what I've seen in just the few games I've played, the majority of people who quit this game, do it during that timeframe. So when a team makes any trade, whether good or bad, and decides to quit within that first 7-10 days; we don't have a team sitting there that no one wants to replace and that creates an inconvience for all the other gm's that may want to do a deal with that team. So with the 7-10 days pending, if a gm makes a deal during that period of time and then quits..that trade gets cancelled and the roster goes back to the default roster. That way, when reserves or new parties interested in playing aren't ran away by a roster they don't want to start with due to a "mess" the former gm left for them to take over. Now I know this causes an inconvience for the gm that traded with this team, but look at it this way, wouldn't you rather sacrifice your trade with a team if it created a higher probability of someone taking over that team and therefore allowing you to be able to do business with them in the future? Heck, you might even be able to pull off the same deal again, but that wouldn't be possible if a gm left a mess on a team and no other gm replaced that team for the entire game. Sorry, but that sucks imo. So, a minor sacrifice early in the game for a more fruitful and enjoyable game in the long-run is what I'm getting at.

I know what you mean. But what we have also done in the past is even if a trade has gone through, and the GM drops out, the next GM of that team can chose weather or not they want that trade to go through, or if they want a fresh team.

[Blazer50]

I originally suggested limiting the nubmer of Trades, but do see the point that trades are the basis of this game. In addition, I like the Franchise tag that is being discussed and would support that addition. In my opinion, I have seen many teams that have been significantly improved only to trade themselves way beyond their best rosters - may be true of my team! Therefore, I would still suggest a trade limit so more thought goes into each move and encourages 3 way deals. We could use 10 or 12 as the max which still gives everyone lots more moves than you would find in real life.

Some other suggestions - Any trades that one of the parties is unsure about should be pre approved by the commissioner. All other trades are automatically approved to save the commissioner who I assume get overburdened in these games. There are 28 other pairs of eyes looking for any errors in trades. Limit the game to 1 month in duration - draft in a week, trade for 2 - wrap up in the 4th week. Designate times in the draft by position - 45 minutes on the clock and then assign the pick.
Free Agents signings should be posted to the original Free Agent board with the new salary. I have spent hours trying to track down current salaries not on shamsports.

Finally - UPDATE YOUR ROSTERS WITH LINEUPS AND PLAYER SALARIES. The game would be infinately more managable for all players and it's an unrealistic strategy if there is any semblence to the NBA.