So if Team A signs Player A for $5M, then trades him him Team B for Prospect B, that is acceptable. But if Team A trades $5M to Team B for Prospect B, who then signs Player A for $5M, that is not acceptable.

Yeah....I don't think we're talking about the same thing...because I don't think either of those situations is what I am saying. Again. I don't think. I'm not sure because I'm having trouble following the math problem...

What else are you going to use cash for?

The only thing in HBD that has purely objective value is cash. And every team starts out with the same amount. Any trade involving cash, therefore, inherently leads objectively to a competitive advantage/disadvantage.

I am a noob, and am interested in this discussion. I believe that trading cash for prospects is part of the game, and don't understand the arguement against it.Maybe I am wrong, and look forward to hearing opinions, but really, everyone starts with the same. If I have saved my money, and want to use it by buying a prospect, what is wrong with that????

Quote: Originally posted by examinerebb on 9/09/2009The only thing in HBD that has purely objective value is cash.  And every team starts out with the same amount.  Any trade involving cash, therefore, inherently leads objectively to a competitive advantage/disadvantage.

I can't buy this premise. The value of cash is determined by whatever context and ***ignment each owner places on it. Teams do start out with the same amount of cash each year, but not the same amount in ***ets.

And herein is why the debate keeps coming up and why it is happening again - this time in a world that both Trop and I are in. It's a debate I think we're trying to keep civil.

A competitive advantage already inherently exists in every world because ***ets are already not distributed equally. But, rather than going into the detail again here, there are many threads on this topic and it's going to be hard to persuade either "side" of the debate to change their positions. There are reasonable merits to each side in my view.

Ok, this line here got me thinking:

"...understanding of the concept that talent and cash are the currency in real baseball as well as HBD. "

Can anyone provide me of sufficient examples of good prospects being dealt for large amounts of cash? I am of the understanding, as per the MLB rules, that any transaction involving a certain amount of cash (Over 1 million?) must be approved by the commisioner's office (remember the A-Rod to Boston thing?). Without a "commisioner's office" in HBD, we rely on the Veto process for these exact situations (IMHO). Now, I am not attacking the user who made the statement, or even the statement itself. I've just always been curious as to where exactly the belief that talent gets traded for purely cash in MLB on a regular basis comes from. Sure, you get the occasional Jack Cust who was moved for "cash considerations" as a career minor-leaguer before breaking out, but how often and what examples can be provided where the actual sale of players/prospects happens for large sums of money? (Post-Charlie-O Era. I realize that before the current era in baseball, vets were sold off all the time thus the creation of the current rule.)

It doesn't happen. It just doesn't.People can say it happens all they want, but in reality - it doesn't.Doesn't.

Quote: Originally Posted By pstrnutbag44 on 9/09/2009Ok, this line here got me thinking:

"...understanding of the concept that talent and cash are the currency in real baseball as well as HBD. "

Can anyone provide me of sufficient examples of good prospects being dealt for large amounts of cash? I am of the understanding, as per the MLB rules, that any transaction involving a certain amount of cash (Over 1 million?) must be approved by the commisioner's office (remember the A-Rod to Boston thing?). Without a "commisioner's office" in HBD, we rely on the Veto process for these exact situations (IMHO). Now, I am not attacking the user who made the statement, or even the statement itself. I've just always been curious as to where exactly the belief that talent gets traded for purely cash in MLB on a regular basis comes from. Sure, you get the occasional Jack Cust who was moved for "cash considerations" as a career minor-leaguer before breaking out, but how often and what examples can be provided where the actual sale of players/prospects happens for large sums of money? (Post-Charlie-O Era. I realize that before the current era in baseball, vets were sold off all the time thus the creation of the current rule.)

I can't provide you with any specific examples in the "modern era" (and perhaps none exist) but I think that the rationale behind the MLB rule (as I understand it) is a bit different than any justification for opposing prospect sales in HBD.Essentially, in MLB, you don't want an owner auctioning off his All-Stars for cash, which may or may not go back into the team. Without any salary floor, an owner could sell off his high-priced talent, pocket the cash, and play a team of league minimum guys - which isn't all that different (playing the league min guys) than what Florida has done some years. There isn't the same risk of that in HBD. The ***ets in the game, both money and players, cannot be removed from the game. It's not like I sell my Cy Young pitcher and so only have to pay $15 for the season instead of $25.

If a panda from china goes to jupiter and has kids, and its kids have kids, and their kids have kids, are those kids now chinese or jupiterian???

This "discussion" happens every 2-3 months.It's been established that everyone has a limit. Can an owner sell 5 players? 10? 20? 30? Only the 'tardiest of 'tards say "It's his team, he can do what he wants. Cash is a resource." Because, once you say that, you've opened up Pandora's Box. You're saying "As long as he finds a taker, it's OK with me." And that means any trade is OK in your book. You're either OK with prospects for cash or you're not. You can't close the gate once a couple of cows escape, you have to let the whole damn herd run free. And once that happens, you're the next world saying "Only need 11 to start playing tomorrow!!"

use yer vetoes if you don't agree

In real life, players are sold all the time. Babe Ruth was sold. I really have no idea why so many HBD owners are against making pure cash trades when it is something real teams constantly do. Even the Yankees sell players from time to time and they clearly don't need the money.

Jeez. In this huge thread, all 12 posts, someone asked "Can anyone provide me of sufficient examples of good prospects being dealt for large amounts of cash?" You give us a sale from 90 years ago and say " it is something real teams constantly do." Do you have anything more recent?I can tell you the sale of Joe Rudi, Vida Blue and one other player(around 3m) was vetoed by the commissioner's office on 35 years ago.

It was Rudi and Fingers to the Red Sox, and Blue to the Yankees.Bowie Kuhn voided the sales, invoking the "best interests of baseball" clause of the Commissioner's office.So there is an established precedent in MLB for NOT allowing these kinds of multi-million cash deals.