[USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL**
Andrew R. Klein
anrklein at yahoo.com
Sun May 13 22:07:35 EDT 2007
Sweeney's no beany -- he is the White Sox startling leftfielder, and an
active member of the K9! (In fact, he replaced Jack "The Man" Cust, who
hit *another* dinger today.)
Again, I'm fine with this interpretation ... the trade takes effect next
week, and we have league "common law" on how the Barrett Rule works.
-Andy
jhwinick at aol.com wrote:
> The irony, of course, is that Jim's rule was rejected in large part
> because of the maneuvering done by Mr. Klein to ensure that his
> proposal to ban trading prospects outright was considered before the
> reasonable alternative of adopting a June 1 limitation could be
> considered. More ironic yet is the fact that Andy will be the first
> team to trade a so-called magic bean in a dump trade this year. In
> the immortal words of Arsenio Hall: "the things that make you go hmmmm."
>
> Although I also find it ironic that but for Jim's objection, we would
> now be adopting the very rule that he proposed, it seems to me that in
> light of Jim's apparently vociferous objection, the rule must remain
> exactly as written. Any trade between Brad and Andy will have to wait
> until one week after Andy activates Ryan Sweeney.
>
> Jeff
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: chicagojab at yahoo.com
> To: announce at usml.net
> Sent: Sun, 13 May 2007 9:04 PM
> Subject: RE: [USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL**
>
> That's exactly what I'm suggesting. I foresaw this exact possibility
> and proposed a rule to deal with it. My idea was rejected in the
> voting. Hence there needs to be a week delay on the transaction.
>
> */"Richard E. Robbins" <RERobbins at iTinker.net
> <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("RERobbins%40iTinker.net", "");>>/* wrote:
>
> That's an interesting observation Jim.
>
> Are you suggesting that we specifically rejected what Andy
> seeks and that he needs to activate Sweeney and then wait a week
> before trading him to Brad?
>
> -- Rich
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* announce-bounces at usml.net
> <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("announce-bounces%40usml.net", "");>
> [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net
> <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("announce-bounces%40usml.net", "");>]
> *On Behalf Of *Jim Barrett
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 13, 2007 10:56 AM
> *To:* USML Announcements
> *Subject:* RE: [USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL**
>
> These were the options. I voted for 2A but 2B won.
>
> 2A. Amend the USML Constitution by adding the following provision:
>
> "From the commencement of the USML auction until June 1, if a
> player whose USML contract is not running is traded, that player
> will be deemed to be in the first year of his USML contract
> without regard to whether the acquiring owner rosters the player."
>
> 2B. Amend the constitution by adding the following provision:
>
> "From the commencement of the USML auction until June 1, a team
> can not trade a player whose USML contract is not running."
>
>
> */Jim Barrett <chicagojab at yahoo.com
> <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("chicagojab%40yahoo.com", "");>>/* wrote:
>
> I believe if you review the history, you'll see that I
> proposed the variant that the team trading the player away did
> not need to activate the prospect before the trade, provided
> that the acquiring team did so on receipt. However, when we
> did the actual voting, my variant was not approved. Rather,
> the winning variant was the "simpler" version that required
> the player's contract had to be running at the time of trade.
>
> */"Richard E. Robbins" <RERobbins at iTinker.net
> <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("RERobbins%40iTinker.net",
> "");>>/* wrote:
>
> Me and Justice Scalia . . .
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* announce-bounces at usml.net
> <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("announce-bounces%40usml.net",
> "");> [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net
> <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("announce-bounces%40usml.net",
> "");>] *On Behalf Of *Andrew R. Klein
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 13, 2007 9:23 AM
> *To:* USML Announcements
> *Subject:* Re: [USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL**
>
> Are you ignoring Jim Barrett's personal proclamations
> concerning the Barrett Rule? You're probably the type
> that ignores Thomas Jefferson's statements concerning the
> Constitution ...
>
> Richard E. Robbins wrote:
>> Legislative history?
>>
>> You might also recall that I circulated four possible
>> variations of text for this rule that dealt with this
>> issue specifically, however, in order to simplify things
>> given the compressed time period in which we acted, I
>> believe Jeff circulated the simplest variant. Gee, maybe
>> we should allow more time to fuss with rules. Naah --
>> it's more fun this way. (grin)
>>
>> -- Rich
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* announce-bounces at usml.net
>> [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] *On Behalf Of *Andrew
>> R. Klein
>> *Sent:* Sunday, May 13, 2007 9:00 AM
>> *To:* USML Announcements
>> *Subject:* Re: [USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL**
>>
>> On the merits, I have no preference either way -- for
>> this trade or future trades. My recollection is that the
>> creator of the rule -- Jim Barrett -- suggested that
>> players could be activated by the receiving team.
>>
>> I will amend my usmltrans message on the assumption that
>> the trade goes through this week, as that seems to be the
>> consensus (Doug notwithstanding). Brad -- don't forget
>> to activate Sweeney!!!
>>
>> -Andy
>>
>>
>> jhwinick at aol.com wrote:
>>> I agree with Rich on this one. It seems to me that as long as there is a consensus, either rule would be fine. Is anyone else entertained (but not surprised) that its these two gentlemen that are testing the parameters of the new rule? Jeff Sent from my BlackBerry? wireless handheld -----Original Message----- From: "Richard E. Robbins" <RERobbins at iTinker.net> Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 07:27:34 To:"'USML Announcements'" <announce at usml.net> Subject: RE: [USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL** I don't have a strong view either way on this one. New Section 12.13 doesn't clearly address the matter. I wouldn't object to permitting the activation of a player whose contract isn't running to be coincident with the trade. -- Rich -----Original Message----- From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf Of Andrew R. Klein Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 6:04 AM To: USML Announcements Subject: Re: [USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL** It occurs to me that this trade might not be effective until next Sunday, as Sweeney's contract will not be "running" until today at noon. Commissioners ... a ruling please. I have Sweeney set to go active
>>> today. Does that mean he is a Riptorn this week or next week? -Andy Andrew R. Klein wrote:
>>>> Happy Mother's Day. The Klein Nine trades Ryan Sweeney to the Riptorns for Hammern' Hank Blalock. -Andy _______________________________________________ announce mailing list announce at usml.net http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>>> _______________________________________________ announce mailing list announce at usml.net http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce _______________________________________________ announce mailing list announce at usml.net http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________ announce mailing list announce at usml.net http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________ announce mailing list announce at usml.net http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>>
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("announce%40usml.net", "");>
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("announce%40usml.net", "");>
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("announce%40usml.net", "");>
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net <javascript:parent.ComposeTo("announce%40usml.net", "");>
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
> from AOL at *AOL.com* <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000437>.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lyra.siteprotect.com/pipermail/announce/attachments/20070513/002bda8a/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the Announce
mailing list