I pretty much agree with everything Ralph said there. The one thing I&#039;d like to echo once again, is that I don&#039;t think anything of the IDL rules need to change. Of course I believe there should be additional context to some of them as well as the addition of the rule I previously posted. Whether or not that takes place this season is fine, I just want it thrown out there for discussion. Ralph really couldn&#039;t have said it better, the rules don&#039;t need to be fixed, they simply need to be enforced.<br /><br />Which does bring up the trading problems of last season (and quite frankly, just about every season has seen a questionable trade). Last season&#039;s trade from EBL/SPE involving Saber/Noob is worth discussing but not on the grounds of how to &quot;define a trade.&quot; I&#039;ve already said it&#039;s pretty simple what a trade is, I&#039;m merely looking to add something more to the rules, perhaps. As it currently states, a trade is only allowed once a week. The unwritten rule of 3 trades per season was seemingly thrown out so we won&#039;t touch on that. I&#039;ll make a short proposal on trading that, by all accounts won&#039;t improve or degrade the value/usage of trades, but just give people more opportunities. Here&#039;s what I propose:<br /><br /><br />[list][li]5 Trades per season between teams.[/li][/list]<br /><br />This is probably a bit odd based on what I&#039;ve said but I believe at some point, the Commissioner probably shouldn&#039;t be hassled to approve trades constantly. 5 Trades between teams is more than reasonable because this doesn&#039;t include FA swapping. The benefit to this is that it does put a cap on how many times people can trade so teams aren&#039;t constantly swapping back and forth (not that they are now) and as I said, gives Bones&#039; a limited amount of trades to approve.<br /><br />[list][li]Unlimited FA Trades[/li][/list]<br /><br />I do think this can be a hassle for The Commissioner but things do happen and people sometimes need to pull a guy from FA just to get a match played or simply to find a reliable 4th to help with practices, games etc. I don&#039;t want to see this capped as you never know how many problems a team may encounter when it comes to swapping players on and off their roster. Plus it&#039;s generally used to find a 4th, so I don&#039;t see anybody really abusing this rule much.<br /><br />[list][li]One trade per week except for the trade-deadline week; multiple transactions can take place from FA as well as team-to-team depending on how many trades a team has used[/li][/list]<br /><br />This is where I backed off of a previous stance of trading being free market pretty much. I do think 1 trade per week is reasonable but I do understand that at the end of the trade deadline, team&#039;s might have more of a sense of urgency to get deals done and thus, they might be more likely to make just more than one trade. This gives them the ability to trade as much as possible given the number of trades they have left to best complete their roster as much as possible. The main reason I&#039;ve gone back to only allowing one trade per week aside from the deadline week is because, once again, nothing is stopping teams from hassling The Commissioner to approve trades as many times as possible per week. He&#039;s already busy enough as it is with scheduling/availabilities probably as well as his own team amongst other things. <br /><br />[list][li]Trading of Draft Picks Alone plus other assets[/li][/list]<br /><br />This is vague but I think the draft pick part speaks for itself. I simply am proposing the idea of swapping draft picks for the protection of being taken advantage of. As it stands, there&#039;s nothing regulating rules about drafting for another captain then swapping the players. What If I get the #1 overall pick, pick for the guy who has 11# and 12# and realize &quot;hey I just drafted Chewy and there&#039;s still going to be plenty of depth left for my 3rd pick, why trade him that?&quot; and pick for his 11#, 12# picks anyway. I could totally screw him and while they&#039;d probably still be good picks at those positions, there&#039;s no guarantee that he&#039;d want them. There&#039;s simply no regulation for this and that&#039;s really my concern. It&#039;s open to abuse and thankfully it hasn&#039;t happened yet (or at least to the best of my knowledge). It&#039;s straight forward though, I give you #1 and 24# for #11 and #12 and so forth. <br /><br />As far as assets go: this is something I remember Ralph actually bringing up prior to the start of the season. He was on SUC the previous season and lost in the MB. He had the 2nd overall pick for homefield and proposed trading it as an extra bonus to sweeten a deal for moving up or down the draft as he pleased. Once again, there&#039;s no rules for/against that and it should probably be stated somewhere. As far as I know, there&#039;s no other real asset you could trade - it&#039;s not like I could trade you my 15ms ping for your 50ms ping (although prior to having children, I may have considered allowing you to move in for your 1st pick :p). But this requires some more discussion and detail so we&#039;ll see. But I still stand by the draft-position swapping being added in, as there&#039;s really not much to discuss.<br /><br />This is my proposal. Of course all of this is theoretical at this point and most likely needs more discussion to be fine-proofed. I&#039;m hoping people (board and non-board members alike) give some feedback on this. This way, we can avoid confusion in the future about trades and have a completely regulated, hard-written system for it so that it&#039;s not abused. It&#039;s probably for the best.<br />