I'm gonna spitball something here:
A moratorium on new GMs trading either their 1st rounder or any top 50 player (by O-ranK) for 2 months upon joining the league.
----------
we've seen this be a much bigger problem in the Pts. league, but in a dynasty format the worst thing is a new GM gutting his team (wittingly or unwittingly), IMO.
I'm in favor of this, or potentially a much stricter threshold for review? Any new GM trading a lottery pick or top 50 player in their first two months must have the trade approved by 70% of the league?
I would second Wiggle's proposal, at least the gist of it - I don't really like flatout banning trading good assets, but a higher bar for approval would add some training wheels to new ownership. 70% might be hard since it's hard to get 70% of the league to vote on anything in the offseason.
personally I'd just like to tell a new GM that they have to wait 2 months (or whatever) than get into a case-by-case review of their trades -- which makes it more subjective and therefore messy in my experience.
If a trade is good enough now, it should be there in 2 months.
1. this is a dynasty league not a redraft league so you don't need to move as quickly as in a redraft/keeper league. Conversely rash decisions last forever here that are wiped away in a league that you can keep (for example) 4 players...
2. the goal, IMO, of this rule is to force a new GM to (a) look at value of his assets/players, (b) give him time to get a number of offers (and hopefully the best return) and/or announce he's looking to move players X, Y, Z.
3. voting on value of players/trades as opposed to setting (even) arbitrary levels gets messy.
I remember my first trade (Biedrins (coming off his best season) for Jason Richardson) was panned by most of the league. I don't want to tell GMs what trades are good or bad, i just don't want them selling the farm the first week.