• Draft and Trade Talk Message Board

  • Bill J Bill J Sep 28, 2009 7:23 PM Flag

    veto worthy?

    saw this in my league took me a second to vote no. Nash/Biron/Phaneuff for Tanguay/Little/Varlamov.

    How about the rest of you?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • My take on all this trade crap is for the commissioner to limit the number of trades any team can make. That way you would not see any ridiculous offers. Let's say limit teams to 5 trades for the year. No pre-season trades and not trades after March 1st. .

      I'd also limit the number of adds and drops to 20 or 25. That way you have to manage your team and not just trade, then drop and add at will.

      If there are unlimited trades and unlimited adds and drops then the league ends up being won by who ever can make the most daily changes and get a full line up every night.

      Veto the trade, I veto most trades when its up to a league vote. Unless a team gets a rash of injuries and the manager is trading to be competitve then its OK. Once you get the legaue out of whack and one or two teams keep trading and are way out in front then all interest in the league fails.

      Managers only quit managing when they get too far behind and the rrules or scoring will prevent them from ever getting close once the get too far behind.

      • 1 Reply to Walt
      • IN my main leagues we

        1. Have no limit on trades but end up having only 2-3 trades a year despite having active managers. Many get proposed but few get accepted. None have been vetoed

        2. Limit adds to FIVE per week. This prevents wholescale churn but allows tweaks each week. We like it better than a global limit where someone can get completely shafted by injuries.

        Oh and I totally disagree on your approach on trades. vetoing most trades just strikes me as wrong. Is everyone colluding or are you just against people making their teams better

    • Veto that shit...

      Nash = top 5 LW
      Phaneuf = top 5 D
      Biron = backup

      for

      Tanguay = top 30 LW?
      Little = top 20 RW?
      Varmalov = top 20 goalie?

      There's something seriously wrong in the water... either one guy doesn't care about his team, or he values Tanguay (after his spectacular last season) and Little too much.

      • 1 Reply to Jaz
      • To me -- regardless of whether I think a trade is balanced or not is almost beside the point. There are a couple of different questions

        1. Is there any reason to suspect collusion at all? Veto all trades if yes . Even any form of prior relationship could be a reason for suspicion (although in my leagues your best friend is the one you want to screw over in a trade most so you can mock them all year)

        2. Is there any way even a halfway rational manager could see the trade as good for their team? This trade requires the most optimistic views of Little and Tanguay and a really high value for Varlamov. It stretches credibility but would not be completely impossible

        On the contrary side, if Little, Tanguay and Varlamov went in the last three rounds of the draft for this league, this trade loses all of the little credibility it might be credited with. It stretches credibility TOO MUCH for a player to NOT draft players in his last, second last and third last picks and then value them so very much that he surrenders all this.

        If this trade were made two weeks in and tanguay and Little were lighting it up and varlamov had a shutout and 4 wins, it might pass the sniff test but now, with only preseason done, it strikes me as impossible that a manager would give up his first pick for a player or any three players that he didn't bother to pick up with 4 or 5 rounds to go. Who were these players that were preferred over Little/Tanguay/Varlamov in the draft if this combo is seen as so very valuable by this manager now?


        I would inquire hard of the guy getting the Tanguay special as to why he didn't draft them earlier if he saw such value there

    • I like the trade...little is going to explode this year...he'll probably almost match nash's numbers if he plays with Kovalchuk, and I watch phanuef a lot to know he is a bit over rated and will bouwmeesters addition help him or take away from his play??

      Definitely not vetoable.

    • well I did ask he says they will produce as much if not better than what he is giving up (kid must be on drugs) plus he ripped on me for unloading Kessler and picking up Samuelsson. I guess someone forgot to tell him Kessler is out until November and Samuelsson is now a Sweedish triplet in Vancouver. Oh well I told him he will regret the trade in three months and I voted no to protect him. But said FU so thats fine. But if I was commissh instant kill no questions asked. Nash alone is barely worth a Tangs/Little.

    • A definite veto

    • this is a bs trade.. how can anyone with half a brain accept this

    • not fair what so ever (Unless Varlamov gets no1 SG), but non vetoable...

    • I think it is crap. The team giving up Nash does not seem to benefit in any way other than picking up an extra forward. If that's the case, I am sure there is someone they could drop to pick up a good forward. While I am not the first to veto and cool with letting things go, I think this is crap. Nash and Phaneuff will do much better than Tanguay and Little as a group. The wildcard is Varmalov. That kid could step up and stomp, he has the possibility. But as of yet, at face value, Biron is a better bet than Simeon. Bad trade.

    • I wouldnt veto that.

    • View More Messages
 

Expert Fantasy Advice