• Draft and Trade Talk Message Board

  • EvG EvG Jan 12, 2011 3:11 AM Flag

    this is not worth a veto

    i finally made a trade i've been working on for a while that saw me give: Marleau, Semin and Yandle
    in return for Crosby and Kronwall

    Within the hour it was veto'd, largely i think because of the fact i am in first place in my league and people would be threatened by my acquisition.

    sure i might be getting an edge but this trade is far from vetoable and i think this is fucking bullshit. i'm also the commish so i;m thinking about suspending veto power from the other managers if they're going to veto for the sake of it but i'm not sure if i wanna go that far. thoughts on the matter?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • If Cosby has a concussion, be thankful, it could get worse with another hit, although the refs will probable invoke the no player with 5 feet of cosby rule. Marleau and Semin are both streaking players and if washington decides to scra this play defense appraoch Semin should add points.

    • its a fair trade

    • seems fine to me.

    • the trade doesnt even seem that unfair idk what you guys are freaking out about

      • 1 Reply to Noah
      • To Ardo, I totally agree with collusion being one part of the equation and not the sole modifier, but I also stress that the need for checks and balances also has to be considered especially when one person has a gross competitive advantage or knowledge over the other, for example a grown hockey nut trying to hoodwink a little kid – by any weights and measures there is no collusion in that situation because only one party was privileged and the other oblivious. Yet by your rational it is a perfectly acceptable set of circumstances and stands outside the boundaries on which actions should be judged.

        To quote the author of this very topic simply exemplifies this: "He's not twelve, its not like i can take advantage of him, he has just as much hockey knowledge as me and I’m not even that much older than him." - to paraphrase this may be interpreted as if I could take advantage of him if the conditions were reversed it would be okay.

        Ardo do not confuse the lines of fair play and sportsmanship with the rights to win at any and all costs.

        All I attempted to do was to point out in my post that Veto's are a flawed system. Personally if you wanted to veto or endorse a trade in my opinion you - as a responsible GM - should quantify the reasons why in an email to the Commish by a pre-determined deadline who would then post all the responses in the league message boards and tally. That way irrational responses could be justifiably rejected by the group and there is a record of the events.

        Also once again this is not a vetoable trade, a little sucky perhaps - but extremely far from vetoable.

    • Now with Semin hurt as well, that makes it arguable, because he hadn't scored in 14 games anyway. Marleau's numbers have been awful, especially +/-. Kronwall is a slight upgrade on Yandle, so you have Marleau and Semin for Crosby. Not vetoable if Marleau and Semin are both healthy.

    • to Hyukjin and Jay-O, you just don't get it. trades should NEVER BE VETOED unless there is collusion between the managers, or if one of the managers involved is mathematically eliminated from playoff contention (which usually means there was collusion anyways). who cares if one of the guys got a slight edge? your in-depth analysis of the players involved is irrelevant - both managers clearly wanted to make the trade, no one took advantage of anyone, and it doesn't sound like there was any collusion behind the scenes.

      it was obviously vetoed because a team in 1st place made a play for Crosby and the rest of the league didn't want that to happen. and that's just f*cking lame. as the commish of a 7-year-running league, I'd NEVER have vetoed that trade, and I'm positive no one in our league would've requested it be vetoed. I'm assuming the 2nd team involved team is a ways lower in the standings (I mean obviously they're not in 1st) and may not be able to afford sitting and waiting for Crosby to return. so vetoing the trade is probably hurting that guy more than the 1st place team, which is just flat out unfair and destroys the legitimacy of the league.

      and for the record, your public league example is dumb because this is obviously not going down in a public league. public leagues are garbage; usually filled with half competitive, knowledgeable players and half ignorant, casual players. comparing trades in a public league to a private league is like apples and oranges, so leave the pubby references out.

      EvG, unfortunately you're in a tough spot. sounds like you have a bunch of whiny babies in your league and you'd be well within your rights to overturn the veto. we don't even do league votes in our league - I have all the power (though I let the league vote before making the final decision) - which has always worked since I make decisions democratically, but it makes it so collusive trades don't go through late in the season when a few teams have already packed it in and stopped checking their teams. just a thought. if I were you I might just overturn the trade and find some new guys to play with next year. chances are not everyone in your league disagreed and you'll get a few of them back next year. the rest sound like a bunch of scrubs.

      • 1 Reply to Ardo
      • Yeah good call man, of course its not a public league haha. there all my buddies and the trade was vetoed with in 15 minutes of it going through, so obviously people got together, i'll blame it on the bbm that i do not yet have hah. but in seriousness this puts me in a tough place, cause being commish and in first place people will accuse me of rule bending if i make any changes that are favourable to my preferences and i could see a lot of them threatening to quit which would be a shame because this is one of the best leagues we've been where no one has lost interest, which had been a problem in previous leagues i've been a part of with some of the same guys.

        this may sound kinda bad but the other manager is my little bro, but before anyone makes any judgements on that there is no one i'd want i'd want to win more than him, and i told him we could throw in a couple more players if he wanted but he was good with the deal we had. now thats it been vetoed if i decided not to go the route where i overturn there veto i may try and throw Kovalchuk in and get him to throw in Hossa. He needs leftys bad and then he'd be getting 2 dual eligible players in the deal that can play LW. As the commish im trying to go the honourable route but i admit im pretty fucking pissed with the whole ordeal and just hate when managers abuse there ability to veto, hopefully i can get them to see the light. thanks for the reply though Ardo, it helps

    • Shouldn't be vetoed and don't change the rules - that'll make it worse. Player value is irrelevant unless there is collusion, but because you are the commish and are in first place, of course your deals will be scrunitized more. But that's sad that they veto because of jealousy. If anything, post a message on the board saying that vetoes should be for collusion only, and both made the deal to improve your teams.

      • 1 Reply to BN
      • Just have to say this off the top BN and I play in the same league (where he is dominating), In principle I agree with BN about the two mature folks working out a deal thing. However in all fairness these teams and leagues, especially the public ones are not always populated with rational adults (I lean to the more irrational side myself), instead they are often comprised of kids.

        Kids of varying ages, abilities, knowledge, acumen who are trying to battle against cagey old vets. Veto's are the way that other managers can intervene on behalf of other players in their league.

        The voting to veto mechanism is a reasonable tool that allows people the opportunity to exercise some judgment, no matter how ill advised or mis-informed, over the outcome of a trade. Does it work - I would say by in large yes - however like any public opinion / popularity system it is also flawed. Yes it can be abused but as a Commissioner we must hold ourselves to a higher standard especially when we set the the rules up in the first place, changing them mid stream is just dirty pool and far more petty than a bunch of impulsive managers.

        Besides if this is not a public league but a private one, no sense in getting your nose bent out of shape and peeving off your friends over something as silly as hockey. If you don't like veto's change the rules for next season.

        Seeing how you don't post league size or type, scoring cats, or any other pertinent info that will allow us to give you a fully informed rather than impulsive response, it really sounds like you just want someone to validate your feelings and tell you its okay to whine and let your tears water down your sour grapes. How can you expect a informed rational response when your query calls for none.

        As to the trade itself, first glance I would probably not veto it, anyone not smart enough to squeeze a little bit more for Crosby deserves to be mocked and teased by his league mates.

        And seeing how goals and assists are the only real barometer in which I can judge this deal:

        Marleau; Points production down by 15% (60-65 points) likely to have worst plus / minus of career, may go as high as -21, only bright spots are his shots are up.

        Semin; Also under performing by 15% (I would say he was actually playing as per his career average if you ignore last seasons aberration) all his numbers are about the same, given our collective expectations nothing great nothing terrible.

        Yandle: Has really embraced the role of offensive defenseman this season and its reflected in his stats, on pace for 60 points (45-50 most likely, few Dmen finish the season scoring like forwards) shots are up huge as are blocks and he has already surpassed his career high for PPP's - its a sunny day in the Yandle house.

        Crosby; 110 - 120 points, plus 25, PIMs way down, shots way up - currently has a brain ache.

        Kronwell; (Nick I assume) on pace for 40 points, career average, all other numbers as per career averages except blocks are way up.

        Looking at the numbers I see a wily manager trying to take advantage of a GM who's looking for a home runs from a couple of bunters - and that doesn't make the deal unfair, a little imbalanced. Crosby is ten dollars and Semin / Marleau are a pair of lotto tickets - if they pay off the upside is huge, if not you should'a bought beer. It's a fair enough trade, just not one I would make if I had Crosby.

        In a nutshell the deal is basically two very reliable and predictable players for one guy having a career year and two guys most definitely not.

    • Dude. Crosby has as many points and a much more impressive +/- than Semin AND Marleau put together. Of course it got vetoed.


Expert Fantasy Advice