CFHF Fantasy League Part XX: Count-down to Season 4

[Pirate King Luffy]

Not a huge deal in what decision is chosen, just would prefer not to wait to have pick someone up when the season starts.

Besides, if I recall I made a prospect/pick swap with one of the commissioners two off seasons ago.

This offseason was a little different. Understandable though.

 

[Savoie92]

doesnt matter to me as well i would have given the pick to him but thought it would be unfair for the people behind that pick to let someone go in front of them free of charge hence why i got his worst prospect

 

[1989]

We have had offseasons in the past where it was agreed upon that non-equal pick trading was OK'd. Seeing as there hasn't been an outright ban on doing it but "gentle encouragement" not to (mainly due to expansion, which coincidentally the newest GMs agree against it) but I think it should stay for another reason (beyond balancing picks in this specific situation as is where it's not even creating a problem):

I believe that non-equal pick trades encourage off-season activity due to increased risk/reward factors. That alone makes it interesting.
We know that the Commissioner can set up uneven picks in the system and it's probably a bit of a headache but you get to see some really strong risky GMing where someone trades three picks in the first two rounds, for say, Dougie Hamilton. And they're going to take that risk of having less depth in the roster due to missing three picks, and the other GM now has three extra that they can trade for other assets. This best simulates a real-world environment and we have had these trades go through before. We could vote on a modified rule (for instance, no more than two or three picks being traded unevenly per trade) if balance needs to be found. But I feel like kiboshing the behaviour makes our game a little less interesting.

 

[Sean Monahan]

Not a huge deal in what decision is chosen, just would prefer not to wait to have pick someone up when the season starts.

whoever picked Sobotka last year had to wait as well.

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

whoever picked Sobotka last year had to wait as well.

Ok? Was he a keeper, and retired on the day of the draft started? Like I said not a huge deal if I don't get the pick.

 

[Sean Monahan]

Ok? Was he a keeper, and retired on the day of the draft started? Like I said not a huge deal if I don't get the pick.

Kovalchuk then

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

Kovalchuk then

I don't know what you are getting at. I traded for a pick. If it doesn't happen, big whoop. Also, that person who lost Kovalchuk could have traded for a pick if they wanted. It's not like they were restricted from doing it.

 

[Sean Monahan]

clearly it's a big enough deal for you to keep replying. you really want that player huh

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

clearly it's a big enough deal for you to keep replying. you really want that player huh

Change the subject? I was replying to you about Sobotka and Kovalchuk. I don't know what the point of you straw grasping was about. I am replying to that, not the pick.

 

[InfinityIggy]

I don't know what you are getting at. I traded for a pick. If it doesn't happen, big whoop. Also, that person who lost Kovalchuk could have traded for a pick if they wanted. It's not like they were restricted from doing it.

Not that it matters, but that actually is what happened.

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

Not that it matters, but that actually is what happened.

I know. I was trying to say the St.Louis and Kovalchuk retirements aren't the same because Signature got something out of it and you get a chance if he ever returns. I just straight up lost him.

 

[InfinityIggy]

I know. I was trying to say the St.Louis and Kovalchuk retirements aren't the same because Signature got something out of it and you get a chance if he ever returns. I just straight up lost him.

Ah okay nevermind.

 

[tfong]

Did you even read why the trade was made? Or are you just being obstinate?

My point is instead of going through the drama of exchanging uneven picks just do it normally.

Were at waiver players for the last few rounds, why open Pandoras box. Its more of a case of "You couldn't just leave well alone" for me.

Personally I don't like uneven pick trades because I have managed my own yahoo league and its a big pain.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Even picks don't bother me, you just adjust the value accordingly. If you offer someone a 10th round pick and get their 21st back in return, it's essentially the same thing. I think the benefits of having even rosters post draft is a good thing. My 2 cents.

 

[Kanye]

Maybe someone really wants Deryk Engellend guys

 

[Taranis]

Two things for me, one if its a rule then thats how it is. Two, let GM's live by the sword and die by the sword. I thought going in I could make an uneven trade and just pick off of waivers to fill up the roster and that was an acceptable chance to take to get better trade value and I don't see why that shouldn't be an option.

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

Two things for me, one if its a rule then thats how it is. Two, let GM's live by the sword and die by the sword. I thought going in I could make an uneven trade and just pick off of waivers to fill up the roster and that was an acceptable chance to take to get better trade value and I don't see why that shouldn't be an option.

That is how it was before this offseason. This was a trade with Anglesmith last offseason

July 28, 2014

To The Techno Union

21st rd. (12th pick) 2014 m.d.

To Intangibles

William Carrier (P)

 

[Savoie92]

honestly i dont see how it changes anything in the league

the winner of the league will always have an extra pick at the end thats not used because of the added keeper

there is 5 picks left in this draft. the chances of the player he picks being a player the other 4 picks after want are quite slim

I profit a prospect that he valued as is "worst" prospect so i dont just let him skip 4 picks.

I honestly don't understand why people are getting so hyped up on a trade at the end of the day will be quite unnoticeable

hes missing a pick due to a keeper retiring i got an extra pick because i won the league. There is no picks that are magically appearing and the next person to draft has yet to make their pick

thats my two cents if the trade gets vetoed so be it wont make or break any team in this league.

 

[InfinityIggy]

I don't think the issue around these types of trades is anything to do with fairness/value/ect.

They traditionally have not been allowed because they are hard to process in the Yahoo system.

 

[Savoie92]

I don't think the issue around these types of trades is anything to do with fairness/value/ect.

They traditionally have not been allowed because they are hard to process in the Yahoo system.

wouldnt this trade then solve said problem? i had an extra player already and he was missing a player so wouldnt this solve the problem of processing in the system

 

[1989]

Another issue I have is there is that technically, there are no grounds to veto this trade.

- It's a fair trade by value: meh waiver player for longshot prospect.

- Regardless of nuisance, we have allowed these trades before with numerous examples.

- They don't break/haven't broken the system or game.

-And we've never outright banned it. And like pretty much any rule changes, if we are to disallow it, we should be voting as a league whether it should be allowable, as we have done in the past. Just making the practice discouraged does not mean the same thing as disallowed.

Therefore, IMO, this trade should go through. Whether these trades happen in the future can be debated on later.

 

[tfong]

wouldnt this trade then solve said problem? i had an extra player already and he was missing a player so wouldnt this solve the problem of processing in the system

No the issue comes up with yahoo because you can't trade a pick without sending a pick back.

Its not value or anything, I don't care about the trade otherwise, its a pain in the yahoo system to go around. I believe its like they have to manually assign you the player, use the pick to choose another player and drop them after. Its just additional work on top of the work for just inputting the picks into the league.

So its not like i care what you got or what player you send. I just care that it's creating extra work that can be avoided. Both you and Siggy think its because I don't like the value, its not about value or anything. Its just something to avoid because the yahoo league system is just a pain when doing this kind of trade.

 

[Taranis]

Another issue I have is there is that technically, there are no grounds to veto this trade.

- It's a fair trade by value: meh waiver player for longshot prospect.

- Regardless of nuisance, we have allowed these trades before with numerous examples.

- They don't break/haven't broken the system or game.

-And we've never outright banned it. And like pretty much any rule changes, if we are to disallow it, we should be voting as a league whether it should be allowable, as we have done in the past. Just making the practice discouraged does not mean the same thing as disallowed.

Therefore, IMO, this trade should go through. Whether these trades happen in the future can be debated on later.

Didn't seem to be an issue when I wanted to trade McDavid for an uneven amount, yet I wasn't allowed.

 

[1989]

Didn't seem to be an issue when I wanted to trade McDavid for an uneven amount, yet I wasn't allowed.

Then you should have argued it. That's partly because of expansion, which I'm sure has some other implications.

But IMO in regular off-season activity, it shouldn't be an issue.

 

[Taranis]

Then you should have argued it. That's partly because of expansion, which I'm sure has some other implications.

But IMO in regular off-season activity, it shouldn't be an issue.

Seriously? I did make an argument and no one cared cause it didn't affect them.