HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

ATD 2013 - Trading thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-02-2013, 09:57 PM
  #501
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post



Attempting to bully the trade committee like this isn't going to get you very far.
I'm not trying to bully anyone, why can't we voice our displeasure with how this has been handled?

MB and I have spent countless hours for the past 4 months researching, planning and drafting a team. Then even more time hashing out a trade that we both feel improves our teams, and follows every guideline that has been submitted to us.

We then quickly get our trade shut down and take time to retool the trade to fit your needs and yet now we are still up in arms not knowing why we have to try and defend a decision that both of us have made, following every rule possible, for a trade because you guys "aren't sure if it's fair or not"?

markrander87 is offline  
Old
04-02-2013, 10:06 PM
  #502
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,808
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
I'm not trying to bully anyone, why can't we voice our displeasure with how this has been handled?

MB and I have spent countless hours for the past 4 months researching, planning and drafting a team. Then even more time hashing out a trade that we both feel improves our teams, and follows every guideline that has been submitted to us.

We then quickly get our trade shut down and take time to retool the trade to fit your needs and yet now we are still up in arms not knowing why we have to try and defend a decision that both of us have made, following every rule possible, for a trade because you guys "aren't sure if it's fair or not"?
The point of the trade veto is to make sure that the other 30 teams aren't getting screwed over because a single pair of GMs make a lopsided trade. I don't know why MB is basically asking the trade committee to do his negotiating for him, but that's basically what he's doing after saying he's happy we vetoed the first trade.

Anyway, I'm inclined to approve the trade. Kelly for Lindsay does favor the team getting Kelly, but not to an extent that it unbalances the draft. In fact, 2-3 drafts ago, Lindsay was getting drafted ahead of Kelly, which I disagreed with at the time.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
04-02-2013, 10:09 PM
  #503
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
If you look at it this way, I do think Mahovlich (50) and Keats (242) is fairly close in value to Gerard (90) and Savard (164).

Kelly (15) and Kolzig (690) for Lindsay (29) and Vachon (548) is barely different from Kelly vs Lindsay straight up when you consider the vast difference between 1st round picks and backup goalies, a definite advantage for the team getting Kelly. I'm not sure if it's bad enough to veto though.

Edit: Would anyone veto Kelly for Lindsay straight up? If not, then we should definitely let this trade go through.
Yeah, I'd definitely veto Kelly for Lindsay straight up. Kelly is a much more important player. It's like trading the 6th best DMan in the league now for the 2nd best LW. So you'd be trading something liek Ryan Suter for Thomas Vanek, which is comical at best in their levels of importance.

vecens24 is offline  
Old
04-02-2013, 10:15 PM
  #504
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
Yeah, I'd definitely veto Kelly for Lindsay straight up. Kelly is a much more important player. It's like trading the 6th best DMan in the league now for the 2nd best LW. So you'd be trading something liek Ryan Suter for Thomas Vanek, which is comical at best in their levels of importance.


Can someone please agree with this so we can move on...

I don't even know where to start with this.

markrander87 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 12:07 AM
  #505
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Allright, well, if mb still thinks this is in his best interests, then I will officially vote against vetoing this trade. mb, I am shaking my big internet finger at you for being lazy and/or myopic in your trade negotiations (because I don't think you're stupid), but I guess it happens from time to time.

mark, you have badly misjudged me if you think I give a toss about your juvenile threats. I understand that you were frustrated, but the integrity of the draft is much more important than your presence here, and we will go on, with or without you.

So one vote against veto.

Sturminator is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 12:14 AM
  #506
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,808
vCash: 500
It was quite tempting to veto the trade to see if mark would make good on his promise, but I'm going to vote against veto too. I have no idea why MB wouldn't have asked for more, but it isn't our job to make all trades fair, and Kelly for Lindsay isn't going to unbalance the draft.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 06:35 AM
  #507
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Edit: Would anyone veto Kelly for Lindsay straight up? If not, then we should definitely let this trade go through.
I wouldn't. I think a reasonable person could prefer Lindsay.

overpass is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 07:31 AM
  #508
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,218
vCash: 873
I'm not in the trade committe, but ....

Although I understand the importance of a solid defensive core and I'm higher than most on Frank Mahovlich, the second deal looks better. Mark is the winner of this trade, no question in my mind, but by our own definition of what should we consider a 'vetoable' trade or not, something we discussed before the start of this ATD, this one pass the eye test for me.

PS: Don't underestimate the importance of a backup goaltender. Let's say two workhorse like Martin Brodeur & Glenn will play 70 out of 82 games; that still mean that their backup goaltender will have a decisive influence on the outcome of 15% of the teams' game. Georges Hainsworth is a true workhorse, in the same mold as Brodeur & Hall, so Mark doesn't necessarily need an elite backup goaltender like Rogatien Vachon. Good on him. However, Tony Esposito, although at this peak he could string a lot of games, his backup stil had a more important say in his team overall success. I would guess that with a tandem of Esposito and Vachon, the latter will play approximately 20 games, or 26% of his team games. A quarter of the time, you upgrade from Olaf Kolzig, a mediocre backup in this draft, to Rogatien Vachon, a top-3 backup. That's a significant difference. MOREOVER, Tony Esposito is a fragile playoff goaltender, so an elite backup like Vachon will help him. If he get light out one game or he looks shaky, you can put Vachon in, who's use to play tandem, and you still have a decent chance to win the game. I believe as a community we underestimate the importance of a strong backup goaltender, especially if people don't own a workhorse goaltender.

EagleBelfour is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 07:48 AM
  #509
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
And I don't know where to post this, but just so everyone involved is aware, MB and I have both agreed to boycott the remainder of the season if this 2nd trade gets vetoed. We are getting tossed around by a flawed system and it has sucked any type of fun we were having with this.



Come on, mark.. you had to know that first incarnation at least was pretty bad.

BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 05:18 PM
  #510
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,808
vCash: 500
So uh... I guess it's 2 votes to nothing or did someone other than Sturm and me vote and I missed it?

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 05:37 PM
  #511
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
So uh... I guess it's 2 votes to nothing or did someone other than Sturm and me vote and I missed it?
Neither vecens nor I will vote on this, so that's 4 members of the committee accounted for.

Dreakmur is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 05:41 PM
  #512
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Neither vecens nor I will vote on this, so that's 4 members of the committee accounted for.
Yeah, I mean unless seventies or Stoneberg decide to show up here we have nothing more here.

I wasn't planning on relinquishing my vote, but it doesn't really matter at this point. I say give those two the night to show up, and if they don't just move forward.

vecens24 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 05:50 PM
  #513
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
Yeah, I mean unless seventies or Stoneberg decide to show up here we have nothing more here.

I wasn't planning on relinquishing my vote, but it doesn't really matter at this point. I say give those two the night to show up, and if they don't just move forward.
I suppose I shouldn't have spoken for you then

Dreakmur is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 07:38 PM
  #514
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,381
vCash: 500
Somebody put me out of my misery already.

monster_bertuzzi is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 07:50 PM
  #515
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
Somebody put me out of my misery already.
I just don't understand why you were so desperate to get rid of Frank Mahovlich. He may not have liked Punch Imlach, but they definitely accomplished a lot together.

Funny thing is, poor Frank Mahovlich gets away from Imlach only to land with Mike Keenan. He just can't win

Dreakmur is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 07:56 PM
  #516
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
I just don't understand why you were so desperate to get rid of Frank Mahovlich. He may not have liked Punch Imlach, but they definitely accomplished a lot together.

Funny thing is, poor Frank Mahovlich gets away from Imlach only to land with Mike Keenan. He just can't win
Because everyone made a point of how they feuded and it threw a wrench in my team? Not a peep about that ******** and I don't make the trade.

monster_bertuzzi is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 08:02 PM
  #517
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
Because everyone made a point of how they feuded and it threw a wrench in my team? Not a peep about that ******** and I don't make the trade.
All you had to do was point out how much success they had together. A lot of coaches and players didn't like each other, that's less important than winning.

Dreakmur is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 08:29 PM
  #518
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,808
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
I just don't understand why you were so desperate to get rid of Frank Mahovlich. He may not have liked Punch Imlach, but they definitely accomplished a lot together.

Funny thing is, poor Frank Mahovlich gets away from Imlach only to land with Mike Keenan. He just can't win
And Denis Savard gets away from Mike Keenan only to land with Punch Imlach.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
04-04-2013, 03:08 AM
  #519
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,218
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
Because everyone made a point of how they feuded and it threw a wrench in my team? Not a peep about that ******** and I don't make the trade.
I would of drop Punch Imlach, let Trotz run the show or draft another coach. That was the very easy solution. An yes, I've research Mahovlich extensively enough to believe that you REALLY don't want Imlach and Mahovlich together. Frank Mahovlich is a 4th rounder with Punch Imlach as a coach, close ot the second best LW of All-Time without him and in a great coaching situation.

EagleBelfour is offline  
Old
04-04-2013, 03:26 AM
  #520
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,808
vCash: 500
I'm officially adding the trade as accepted on the OP

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
04-05-2013, 08:08 PM
  #521
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,573
vCash: 500
I'm pretty sure vetoed trade proposal was never voted upon to count as one of the 8 max trades per team. A vetoed trade proposal is a proposal it was never officially processed as a trade.

markrander87 is offline  
Old
04-05-2013, 08:41 PM
  #522
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
I'm pretty sure vetoed trade proposal was never voted upon to count as one of the 8 max trades per team. A vetoed trade proposal is a proposal it was never officially processed as a trade.
It may not have been officially voted on, but it was definitely discussed, and the consensus was that they should count. The idea was to punish dumb trade proposals.

Dreakmur is offline  
Old
04-05-2013, 08:51 PM
  #523
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
It may not have been officially voted on, but it was definitely discussed, and the consensus was that they should count. The idea was to punish dumb trade proposals.
For the record, i'm going to share some of how me and Mark's dialogue went.

-First proposal...Lindsay and Gerard for Mahovlich and Kelly...immediately rejected by me.

-Lindsay, Kennedy, Reardon for Mahovlich, Barry, Kelly...rejected by Mark (I wonder how this one would have went over?).

-Chara and Mahovlich for Gerard and Lindsay

..Then finally the deals that went public. I still don't understand how it's a huge win for Cincy, unless we're REALLY crazy about D.

monster_bertuzzi is offline  
Old
04-05-2013, 10:29 PM
  #524
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
It may not have been officially voted on, but it was definitely discussed, and the consensus was that they should count. The idea was to punish dumb trade proposals.

Sorry, but that's not how things work. Sure it was talked about but it was never stated that a vetoed trade proposal counts as a trade..I still have 1 trade left.

markrander87 is offline  
Old
04-05-2013, 11:12 PM
  #525
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Sorry, but that's not how things work. Sure it was talked about but it was never stated that a vetoed trade proposal counts as a trade..I still have 1 trade left.
The following is posted at the top of every draft thread:
Quote:
1). The draft will last 25 rounds. You must draft 2 goalies, 6 defensemen, 12 forwards, a coach and 4 extra picks.

2). The time windows will be tight but reasonable.
  • 12 hour clock for the first two rounds, (sending a shortlist to another GM highly encouraged here)
  • then 10 hour clock for rounds 3-6,
  • then 8 hour clock for rounds 7-14,
  • then 6 hour clock for rounds 15-20,
  • then 4 hour clock for rounds 21-25
One hour time window deduction for each skipped pick (two hour deduction for missing a 12 hour clock - leave a list), with a minimum 4 hour clock guaranteed regardless of deductions.

3). Trades
  • Trading is to be reasonably fair and balanced and lopsided trades will need to be re-worked or dropped. This is at the discretion of the trade committee.
  • Each team may make up to 8 trades.
  • A submitted trade counts towards the maximum, even if it is vetoed (exception - first time GMs). Don't submit lopsided trades.
  • No more than 4 assets per team may be traded at a time.
  • Swapping all positions before the draft doesn't count as a "trade" for the purposes of the above rules.
  • Trading while on the clock is allowed. However, using your entire clock to openly shop a pick annoys your fellow GMs, so do it sparingly. If GMs abuse trading on the clock, a rule could be added against it
4). At the conclusion of the draft, there will be a 10 day period for lineup assassinations. Assassinations will be divided by division.

5). Regular season rankings MUST BE VOTED ON by at least one GM (if the team is co-GM'd) per team. The penalty if not done is a potential lowering in the standings because each GM will rank his own team first. Co-GMs who both vote each get half a vote for the regular season rankings in their own division.

6). All Teams make the playoffs. Playoffs will be cross-divisional - Seed 1 will face Seed 4 from the adjacent division, and Seed 2 will face Seed 3 from the adjacent division.

7). REGULAR SEASON AND PLAYOFF VOTING TO BE A SET RESPONSIBILITY.

8). NO MENTIONING UNDRAFTED PLAYERS!!!

9). PM the next team after you have made your pick. THIS IS NOT OPTIONAL!

Dreakmur is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:34 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.