Announcement

**Guynemer** · August 24, 2006, 19:46

Your Mom.

**Asher** · August 24, 2006, 19:50

Originally posted by joncha
If we had a vote on such issues, there wouldn't be a need for any screaming.

Sure there would be -- I for one don't think your vote has any bearing on a trade between two consenting adults.

In fact, I think some people have a lot to gain from voting down trades that may help a person they're competing against. Like let's say the guys in 1st and 3rd last season when the guy in 2nd addressed his weakest roster spot with a new acquisition...

This ain't some communist everybody-wins game, it's a competition. And any time you give power over your roster to competitors it becomes all ****ed up. Everybody here is a man, let us have our own rosters and make our own trades.

**joncha** · August 24, 2006, 19:57

Yawn.

If one or two people try to stop a legitimate trade, they'll be voted down. Ditto if someone tries to use an out-of-contention team as their extended bench.

**Ninot** · August 24, 2006, 19:59

Originally posted by joncha
Yawn.

If one or two people try to stop a legitimate trade, they'll be voted down. Ditto if someone tries to use an out-of-contention team as their extended bench.

I generally agree with you, but it is a real issue that not everyone might show up to vote up or down a trade.

**Asher** · August 24, 2006, 20:21

Originally posted by Ninot

I generally agree with you, but it is a real issue that not everyone might show up to vote up or down a trade.

Precisely. Especially with a 1-day delay.

The result is a couple people who may disagree with a trade will vote it down, when in the end it's a fair trade...

Comprehend this: trades are, when you come down to it, are gambles. Some people take riskier gambles than others, and I don't think a whole bunch of conservative players who think it's too risky should shoot down that option for players.

Every single trade I made last season, I got flak against it from the same couple players who don't mind their own business. To me, I think their hockey sense needs a lot of work and isn't compatible with mine, and I really do not think them being able to vote down my trades is a good thing. It makes the league boring, predictable, and a hive mind...

**Ben Kenobi** · August 24, 2006, 20:28

Edit: and BK. He's been talking like he's joining, but I'm not sure.

Just adding my two cents having been in last time.

I'm moving very soon, so I am hesitant to take on additional responsibilities until I am sure of how things are at my new place. I expect to be online again on the first, and off at most for a day or so.

**joncha** · August 24, 2006, 20:32

Originally posted by Asher

Precisely. Especially with a 1-day delay.

The result is a couple people who may disagree with a trade will vote it down, when in the end it's a fair trade...

Comprehend this: trades are, when you come down to it, are gambles. Some people take riskier gambles than others, and I don't think a whole bunch of conservative players who think it's too risky should shoot down that option for players.

Every single trade I made last season, I got flak against it from the same couple players who don't mind their own business. To me, I think their hockey sense needs a lot of work and isn't compatible with mine, and I really do not think them being able to vote down my trades is a good thing. It makes the league boring, predictable, and a hive mind...

You're full of crap, as usual. People can dig through the old threads if they really want to hear about the crap you pulled last year, but I'm not going to be dragged into a discussion of it here.

The alternatives to putting suspect trades to a vote are either giving all discretion to the commish or just letting them stand, suspect or no.

Of the three choices, I think the democratic option is the least problematic.

**Asher** · August 24, 2006, 20:35

What exactly is a "suspect trade"? A "suspect trade", according to you, is a good goalie for good skater in a league that heavily emphasized goalie stats. That's bull****.

The problem is that there are at least two people in this league that play dirty, and Ill refuse to play if either of those people have any say at all in how I run my team or how other people make trades. They have a very narrow-minded image in their mind of what a proper trade is and VEHEMENTLY oppose trades they find to be "unfair", and refuse to change their tune even after the trade turned out to be more than fair. These people are clearly inexperienced with hockey pools, these people clearly didn't understand the value of a good goalie vs good skater last term, and these people were unabashedly personal in their attacks against me for such a trade.

It's only because I genuinely enjoy the vast majority of people in this league that I'm willing to join, but if the two people I've mentioned have any say, I'm gone.

**joncha** · August 24, 2006, 20:48

Originally posted by Asher
What exactly is a "suspect trade"?

An example of a suspect trade is a team that is out of contention accepting a trade only because it will help a team that is still in contention. Just off the top of my head.

Without some oversight, people can pull off the same kind of bull****. With all the power in the hands of the commissioner, it's too easy for him or her to be a destructive, arrogant, hypocritical, lying ass.

The solution, it would seem, would be to give control to the league as a whole. If the league becomes so inactive that only two or three people bother to vote, then trade oversight will be the least of our problems.

**KrazyHorse** · August 24, 2006, 20:50

I move that any further discussion of anything that happened last year be sufficient cause for immediate expulsion from this year's league.

**Asher** · August 24, 2006, 20:54

Originally posted by joncha
An example of a suspect trade is a team that is out of contention accepting a trade only because it will help a team that is still in contention. Just off the top of my head.

As has been said before, in such a case the commish has full power to undo the trade. There is no need for the stupid voting system, if somebody makes trades for reasons such as that, it makes the game less fun for everyone and it should be undone.

This absolutely does not require the oversight of hockey pool newbies with a gavel-happy hand and an axe to grind with certain players.

**joncha** · August 24, 2006, 20:57

And what happens, sir, if the commish is one of the guilty parties?

**Asher** · August 24, 2006, 20:58

Originally posted by joncha
And what happens, sir, if the commish is one of the guilty parties?

Then he'll undo the trade, and if he doesn't then for the sake of Apolyton his team's results will be ignored as he'll be disqualified as per the league, as will the other team in the deal if they refuse to undo it.

**Asher** · August 24, 2006, 21:00

To be honest, I think that that situation will be very unlikely. I think it's far more likely that we'll have a situation where one player who is ranked low would like to take a big risk, and a bunch of conservative poolies who wouldn't personally take that risk would bang their gavels and yell "NO!" rather than let the people play the damn game.

**joncha** · August 24, 2006, 21:01

Originally posted by Asher

Then he'll undo the trade, and if he doesn't then for the sake of Apolyton his team's results will be ignored as he'll be disqualified as per the league, as will the other team in the deal if they refuse to undo it.

One would hope so. He or she may instead try to lock the teams of anyone critical of the trade. Or leave the league in a hissy fit, perhaps.

Announcement

Yahoo Fantasy Hockey

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment