when we able to.....

[Ryan]

when we able to resume trades?

[Mark - Bruins]

i think it is reasonable to assume that we can resume trading. the rules just say no trades during the playoffs. also, are we able to resume signing free agents/prospects over the summer?

[Ryan]

thats what im thinking how it should be as well but i guess we have to wait to hear the final decision lol

[Phil - Blue Jackets]

nafhl2.proboards79.com/index.cgi?board=generaldiscussion&action=display&thread=1169341334

Trading resumes after the keeper submission. With that said, the only trading availabe at that point wil be players that are kept or on your farm and draft picks. Players on your roster that are not kept are thrown into the waiver pool for the waiver draft. Hence, these players cannot be traded until they are redrafted. Also, no one is allowed to move players back and forth from the farm until after the keeper submission.

[Mark - Bruins]

I think we should allow like at least 1 day of trading before the keeper submission. This way, people are able to make changes to their team in preparation for the waiver draft and keeper submission. For instance, do you think its smart advice for a playoff-bound team, with like 12 or 13 good players, to trade away 2-3 good non-keeper players for a slight improvement of a single keeper player at the trade deadline? This forces GMs to either weaken their teams for the playoffs or weaken their teams in the future. By enforcing a no-trade clause from Mid-March to June 1st, you are forcing GMs to decide who their 10 keepers are in the middle of March before the tade deadline or else face losing players for nothing if you lose in the playoffs.

I think its silly to not allow trades before keeper submissions since a lot of things can change and I doubt everybody plans their keepers 3 months in advance. I like the original rule (posted on the main page) that we can trade after the NAFHL playoffs end. At the very least, we should be allowed to make transactions on like May 31st.

[Nos - Sharks]

Trades are allowed from now until the keeper deadline in order to improve your position. Basically what Mark said. Derrick should confirm this.

[Phil - Blue Jackets]

Wrong and wrong. I linked the "revised rules" thread in my previous post. Trades are not allowed now and they wont be allowed until the "open transaction period" starts on June 1st. And, like I said previously, even then all your players are not tradable. The players that are not submitted on the keeper list will go into the waiver pool. They cannot be traded until after they are redrafted in August.

In regards to Mark, your suggestion is bad. Teams that are capable of making a playoff run have to make a sacrifice. A manager can't keep all of his players. So, some of those players that he used to compete in the playoffs are forfeited to the waiver draft and redistributed across the league. A manager in that position has to make a choice. This entails looking at his team and deciding what he needs to keep in order to compete in the playoffs. If he doesn't need a player, he can attempt to trade him for something else that he can keep or send to his farm. I don't understand your point. Your suggestion largely nullfies the benefit of the waiver draft. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Competing in the playoffs has consequences, and those include losing keeper worthy players because you don't have enough keeper slots.

This goes along with my argument for the locking of rosters after the playoffs start. Trades end in mid-March. ALL new player acquistion should be stopped when the playoffs start. This includes trades as well as free agent and farm signings. Notice that I have left the option open of moving players up from your farm. This excludes, however, adding new players to the farm. After June 1st, trading can resume, but only with the players on your keeper list, players currently on your farm, and with draft picks. This does not include new signings to your regular or farm teams. Farm signings have to wait until after the waiver draft. Otherwise, the pool of players in that draft could be diminished.

[Nos - Sharks]

Bummies, shhhh, you're wrong. Nowhere on the revised rules list does it say we can't resume trading after the season is over. Trades are halted for the rest of the season, after that's done everything can resume. Derrick has said that we can elsewhere, he should get in here and confirm as I'm sure that's the right course of action.

[Derrick - Senators]

Trading will resume on June 1st. I feel as though that date gives the real life NHL teams enough time to get some initial signings/moves out of the way after the playoffs in order to give us, the fantasy managers a chance to assess and determine who we do and don't want to keep based on such actions.

As stated, allowing the trading of players post-playoff and pre-keeper submission would make the waiver draft pointless. All that would result would be a lot of trading trash for gold (which is detrimental to the weaker teams). Essentially all the players that strong teams cant keep are useless to them. Why should weaker teams, or any team for that matter have to give up current assets or future assets when they can probably obtain the player for free in the waiver draft? it is a system of checks and balances.

On the other hand, the trading of draft picks and keeper slots is debatable since it wasn't separately addressed. I don't see the point in arguing this really anyway because you would only be allowed to trade picks for picks, keepers for keepers, or any combination of the sort.

[Nos - Sharks]

Silly rule in my opinion. You're basically looking at it from a black and white perspective. What if the negotiating managers find use in a deal? What if it's a combination of keepers, picks, non-keepers, keeper slots, etc? Who's to say what's legit or not? Who's to say what a keeper is or not? (If we're doing keeper for keeper trades before June 1st) Ultimately, can't a trade benefit a lower team more so than a stronger team? If not, why not?

[Derrick - Senators]

nossharks said:

What if the negotiating managers find use in a deal? What if it's a combination of keepers, picks, non-keepers, keeper slots, etc? Who's to say what's legit or not? Who's to say what a keeper is or not? (If we're doing keeper for keeper trades before June 1st) Ultimately, can't a trade benefit a lower team more so than a stronger team? If not, why not?

I'm sure you could draw up any number of scenarios that would benefit each and every team. However, just because it COULD benefit a certain team doesnt mean it is whats best and fair for the league.

As far as keepers and non keepers go, it is fairly simple. A keeper = a player that a good team cant keep because of lack of keeper slots that is superior to the existing keepers of a lesser team. As i said before, in an attempt to give the lesser teams a better chance at improving, WHY ship off current assets or future assets to a power team (making the strong even stronger) when the lesser team could get these players for free in the waiver draft while still keeping their assets?

To get to the point, you dont care about weaker teams, you have stated this many times before. your concern lies with how you can squeeze any and all value out of your team and your team only. If this is such an issue, dont you think the weaker teams should be the ones up in arms complaining in posts about how "unfair" it is to them? It would certainly hold more merit than a team such as yours who doesnt benefit from such a rule and might have to give up a little more than they would like.

[Mark - Bruins]

so whats the ruling on just trading keeper picks? I know some teams traded them during the regular season, but what about now? having weaker teams trading keeper slots for keeper-worthy players would be able to improve both teams.

[Nos - Sharks]

While it's true that I only care about my own team, I don't see how this is a problem as I'm sure every single other team feels the same way. Of course, keeping things legit and "fair" within the system is also important to me.

I still don't understand your stance here either. For example, some teams might find use in players like Chris Clark or Mike Ribeiro, players I might not necessarily keep because of space, but would be keeper worthy to these other teams. How should this be dealt with? Are they tradable? You say to improve the other team's keepers, well this does so, no? Then which players are not tradable? I'm sure common sense of each manager will come into play when deciding upon a deal. If the deal benefits them they'll take it, if not they won't, it'll be self monitored when it comes down to worth.

Furthermore, you say these teams can get these players in the waiver draft and all that, but it's not a guarantee is it? One of the teams could have a low waiver pick, or could have traded away a higher pick, and instead of trading up in the waiver draft these managers can go straight to the source. How is this not fair, legit, and "best for the league"?

[Derrick - Senators]

Simply put: I question the decision making skills (for better of for worse) of many involved in the league. In order to preserve fairness, this is the system that i have adopted. If the lower team has traded away their pick or is in an uncompromising situation that further goes to show their lack or management and organization in terms of "rebuilding." Therefore it is my duty to come up with a way, or as many ways as possible in order to make the league as fair, and as fun as possible regardless of who is managing the team.

With that said, there is no doubt that the concept you are arguing for would help me greatly, but my main concern is finding ways to improve the league and making sure we have a full roster year after year, not what would benefit my team the most. I, too, value competition and excitement. To slant everything in my favor would be neither of those.However, we downsized the number of keepers from 12 to 10 in order to have a more exciting waiver draft no? This new concept seems counterproductive to the original plan. The make up of a team and its success is determined by how well you can pick up spare parts and fill out your team, not how well your superstars play necessarily. The waiver draft provides exactly that year after year.

On a side note, as far as im concerned, it doesnt take any skill whatsoever to trade. Sure there are exceptions, but compiling a package deal in order to acquire a superstar, or trading "extra" keepers for appealing assets are no brainers. Be original, all trading has become is "who can take advantage of who first." In no way am i looking to reward or promote such activity when other fantasy managers are putting in the hours grooming players from their farm and scouring the prospect and free agent pool. Afterall, that is the focal point of a keeper league is it not?

[Nos - Sharks]

I can see where you're coming from but this rule stems more from your lack of confidence in some of the managers. It's either one or the other, I still don't get what's tradable and what isn't, so it should be all trades can be made or none before June 1st. I see the poll is up now and that's just fine.