|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Dec 19, 2022 19:28:09 GMT -5
There has been a significant amount of concern raised with this particular trade so I’m doing due diligence and creating a thread to start a discussion on whether or not to push this trade through. Voting 'No' means you believe the trade should be vetoed, voting 'yes' means you think the trade should NOT be vetoed. Per the rulebook, H) 7/10 managers of those not involved in a trade must be reached for a trade to be vetoed. Votes are anonymous. Those involved in the trade, please do not vote. The trade in question: To Seattle:
Drake Batherson
2023 1st Round Entry
To San Jose:
David PastrnakPlease reference nafhl2.proboards.com/thread/1346/kraken-sharks-trade-12-2022 for ongoing discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Dec 19, 2022 19:56:19 GMT -5
There has been a significant amount of concern raised with this particular trade so I’m doing due diligence and creating a thread to start a discussion on whether or not to push this trade through. Voting 'No' means you believe the trade should be vetoed, voting 'yes' means you think the trade should NOT be vetoed. Per the rulebook, H) 7/10 managers of those not involved in a trade must be reached for a trade to be vetoed. Votes are anonymous. Those involved in the trade, please do not vote. The trade in question: To Seattle:
Drake Batherson
2023 1st Round Entry
To San Jose:
David PastrnakPlease reference nafhl2.proboards.com/thread/1346/kraken-sharks-trade-12-2022 for ongoing discussion. I'm voting "Yes" because a GM should have freedom on how they want to run their team. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Dec 19, 2022 20:12:28 GMT -5
Like I've stated in the past, polls should not be anonymous, what kind of pussy shit is that? There are multiple extra accounts registered here that can be used to vote in any poll. Keeping votes anonymous lacks integrity. Something that's becoming commonplace here it would appear. Like I've stated in the other thread, anybody voting to veto this trade has zero integrity and if the trade gets vetoed the league itself has zero integrity. That is all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Dec 19, 2022 20:26:22 GMT -5
Bob - Kraken, having heard everyone's opinions on the matter thus far, would you reverse the trade or do you still stand by it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Dec 19, 2022 20:36:37 GMT -5
Bob - Kraken, having heard everyone's opinions on the matter thus far, would you reverse the trade or do you still stand by it? Irrelevant. Hearsay. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Capitals on Dec 19, 2022 20:49:33 GMT -5
I voted no veto but this is a very lopsided trade in favor of Nos. I'm of the opinion that we don't veto unless it's collusion as well and don't feel like that's what happened here. I don't like the trade and don't see the reasoning from Seattle's side but it's his team. I don't see how an argument can be made about a rebuild after he's moved his 1st rounder in a year with the deepest draft in quite awhile.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Dec 19, 2022 20:51:06 GMT -5
Bob - Kraken, having heard everyone's opinions on the matter thus far, would you reverse the trade or do you still stand by it? Irrelevant. Hearsay. I'm just genuinely curious. Regardless, if this trade doesn't go through I will personally be pushing for a veto on every single trade I feel isn't 100% right down the middle even. I guess I won't be able to make trades anymore either since I also think I'm the one winning my own trades. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Dec 19, 2022 21:03:01 GMT -5
I voted no veto but this is a very lopsided trade in favor of Nos. I'm of the opinion that we don't veto unless it's collusion as well and don't feel like that's what happened here. I don't like the trade and don't see the reasoning from Seattle's side but it's his team. I don't see how an argument can be made about a rebuild after he's moved his 1st rounder in a year with the deepest draft in quite awhile. You voted no it isn't a fair trade. See? Already confusion with the way the poll was put up, it should be Veto? Yes or no? This is also why people need to post their vote. Fair trade? Why was it put up this way? To add confusion. It doesn't matter if people think it's a fair trade or not. It's, does this need to be vetoed? |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Dec 19, 2022 21:09:19 GMT -5
It doesn't matter if people think it's a fair trade or not. It's, does this need to be vetoed? I agree with this sentiment. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Dec 19, 2022 21:14:42 GMT -5
I voted no veto but this is a very lopsided trade in favor of Nos. I'm of the opinion that we don't veto unless it's collusion as well and don't feel like that's what happened here. I don't like the trade and don't see the reasoning from Seattle's side but it's his team. I don't see how an argument can be made about a rebuild after he's moved his 1st rounder in a year with the deepest draft in quite awhile. You voted no it isn't a fair trade. See? Already confusion with the way the poll was put up, it should be Veto? Yes or no? This is also why people need to post their vote. Fair trade? Why was it put up this way? To add confusion. It doesn't matter if people think it's a fair trade or not. It's, does this need to be vetoed? It is worded this way to not create any bias. Which is actually a benefit to you. Including the word 'veto' in the title already puts the idea in the voters head that it is the desired outcome. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Dec 19, 2022 21:21:07 GMT -5
No it doesn't and it's already been illustrated that there's confusion with the wording with Chris' response. You also put veto in the initial post's message text. More dishonest nonsense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyler - Jets on Dec 19, 2022 21:22:18 GMT -5
There have been multiple trades vetoed that were way closer to “even” than this. That being said I will vote to not veto this trade. We should all be able to run our teams how we see fit. I agree this is a bit lopsided but I don’t like Batherson long term at all. If Bob feels Batherson will develop at a better trajectory then great go for it.
Nos you especially have ripped apart trades that ended up being vetoed where both GM’s were completely happy with the move.
I would be on board with taking away all veto’s. Obviously there is no going back to correct or un due previous Fair trades….. So let’s set the precedent here and end vetoes. We are all experienced Fantasy hockey General Managers make the moves you see fit for your squad and live with the results!
|
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Dec 19, 2022 21:27:45 GMT -5
There have been multiple trades vetoed that were way closer to “even” than this. That being said I will vote to not veto this trade. We should all be able to run our teams how we see fit. I agree this is a bit lopsided but I don’t like Batherson long term at all. If Bob feels Batherson will develop at a better trajectory then great go for it. Nos you especially have ripped apart trades that ended up being vetoed where both GM’s were completely happy with the move. I would be on board with taking away all veto’s. Obviously there is no going back to correct or un due previous Fair trades….. So let’s set the precedent here and end vetoes. We are all experienced Fantasy hockey General Managers make the moves you see fit for your squad and live with the results! Exactly right Tyler, you're a beast with integrity, thank you. You're a boss, willing to do what it takes to improve and you have dramatically. I'm glad there are some people who are still beasts with integrity, it gives me hope for the future. Trades should never be vetoed unless there's cheating involved. Trades can be evaluated later and used to determine whether a GM is doing his job and worthy of his position but vetoes should never occur based on opinions. We've all seen what certain managers opinions devolved into. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Capitals on Dec 19, 2022 22:13:54 GMT -5
I voted no veto but this is a very lopsided trade in favor of Nos. I'm of the opinion that we don't veto unless it's collusion as well and don't feel like that's what happened here. I don't like the trade and don't see the reasoning from Seattle's side but it's his team. I don't see how an argument can be made about a rebuild after he's moved his 1st rounder in a year with the deepest draft in quite awhile. You voted no it isn't a fair trade. See? Already confusion with the way the poll was put up, it should be Veto? Yes or no? This is also why people need to post their vote. Fair trade? Why was it put up this way? To add confusion. It doesn't matter if people think it's a fair trade or not. It's, does this need to be vetoed? I probably could have taken a second and read that a little better but was trying to get a response in prior to the start of the Caps game 2nd period. It does add to the confusion on how it was created. My vote needs to be corrected I was voting "no the trade should not be veto'd". Why was this worded in a way asking if it's fair? We're not here to determine fairness we're here to determine if a veto should take place which isn't necessarily the same. Going back I see that they've always been "is this fair" but it needs to be flat out "should this be veto'd" |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Dec 20, 2022 2:46:04 GMT -5
Hey Chris, I believe you can change your vote yourself? I'm not 100% sure but I thought that was possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Capitals on Dec 20, 2022 10:10:57 GMT -5
So it does not allow me to change my vote but the question being asked I would not change my vote.
Is the trade fair imo no not at all but that also doesn’t make it vetoable and I would vote no to it being vetoed just to be clear on my stance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Dec 20, 2022 12:29:37 GMT -5
Like I've stated in the past, polls should not be anonymous, what kind of pussy shit is that? There are multiple extra accounts registered here that can be used to vote in any poll. Keeping votes anonymous lacks integrity. Something that's becoming commonplace here it would appear. Like I've stated in the other thread, anybody voting to veto this trade has zero integrity and if the trade gets vetoed the league itself has zero integrity. That is all. You sound like Donald Trump. Votes are anonymous so that every GM that is required to participate in this poll can do so without being berated by you like you have continually done to anyone who has a dissenting view throughout this entire process thus far. |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Dec 20, 2022 14:20:25 GMT -5
The poll question should be changed to "Should this trade be vetoed?".
I really don't care what's been done in the past or what the rulebook states, it needs to be changed then.
Like I said earlier, if this trade doesn't go through...I will 100% be creating a poll thread myself for EVERY SINGLE TRADE asking GMs "Is this trade fair?".
I hope you all realize what you're really voting for here, it's not just this one instance, it's trades for every single trade you conduct in the future. You want to play by the "it's fair" card, then we sure as Hell will play by the "it's fair" card CONSISTENTLY.
To those who have voted for this trade not to be processed, I really hope down the road you enjoy the league governing your trades for you.
Embarrassing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Dec 20, 2022 15:29:20 GMT -5
The poll question should be changed to "Should this trade be vetoed?". I really don't care what's been done in the past or what the rulebook states, it needs to be changed then. Like I said earlier, if this trade doesn't go through...I will 100% be creating a poll thread myself for EVERY SINGLE TRADE asking GMs "Is this trade fair?". I hope you all realize what you're really voting for here, it's not just this one instance, it's trades for every single trade you conduct in the future. You want to play by the "it's fair" card, then we sure as Hell will play by the "it's fair" card CONSISTENTLY. To those who have voted for this trade not to be processed, I really hope down the road you enjoy the league governing your trades for you. Embarrassing. Fear mongering rhetoric. You are starting to sound like your brother now. What is more embarrassing? Attempting to discuss an issue politically that affects the whole league or threatening people and throwing temper tantrums. |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Dec 20, 2022 15:41:07 GMT -5
The poll question should be changed to "Should this trade be vetoed?". I really don't care what's been done in the past or what the rulebook states, it needs to be changed then. Like I said earlier, if this trade doesn't go through...I will 100% be creating a poll thread myself for EVERY SINGLE TRADE asking GMs "Is this trade fair?". I hope you all realize what you're really voting for here, it's not just this one instance, it's trades for every single trade you conduct in the future. You want to play by the "it's fair" card, then we sure as Hell will play by the "it's fair" card CONSISTENTLY. To those who have voted for this trade not to be processed, I really hope down the road you enjoy the league governing your trades for you. Embarrassing. Fear mongering rhetoric. You are starting to sound like your brother now. What is more embarrassing? Attempting to discuss an issue politically that affects the whole league or threatening people and throwing temper tantrums. Lmfao, I'm discussing Fantasy Hockey bud. You're the one throwing Donald Trump into the mix. 😂😂😂 I'm someone who stands for CONSISTENCY. A concept that is VERY hard for you to grasp apparently. There are no threats or tantrums being had, that's your issue if you view it as such. I simply want things to run consistently and for every GM to be treated that exact same way with the same amount of fairness. |
|
So exciting.
You better make that pick or trade it! I'm excited to see if we can use up all the draft picks this year.