VETO'S

[Ryan]

Ok guys, not pointing fingers at anyone(derrick I know you were doing that because of all the finger pointing at you).


seriously I think 1 of 2 things need to happen.......

either no Veto unless an obvious Collusion attempt(if 2 seperate managers can give a valid arguement as to why they beleive the trade helps them then no veto)

or every trade goes through a league vote, which I think will de-value the leagues integrity and will force me to contemplate pulling myself out of the league.......

My suggestion is option 1, and to further that option maybe we can have each manager write up a short article on how they think each trade helps there team, that would give me content to add to NAFHL Newswire if i start it back up again.

[Derrick - Senators]

I fully support Option 1, and would like to think that's how the league was designed to be (and how its operated). I hate vetoes, and can't remember the last time I have actually voted to veto a trade, no matter how bad I thought it was.

Things would run a lot smoother if we had a written rule about vetoes in the books, whereas right now it is sort of run on the honor system.

[Markus - Hurricanes]

I didn't actively participate in the Ottawa/Washington deal aftermath as I still consider myself somewhat new in this established league but I guess it's time to throw my 2 cents out anyway.

I just want to point out that NAFHL isn't the only place where so called "bad" trades take place all the time. Just take a look of certain Toronto transactions not too long ago in the NHL. There was no one to shout veto when Burke decided it's time to throw the future of the franchise to the trash bin with an offer sheet. (ok, exaggeration but I really don't like Burke or Toronto for that matter )

The only time there should be talk about vetoing is when you're in a money league. Then I can understand the need to have a some sort of voting procedure regarding collusion.

"Bad" trades happen all the time. Not everyone regards the value of certain players in the same way and all the "What? Really?" comments in the trade threads only serve to demoralize the parties involved in the trade. I can fully understand if someone gets tired with the quite frankly disrespectful oneliners that are being thrown on the board without second thought and decides that he has better things to do with his time.

There's nothing wrong with debating the deal, but if your "opinion" is one f-in line with three words in it why not just keep it to yourself? It's not like its going to contribute to anything anyway. Of course this sort of stuff is quite common in fantasy hockey leagues and competition tends to bring out the worst in people, but that doesnt mean that NAFHL couldnt hold higher standards than some of the other leagues out there.

[Ryan]

I second the written rule, and as I have stated it should read as:

when a trade is completed both managers must submit an article as to why they think the trade helps their team, it is to be submitted to the Commish, and one other appointed gm(in the case that the trade involves the commish) and then if it happens that there is an issue they will produce the two articles(the reason for not producing them at the time to the league would be because it can be saved and produced into the monthly Newsletter I want to do assuming I can have enough articles to fill it).


and then if any manager brings up the veto vote then a couple of things are automatically looked at.

1)The articles are introduced right away.
2)Determine if the Managers involved may be the same person(not saying that is happening in the league because I beleive it is not and I know of a relatively easy way to tell that should determine if it is happening for most computer users).

*Edit* if someone requests a veto it should also be done via PM so that it will not take the desire to be in this pool out of any of the participants, the involved Managers will be advised and there will be a post regarding the final decision.

[Robyn - Flames]

The issue is the 'skill level' of individual GMs in the league. Obviously everyone is going to value players differently, but a competent GM with an interest in long-term viability would never make the heatley/backstrom/grabner for Rinne/Kopitar/5th overall pick trade.

[Chris - Capitals]

So now I have no "skill" fuck off

[Derrick - Senators]

It is hard to argue with the success that Chris has had assembling a fairly solid farm team without high draft picks, taking chances on guys most others passed over. Additionally, lest we forget the infamous Thornton for Semin trade. I would say that worked out okay.

However, that doesn't mean there is a place for needless bickering or flaming in this thread, and more importantly in this league. I think we have strayed away from what makes this league so fun and so successful. This is a poor reflection on us as managers and as a league, especially to those new GM's and any prospective Gm's.

Any rule changes will be discussed after the drafts, and once all the dust settles. Right now we need to focus on the off-season, so lets keep things civil.

[Derrick - Senators]

Since there are a few weeks left before the Waiver Draft, I have decided it a good time to start discussing some of the league changes/additions that need to be made for this upcoming season.

The first issue that we will address is one that has already been mentioned and discussed briefly: veto system

I am opening this thread back up under the conditions that there isn't any finger pointing or unnecessary inflammatory remarks. The idea of this thread is to better league system under which we all abide.

Discuss.