James Reimer

[Nos - Sharks]

Near the end of last season Tyler - Jets made an erroneous transaction to send James Reimer back down to his farm team after he had played in over 100 games effectively making him a Minor Leaguer. This transaction happened at a time (near the end of the playoffs) when Waivers were not in effect and he couldn't be claimed.



The bubble that pops up reads 'You may not add this player because the game is over.' This showed up when I attempted to claim him off Waivers.

9) The Playoffs

F) Transactions of players who cannot clear waivers due to the fantasy seasons ending will result in the forfeiture of that player(s) in question. Attempting to circumvent the system will not be tolerated. These players will be considered free agents and are available to be drafted in that year’s waiver draft and/or signed as a free agent.

As clear cut as you get yet when I notified Derrick of this, at first, he agreed and took him off the Jets roster but then later put him back on there and when I asked what was up with that he remarked that it was somehow 'his' fault for telling Tyler some wrong information. Now, we can all see the information, Tyler doesn't need to be told anything in this instance, he can see the games played and he knows when eligibility is up. He is in control of his roster, limits and all. He doesn't need his hand held and he certainly shouldn't profit from another manager's 'mistake' in this instance.

Sucks that it had to come to this, a vote thread, I realize this makes me out to be the bad guy for attempting to 'take away' one of your players Tyler, and it paints Derrick in a 'good guy' light for wanting to give him back to you but I'm simply following protocol and it's nothing personal at all. We all adhere to the same rulebook and that's the point. I'm convinced that if I were to have done the same thing this wouldn't be an issue whatsoever because I would never have been given back the player in question.

[Tyler - Jets]

Derrick and I had numerous PM's back and forth on Reimer. Yes I did make a minor mistake but I was told (falsely) that it was okay to send him down at 99 GAMES STARTED. Since I was told incorrectly by Commish he allowed me to retain Reimers rights.
It is always NOS the Best in the World who has to pick everyone else's transactions apart. Losing Reimer will seriously effect my ability to compete and I believe I should be able to retain his rights. I hope rest of league weighs in see where chips fall in the end.

[Tyler - Jets]

I would never have even made the transaction if I wasn't told it was okay through PM.

[Nos - Sharks]

The rulebook is available for everybody to read, the question of 'Games Played' and 'Games Started' has come up in the past as well. I find it strange that Derrick, someone who knows the rulebook back to front, the guy who wrote the rulebook would make this type of mistake but that's beside the point. A mistake was made, it sucks, but your standing in the league shouldn't affect how the rules are interpreted and followed.

[Tyler - Jets]

Even if you get him Stripped from my team. I submitted my keepers first and got no warning like Toronto did about ineligible players and should be given opportunity to make adjustments. Bottom line is NOS is a dick and the only GM to even notice such a minor blip MONTHS later. He just wants to poach Reimer to have both Leaf goalies. Honestly dealing with you is like a spoiled little 8 year old punk.

[Nos - Sharks]

Jul 26, 2013 15:50:35 GMT -5 Tyler - Jets said:

Even if you get him Stripped from my team. I submitted my keepers first and got no warning like Toronto did about ineligible players and should be given opportunity to make adjustments. Bottom line is NOS is a dick and the only GM to even notice such a minor blip MONTHS later. He just wants to poach Reimer to have both Leaf goalies. Honestly dealing with you is like a spoiled little 8 year old punk.

Wow, lots of emotion here, if anyone is acting like a spoiled little 8 year old punk it's you Tyler. What exactly have I done wrong here? What do you object to? Warnings you want now, where does it end? If you want to resubmit your keepers that's fine, hate the idea of it, but since some others have been offered the same opportunity in the past I don't see a problem with it, except for the fact that you gain about a month's knowledge of what's happened in the NHL landscape but I'd be fine with that. Also, I didn't notice this 'months later', no, I noticed at the time it happened because I couldn't claim him and made a screenshot for later reference because I knew shenanigans were likely to occur.

Lastly, I have no interest in James Reimer whatsoever, I wouldn't pick him in the draft with any meaningful picks. Jonathan Bernier is the Leafs starter now and in the future. Reimer has become an after thought...but that's beside the point.

[Tyler - Jets]

Your just a joke why even bring it up now?? Especially if you have no interest. I guess we will see how the poll goes.

[Nos - Sharks]

I brought it up long ago, with Derrick, the only reason I'm bringing it to the league's attention now is because Derrick decided to put Reimer back on your farm team when he had removed him previously. I noticed, asked him about it, and that's what he told me. I told him I'd bring it up with the league and he said to go ahead and that he told you himself that it probably wouldn't fly with the league and he expected the response.

Just because I have no interest doesn't mean it doesn't affect things. It means you got a free keeper. It means one less player in the Waiver Draft to select because of your mistake. The only 'joke' I see here is how riled up you're getting for a mistake you made. Your grammar is also a joke...

[Tyler - Jets]

Done talking about this. Other GM's respond accordingly.

[Nos - Sharks]

'Let Tyler Cheat' seems to be the early consensus. Interesting.

[Mark - Bruins]

If this was brought up when it happened, there'd be more options for us to take (e.g. just have Reimer stay on the roster instead of placed on the farm). At this point, I'd rather have Tyler just keep him instead of bringing up an issue months after an honest mistake.

[Chris - Capitals]

I'd like to hear what Derrick says went down between him and Tyler.

[Derrick - Senators]

Jul 27, 2013 9:33:40 GMT -5 Chris - Capitals said:

I'd like to hear what Derrick says went down between him and Tyler.

1.) Tyler sent me a PM at the start of the playoffs inquiring about Reimer's eligibility.

2.) For whatever reason I falsely informed him that a goalies "games started" was the marker for prospect eligibility instead of "game played," so Tyler rostered Reimer accordingly.

3.) Playoffs ended, I began updating rosters, removed Reimer from the Jets roster because he finished the year on the main roster and was not listed as a keeper.

4.) Tyler sent me another message inquiring why Reimer was no longer on his roster (given the information I previously told him).

5.) I double-checked my PM's and indeed confirmed I told him the wrong information. Added Reimer back to his roster.

6.) This poll was created.

[Chris - Capitals]

That being the case I'm changing my vote

[Nos - Sharks]

I'd like to actually see a copy of this PM. Not that it would change my stance. The trouble I'm having is this 'mistake' effectively gave Tyler a free keeper. When you first noticed this mistake, Derrick, shouldn't you have told Tyler to resubmit his keepers at the time like you did with Scott - Maple Leafs? Like I said, the rulebook is there for everybody to read over, double check, especially for instances like this. Eligibility is the first rule you should know and memorize, Tyler isn't a rookie and games played/started has come up in the past. What has happened here is...

01. Tyler kept Reimer on his main roster over his prospect eligibility time.
02. Tyler drops Reimer as a Minor Leaguer at a time when Waivers are no longer in effect and he can't be claimed. (Re: Section 9F)
03. Tyler complains about losing a player under legit circumstances.
04. Derrick adds him back to his roster.

The only variable here is that Derrick gave some bad information that I don't feel should be admissible. I'm truly stunned at the response the league has had. Votes should be explained, well. There's no excuse to allow this. If the Jets were a top team the voters would do a complete 180, unacceptable.

[Derrick - Senators]

Jul 27, 2013 17:08:28 GMT -5 Nos - Sharks said:

I'd like to actually see a copy of this PM. Not that it would change my stance. The trouble I'm having is this 'mistake' effectively gave Tyler a free keeper. When you first noticed this mistake, Derrick, shouldn't you have told Tyler to resubmit his keepers at the time like you did with Scott - Maple Leafs? Like I said, the rulebook is there for everybody to read over, double check, especially for instances like this. Eligibility is the first rule you should know and memorize, Tyler isn't a rookie and games played/started has come up in the past. What has happened here is...

01. Tyler kept Reimer on his main roster over his prospect eligibility time.
02. Tyler drops Reimer as a Minor Leaguer at a time when Waivers are no longer in effect and he can't be claimed. (Re: Section 9F)
03. Tyler complains about losing a player under legit circumstances.
04. Derrick adds him back to his roster.

The only variable here is that Derrick gave some bad information that I don't feel should be admissible. I'm truly stunned at the response the league has had. Votes should be explained, well. There's no excuse to allow this. If the Jets were a top team the voters would do a complete 180, unacceptable.

Re: Reimer
« Message sent on Mar 27, 2013, 7:36am »

Watching Reimers games closely so I can send him down. Should I be concerned with GP 91 or GS 87?? I know this has come up before just want to be careful and not lose him for nothing.

No worries. He must be sent down before his 101st GAME STARTED in order to be kept for free.

Re: Roster
« Message sent on Jun 27, 2013, 3:35am »

Hey Derrick Reimer should be on my farm team. I asked you about him and sent him down at 99 GS. I am hoping this is just a mistake. Please get back to me.

Per the forum:


Apr 27, 2013, 9:55pm, gorzie11 wrote:
Winnipeg sends Matt Frattin and James Reimer to St. John's


Per the rulebook:


Quote:
F) Transactions of players who cannot clear waivers due to the fantasy seasons ending will result in the forfeiture of that player(s) in question. Attempting to circumvent the system will not be tolerated. These players will be considered free agents and are available to be drafted in that year’s waiver draft and/or signed as a free agent.



Quote:
C) Goalie "Games Played" is noted by the actual number of games a goalie has participated in his career or in that particular season, not the games in which he has started.

C) Goalie "Games Played" is noted by the actual number of games a goalie has participated in his career or in that particular season, not the games in which he has started.

Sending James Reimer to the farm on April 27th did not allow the player enough time to clear waivers before the end of the season and is in direct violation of rule F. Additionally, on April 27th, Reimer had 103 games played (not 99), which is clearly detailed in rule C.

Re: Roster
« Message sent on Jun 27, 2013, 9:35am »

K this is a lot of BS because I specifically asked you in Personal messages about sending Reimer down you told me. He was okay to send down before 100 GS not GP. I would have sent him down way earlier if you Derrick THE COMMISSIONER didn't clear up my decision. You can't make me lose my best starting goalie when you yourself talked with me and corrected me. I read the rule book, asked you directly to get clarification and your still going to Jew me out of Reimer come on. I need him to be competitive and you know it. We talked about Reimer I am not in the wrong here? Please fix the mistake.

After re-reading our PM conversation, it does appear as if I incorrectly told you "games started" instead of "games played." I was under the impression that I correctly quoted the rulebook, and you just chose to keep Reimer up as an attempt to win the consolation bracket.

In any event, I have returned Reimer to your roster, but I can not promise that there won't be any league backlash (Nos) as a result. This was an honest mistake that hopefully won't happen again. Just another reason why it always pays to double check the rulebook and keep your own records and not go just by what is said, because even I slip up on occasion.

But just for future reference, concerning goalies, it is games played, not games started.

Good Luck in the upcoming drafts.

Unlike with Scott - Maple Leafs where the keeper issue was noticed immediately, this issue wasn't realized until 3 months later (1 month after keepers were submitted). Additionally, unlike Scott - Maple Leafs, Tyler clearly states (in his first PM) his intent to NOT roster Reimer over his prospect eligibility limit.

I seriously have no idea how this mistake occurred, as evidenced by the 2nd PM I sent Tyler months later explaining (correctly) in-depth why Reimer was removed from his roster. The only thing I can think of is that initially I had a much longer/potentially confusing 1st response typed out, only to start deleting/reorganizing the PM where I accidentally deleted "GAMES PLAYED" instead of "GAMES STARTED"

In any event, that is the entire PM correspondence.

[Derrick - Senators]

Jul 27, 2013 17:08:28 GMT -5 Nos - Sharks said:

Like I said, the rulebook is there for everybody to read over, double check, especially for instances like this. Eligibility is the first rule you should know and memorize, Tyler isn't a rookie and games played/started has come up in the past.

This is something that definitely shouldn't be overlooked in all of this either. Tyler is absolutely not without fault here. It is every GM's responsibility to know the rulebook and the laws that govern the league (as explained in my last PM). However, in THIS instance, we as a league are forced to choose the between the lesser of the two evils. In my opinion, given all the evidence, that is to return Reimer to the Jets roster.

If the Jets were a top team the voters would do a complete 180, unacceptable.

Also another thing that should not be overlooked. Informal rules/rulings have always tended to favor the weaker teams without protecting the stronger teams for the same or similar offense/s (excluding Robyn - Flames and Steve Mason). The good thing about formalizing the rules and writing them into the rulebook is that all teams (in theory) should enjoy the same protections. However, when league discrepancies arise with wording etc., the stronger teams will still be at the mercy of the league.

[Tyler - Jets]

You should have just brought it up immediately. I would have had lots of time to make corrections. At no point did I feel like an illegal transaction took place. No else in the league had a clue this was going on or someone else would have pointed it out.

[Nos - Sharks]

Jul 27, 2013 21:24:37 GMT -5 Tyler - Jets said:

You should have just brought it up immediately. I would have had lots of time to make corrections. At no point did I feel like an illegal transaction took place. No else in the league had a clue this was going on or someone else would have pointed it out.

Are you speaking to me? You should have just made legal roster moves. Nobody else in the league had a clue because nobody cares as much as I do, nobody knows the rulebook as well as I do either. Finally, and for the last time, I did bring this up right away with Derrick. The only reason this thread popped up now was because I noticed he placed Reimer back on your farm team and I wasn't notified of this change, nor should this change have even taken place. I noticed it and brought it back up, period.

[Nos - Sharks]

This is the last thing I'll say to you, Tyler, if you want this black mark on your legacy in the NAFHL so be it. You want your hand held, you want exceptions made for you, you want the rules bent to favor mistakes you make, go ahead and have all of it. If you can live with it then so can I.