Re: [Stanleit] Trade Commission

Hobbit83 · Post by **Hobbit83** » 24/11/2009, 17:09

Vicram wrote: La trade sul sito è stata accettata perchè è scaduto il tempo.
So che sono ancora nascosti i pulsantini, colpa mia, però, per la prossima volta, c'è un pulsante che mette la trade in stand by fino a quando la commissione non decide...
Poi una volta deciso, si accetta o rifiuta la trade...adesso credo sia da sistemare a livello di DB.

Kach...combini? Io ho un periodo a dir poco incasinato..... :gazza:

Io mi ero scordato che anche noi potevamo bloccare la trade, non vedendo i pulsanti.... l'ho riletto solo ieri.

kachlex · Post by **kachlex** » 24/11/2009, 17:25

bure wrote: A dispetto del fatto che lo scambio figura ancora in archivio come 'accepted', credo che kax abbia già sistemato i roster, perché Lupul lo vedo al suo posto.

Si mi scordato di sistemare lo stato della trade ma i giocatori sono ok! Ora sistemo!

therussianrocket · Post by **therussianrocket** » 25/11/2009, 13:11

ho riletto parte della discussione. Mi sembra si sia un po' esagerato con bure eh (guarda che mi tocca scrivere). Ho capito gli sfottò ma se abbiamo accettato le sue trades è solo colpa nostra (e io faccio parte della compagnia, Olesz in cambia di Doughty praticamente :roll: ). Poi per fortuna nel mio caso è arrivato il Jovo di turno (alias Mike Keenan) a salvare la situazione

^Tex^ · Post by **^Tex^** » 03/12/2009, 23:02

Mi scuso se ho offeso qualcuno come bure ed altri (magari Anzer e paolino) in seguito alla trade di Voracek e le discussioni che ne sono generate:non era mia intenzione ma mi sono fatto prendere la mano a causa del fatto che venivo da un periodo un pò particolare,e mi sono lasciato troppo andare.
Ora è tutto OK e ci tenevo a smorzare i toni,rasserenando l'ambiente. :D

ItalianBlueJay · Post by **ItalianBlueJay** » 03/12/2009, 23:10

noooooooooooo...e il mio ruolo di mescolatore e annebbiatore di mari che serve allora :D

therussianrocket · Post by **therussianrocket** » 04/12/2009, 1:38

^Tex^ wrote: Mi scuso se ho offeso qualcuno come bure ed altri (magari Anzer e paolino) in seguito alla trade di Voracek e le discussioni che ne sono generate:non era mia intenzione ma mi sono fatto prendere la mano a causa del fatto che venivo da un periodo un pò particolare,e mi sono lasciato troppo andare.
Ora è tutto OK e ci tenevo a smorzare i toni,rasserenando l'ambiente. :D

bure · Post by **bure** » 30/06/2010, 19:37

I protest both California's trades

Reasoning:
the new GM of California just joined the league and it looks like he has yet to figure out the importance of draft picks in this league.
They were basically thrown up in these deals, whereas they came hard for the former ownership who put those assets together as the prime feature to build the future of the franchise.
Adding 2 picks to exchange players of similar value doesn't make any sense, even more so for a rebuilding team:
this obviously can NOT be a reason to give awaw picks.

kachlex · Post by **kachlex** » 30/06/2010, 19:40

bure wrote: I protest both California's trade

specifics to come..

i quote just to permit the commission to have the time to discuss them.

edit: I protest!

Snipeshow · Post by **Snipeshow** » 30/06/2010, 22:08

Lol alright. Here is my reasoning and I cant believe these are being protested. Anyways.

Bailey was drafted 9th overall two years ago and had made solid strides in his development. He's going to be a very good player and certainly better than anybody I'd be picking in the third round. Believe me I am a prospect junkie and I have researched the hell out of this draft. This is nuts.

Little I am getting very cheap. He had one poor season and suddenly these late picks aren't worth a 23 year old contributing forward? I think you are severely overrating late round draft picks. I have a ton of prospects and I traded for two young nhlers that are just scratching the surface of what they can be.

Its not like I traded for two veterans here. These are two NHLers who are very young. They are just scratching the surface in their development. I cannot believe these are being protested.

I have a boat load of prospects. Late round picks, I researched the players available, the I made the trades.

Snipeshow · Post by **Snipeshow** » 30/06/2010, 22:12

I am also away and likely not even able to make the picks now. So they'll just get forfeited and I'll be left with nothing.

If I knew these would be protested (which I still can't believe) I would have left a long list and still been frustrated because these late round picks are a lot less valuable than two top 12 picks already playing in the NHL!!

I guess whatever is decided is decided....

Mazziero · Post by **Mazziero** » 01/07/2010, 0:51

Trade #1

California sells:
Player Tuomo Ruutu - 2.0M - 2010
Pick Entry Draft 2010 Round 3 from California
Pick Entry Draft 2010 Round 3 from Ontario
Miami sells:
Player Josh Bailey - 1.7M - 2012

Trade #2

Denver sells:
Player Bryan Little - 1.6M - 2011
California sells:
Player Karl Alzner - 2.3M - 2012
Pick Entry Draft 2010 Round 3 from Toronto
Pick Entry Draft 2011 Round 3 from New York

Both trade are confirmed because the commission considered their effects won't be so heavy to unbalance the league next and on the following years.
The four 3rd round picks sold, Ruutu, Alzner, and their salaries have been divided between two teams, so there aren't dangerous situations.
The trade is also on the trend of California tattics during this draft who used the many picks left by Svizzero and IBJ to get the 1st overall, get 2 good young players and to shed some salary cap to make his team better.

Snipeshow · Post by **Snipeshow** » 01/07/2010, 1:05

Thank you. I definitely understand the importance of picks and with my many picks I traded up to 1st overall to get the best prospect available who I think is a star in the making.

Also I don't see much offense coming from Alzner so although he's a good prospect in the NHL, his defensive ways are more important to Washington than to fantasy.

I have many picks next year and intend on using them in the best way possible to improve my team. That may be using them to pick, or to improve my team with young stud players. You won't see me trading for old guys. I will ensure this rebuild is done correctly. I am a prospect junkie, and I love the prospects and young NHLers this team has. Also shedding a bit of salary was important to me for free agency.

Thank you for reconsidering this decision and I look forward to continuing building this team.

bure · Post by **bure** » 01/07/2010, 1:56

Snipeshow wrote: Lol alright. Here is my reasoning and I cant believe these are being protested. Anyways.

Bailey was drafted 9th overall two years ago and had made solid strides in his development.

It's not like being drafted high means something per se..especially when the player has yet to prove that high pick was deserved. But this is not the point..

He's going to be a very good player and certainly better than anybody I'd be picking in the third round.

lol, and you know it how? actually, odds are there will be better player taken in the 3rd round and you will be proven wrong in the future. But again, this is not the point either.

The point is, so far Ruutu > Bailey; as for salary, you were paying (around) 2M for Ruutu or could have got compensation, for Bailey you will pay 1.7 and 2.8 the next year. I don't get all this improvement, considering you have no better options as RFA than Ruutu and the Finn is the better player until further prove.
Considering the thread you started about your sudden departure, the two picks you added look like a present given up by someone who all of sudden realizes he won't be around to use them and so feels like solving his problem in the quicker possible way.

Little I am getting very cheap.

How is 2 draft picks in a good year cheap?!
as for his salary, for Little the salary floor would be 1.5, so considering the bad season he is coming off, his salary is not necessarily lower than the one you would pay during free agency for the same player in the same situation. So big deal getting Little.

He had one poor season and suddenly these late picks aren't worth a 23 year old contributing forward? I think you are severely overrating late round draft picks. I have a ton of prospects and I traded for two young nhlers that are just scratching the surface of what they can be.

Its not like I traded for two veterans here. These are two NHLers who are very young. They are just scratching the surface in their development.

Are you missing the rules dude? you are speaking like you'll be able to keep Little's and Bayley's rights forever..
Little's contract will be over in *1* year, as soon as he will be beyond the surface lol.

Basically you gave away 1 year of Ruutu + 2 of Alzner X 2yrs of Bailey and 1yr of Little
(in fact Ruutu was the best option as RFA for you, i have my doubts Little and Bailey will turn out to be your best options as RFAs when their contracts will expire).

In all of that, there really was no need to give up 4 picks.

bure · Post by **bure** » 01/07/2010, 2:05

Snipeshow wrote: I am also away and likely not even able to make the picks now. So they'll just get forfeited and I'll be left with nothing.

If I knew these would be protested (which I still can't believe) I would have left a long list ..

in fact this is what you're supposed to do when you know you are going to be away while your picks are coming up.. i'm sure you are well aware of that: you're supposed to leave a list, not to throw your picks away.

Snipeshow wrote: I guess whatever is decided is decided....

Thank you for reconsidering this decision and I look forward to continuing building this team.

Nothing was decided, hence nothing was reconsidered.
The trade was protested, as a consequence the Commission revised it and, unfortunately for me and you, ruled against the protest.

bure · Post by **bure** » 01/07/2010, 2:36

Mazziero wrote: Both trade are confirmed because the commission considered their effects won't be so heavy to unbalance the league next and on the following years.

yet, other less unbalanced deals in the past were rejected.

The trade is also on the trend of California tattics during this draft who used the many picks left by Svizzero and IBJ to get the 1st overall, get 2 good young players and to shed some salary cap to make his team better.

one thing is using picks to get the 1st overall (that was a fantastic deal for California), a completely different one is throwing picks away (speaking of consistent tactics, stockpiling draft picks was the main good thing former GMs did for that franchise); i would not put those moves under the same tactics lol.

In fact let's look at what just happened:
Halifax moved down from 1 to 4 to add overall 1 more pick.
California lost 4 picks to go from Ruutu+Alzner to Bailey+Little.

If you think the latter dealing is fair, you should have ruled worth of protest&reject the first one. No way around this.
Since you didn't (and rightfully so), i guess you're weighing 1 draft pick a lot.. hence the definite unbalance in the other trade you just approved.

And California didn't clear salary btw. Ruutu, there was no need to clear his salary: he is a FA (and a good one at 2M, useful for California as RFA).
Right now California went up 1M in salary: adding 1.6 + 1.7 (will be 2.8 next year), losing 2.3.

Bottom line, the message i hope everyone will get from all of this:
don't act in a hurry just cause you have to leave, as throwing away assets won't only hurt your team, it will unfairly benefit the lucky recipient on the other side. And as this vote shows, the trade commission is not always able to prevent crap from happening.