Another Veto worthy trade thread / Mackinnon for Pavelski

[Grapes]

8 Team league, 10 forwards, 3 dmen, 2 goalies, No Bench, 2 IR
G, A, 1pt each. Wins 2pts, shut out 3 bonus pts

Team A is streaming some roster spots trying to max out games played. Was in the process of dropping Pavelski.
Team B says I'm interested in Pavelski (doesn't have any waiver moves left can only acquire via trades).
Team A (about to drop Pavelski) says what can you offer me.
Team B says how about Mackinnon he plays basically every other day from now til end of season.
Done deal

2nd place team is now disputing. Pavelski was acquired by the 1st place team.
There is no collusion. Team A was about to send Pavelski to waivers.
Our league will become a partial keeper (5) next year with expanded stats. Neither Pavelski or Mackinnon would have been keepers.

I don't see where this should be vetoed. If someone could tell me the points projected for each in Dobber's mid season guide that would be awesome. Of all the years I have been part of the Dobber's community I didn't purchase the mid season guide this year.

[LesBoys4]

Midseason projections from guide:
Mackinnon proj 59pts
Pavelski proj 76pts

Don't seem like much collusion, 2nd place is just pissed.

- - - Updated - - -

Midseason projections from guide:
Mackinnon proj 59pts
Pavelski proj 76pts

Don't seem like much collusion, 2nd place is just pissed.

[Kofax]

Mindboggling. Tell the dude who protested to compost his sour grapes and get on with his life.

Positional requirements must come into play here because the guy is only gaining 2 games out of this, still a boneheaded move by the MacKinnon owner.

[lucafen4]

2nd place could have done the same thing... don't cry veto cuz you didn't think of it first.

- - - Updated - - -

2nd place could have done the same thing... don't cry veto cuz you didn't think of it first.

[Grapes]

Awesome. Your responses help me formulate a response to him.
Tough part is, we're all friends who golf together and started this league for some fun during the hockey season.
Every time there is a trade he makes me shake my head.

- - - Updated - - -

Awesome. Your responses help me formulate a response to him.
Tough part is, we're all friends who golf together and started this league for some fun during the hockey season.
Every time there is a trade he makes me shake my head.

[Pengwin7]

8 teams x 10F = 80F in play.

52pts Pavelski (22gp remaining)
39pts MacKinnon (24gp remaining)
38pts NHL #80F
*Point is... in your points-only format, MacKinnon is waiver fodder.

Personally, this trade stinks... and Grapes (I like ya man,,, but come ON!!!)... you are dressing it up with a bunch of "sway music".
How does Team B know that Team is "about to drop Pavelski"? That's the sway trying to justify Pavelski as minimal value.
And the whole "Colorado plays just about every other day"... - more sway music. 22gp left for SJ, 24gp left for COL... it still doesn't churn out more points for MacKinnon than Pavelski if you do the math.

Show me the standings with all the teams & points.
I want to see that.

Collusion/shmoosion... that's not the only word that defines a reason for veto.
It's very possible (even probable) that Team A is gifting Pavelski over to Team B because he doesn't like the GM in 2nd.
Not collusion, no, perhaps not - but there's definitely grounds for veto.

If I'm the commissioner of this league - I'm putting the MacKinnon & Pavelski owners on warning or probation for trying to pull off this stunt.
Again... it reeks in points-only one-year leagues.
We've all been in leagues with the same GMs year-after-year... after a while, you start to dislike some GMs and like other... and this "gifting"... its a way to stick it to someone you don't like... or rub somebody you do.
Again - probably not collusion, but still grounds for veto.


Oh - and as leagues with "expanded stats" go... Pavelski is a top 10 forward in most multi-cat leagues.
Not sure how to justify that he's not. He's top 10 in Yahoo Rank each of the last few seasons... and this one too, I believe.
The trade is unfair.
It's a borderline waiver-wire player (MacKinnon) for a top 20 NHL forward.

I get annoyed when people try to phrase their condition as if its OK.
This trade is not OK... and you know it.
I think somebody deft enough in the art of phrasing analysis could smell the stench here.
It stinks... I can smell it from my side of the screen.

[deantime419]

I think the league needs some tweaking if Pavelski was about to be dropped and GM's are more focused on streaming players than acquiring the best talent.

[BreadManPanarin]

I think the league needs some tweaking if Pavelski was about to be dropped and GM's are more focused on streaming players than acquiring the best talent.

Right? In what league does somebody drop Pavelski rather than trying to trade him for great assets in the first place?

[Grapes]

All valid points.

In the beginning of the season we decided on a 1 year basic point league. We agreed to let guys manage how they want.
The only thing at stake was bragging rights.
Around the All-star break we decided to become a limited keeper next season.

Would I trade Pavelski for Mackinnon straight up. No.
Was there some dressing up in the trade explanation. Yes

How do we educate this Newbie to avoid dropping good players to waivers as well as avoid this type of thing again.?

- - - Updated - - -

All valid points.

In the beginning of the season we decided on a 1 year basic point league. We agreed to let guys manage how they want.
The only thing at stake was bragging rights.
Around the All-star break we decided to become a limited keeper next season.

Would I trade Pavelski for Mackinnon straight up. No.
Was there some dressing up in the trade explanation. Yes

How do we educate this Newbie to avoid dropping good players to waivers as well as avoid this type of thing again.?