Am I over reacting or is this complete BS?

[funandez]

We?ve had this league with friends since the 2000-2001 season. 5 of the 10 gms are still around from the first season, and 4 more have been in the league for at least 6 years.

Needless to say, there?s a ton of history in this league with group chats that would take you years to read through.

In the 2010-11 season, we introduced keepers and draft pick trading. At the end of the season, each gm keeps 3 players.

This season, somehow a raging debate was triggered that has been going on for over a month. One day we?re arguing about going full keeper roster, then no keepers, then increasing to 5, then 6, etc etc etc.

Today, the commish decided he was taking a stand, and effective immediately, we?ll no longer have keepers.

His rational is that he wants to make the league more exciting, wants draft day to be more meaningful.

One of the original GMs lost his crap, he said to count him out next season, and left the chat lol.

But honestly, I feel the same way. I told them I?m out too.

I have McDavid, Tavares, and Gaudreau. I?ve made sacrifices in previous years to get or keep these guys. I?m getting totally screwed. Not to mention, I love the added dimension a keeper league offers.

4 guys have spoken out against the decision, 3 are pushing for it, 2 haven?t taken a position, and then there the gm whose pushing for it too.

I told them if they want to reset the league, go start a new one instead of destroying this one. But the commish isn?t having it.

I?m hoping to get some outside opinions and share it with the league so hopefully people come to their senses.

In my mind, this is compete bs, and a league that has been in existence for 18 years is being ripped apart. Worst part is, they have the option of just starting a new league and not screw the rest of us over.

But maybe I?m wrong, looking forward to your opinions.

[Atomic Wedgy]

I've been in a league that has lasted as long as yours. We introduced a rule that instead of 24 keepers, you would only be allowed to protect 19. We announced this rule but it didn't take place until the season after the upcoming season. Furthermore, if you want a rule change in the middle of a season, you require 100% of the vote. In the offseason, you only require 75% of the vote. This move went through in the summer as it was not unanimous. So essentially, all GMs had a full season to prepare their roster for the change.

If a commish makes a unilateral decision like that, he is not a good commish in my opinion.

Just out of curiousity, who would have been the likely keepers for the commish?

[Shoelace]

Decisions like that ruin leagues. Hold your ground. Chances are the league is so divided that it will be ruined regardless

[stevegamer]

Basically the solution is for the guys who are against it to simply say, "Thanks for the fun over the years, but we won't be returning next year."

The commish has already decided to what he wants to do, and once Pandora's box has been opened it's really hard to get that stuff back in the box. The issue is that he decided what was going to happen rather than basically saying here are some options: vote.

[Wonko]

I've been in a league that has lasted as long as yours. We introduced a rule that instead of 24 keepers, you would only be allowed to protect 19. We announced this rule but it didn't take place until the season after the upcoming season. Furthermore, if you want a rule change in the middle of a season, you require 100% of the vote. In the offseason, you only require 75% of the vote. This move went through in the summer as it was not unanimous. So essentially, all GMs had a full season to prepare their roster for the change.

If a commish makes a unilateral decision like that, he is not a good commish in my opinion.

Agreed. You are right to be upset. You have invested years of time into this league and your voice should be heard. No changes this drastic should be made without 100% consent. This commissioner has likely ruined your league. My condolences.

[PenguinHunter]

Yes... This is complete mismanagement of a league by a commissioner.

And really his reason for it is that he wanted Draft day to be more important.... well in a keep 3 league... Draft day is still really important. You could have the 3 best keepers and still mess up on picking your next 15 players for your roster. The percentage of keepers to total roster is not significant enough to make the draft day meaningless.

It almost sounds to me that the Commish does not have a good set of keepers and realizes this and wants a fresh start. Which is complete BS!!

I am guessing that majority of the GMs are making the decisions based on what they have for keepers. The guys that want 5 or 6 keepers will have a set of really good keeper set of 6 players... whereas the guys that want 0 keepers realize that their keepers are not as strong as the other groups. I feel that the discussion of keepers should never be brought up in a keeper league because it is always going to be influence by the GMs rosters and what they have for a roster.

I bet if you go back to when keepers were implemented that the Commish had a good set of 3 keepers and thats why he wanted keepers.

Well I feel like I am making the same argument over and over.... Its BS

[nickchau2000]

The only fair way is to take a vote on any sort of change to league rules. And there should always be at least a 1 year delay in implementing the rules to allow GM's to make adjustments.

IMO.

[Jouko-Pouko]

That is BS for sure. Start a new league and take those smart GMs with you. You have about half a league in place if you start a new one and they all join.

[lucafen4]

if it's on fantrax... see if support will copy this league (they copy from other sites as well) - create a new one with exact rosters/settings and bring over anyone that wants keepers... this way, they also have the option of remaining in the other pool as well, and joining a second pool.

food for thought

[LawMan]

A commissioner’s role should be limited to enforcing the rules that are clearly spelled out for the league, if there is ambiguity the commissioner should seek counsel and input from all GMs. If he wants to change the rules the commissioner needs to follow the same protocol as any other GM who wants to change the rules. Generally that would be: rule proposal, including a lag time for implementation and then a vote, major rule changes should need at least two-thirds approval before implementation.
If this was a new league I would just advise you to pack up and move on. Since the league is 16+ years old it obviously has some staying power, good friends and likely means something to most of the GMs, I would encourage you to stay and try and work something out.

First, the commissioner’s unilateral declaration that you are going to become a 1-year league is BS, tell him that as respectfully as possible… Point out the trades you made to acquire the 3 keepers you currently have were sacrificing immediate success for long-term upside. Insist on an explanation as to why going to a one-year league will make the league better, actually listen to his comments. Then make your own rebuttal: keeper leagues with draft pick trading lead to significantly more in-season trading because top teams can trade futures to bottom teams for current upside. In your league a #4 keeper, a guy like say Evander Kane or Drew Doughty (depending on rosters) is going to carry a lot of value at the trade deadline. Is loading up worth a 3rd round pick in next year’s draft? A 2nd? A 1st? That will lead to all kinds of excitement between top teams and bottom teams. With only 3 keepers draft day will remain incredibly important, and if you keep the current setup then it will be chaotic and plenty of teams have each other’s picks, they might package those with keepers for more moves. In reality, straight 1-year leagues offer far fewer reasons to make trades because there is no contrast between winning this year and winning in the future.

Anyways, I would object to the unilateral changes. I would call for a discussion and debate followed by a vote, while I would prefer the vote requires at least 2/3 support to pass I may begrudgingly accept the results of a 6/10 vote. I would try and keep pride out of the discussion as much as possible. Ideally, the league comes around without losing any GMs over the matter. If the commissioner is convinced he is going to unilaterally go 1-year I would call bullshit and then decide whether you can remain as a part of the league, if you can’t I would be tempted to take as many managers as possible with you. On the plus side if a deal can be worked out between the parties that would be great. Once this issue is settled your league needs to set to writing some rules about how such future issues will be decided including required vote and implementation lag time.

[marc1pol2]

As a democratic-commish and an economist, the first step I would have done, it's to ask the GMs if they want to have keepers or not by explaining impartially the pros and the cons of the 2 options and let the DG argue about it. If the majority had answer they want keepers, I would have proceded with another vote where I would have offer the options between 1-2-3 or 4 keepers.The mean of all the votes would have determined the number of keepers. I always procede like this for any change in the rules and nobody can complain about the final result.

[als_revenge]

4 against it, 4 for it, and 2 neutrals. What a gong show.

As noted above, I think your best option is for the 4 of you to go "out of your own" and build a new league from scratch.

You are in a losing situation, since it's easier for a Commish to recruit "new blood" for a perpetual 1-year league than it is for you to find more than half a league of replacements for keepers.

Just curious - is this a money league or a free league?

[Atomic Wedgy]

It seems pretty strange that after 16 years there aren't any rules to prevent the commish from doing what he has just done.

Final answer:

[StuntMan12]

I would be infuriated as well. One thing you COULD do, is once the season is over, you could compile a list of the teams and each player associated with that team and copy it into a new league and find new managers for the former commissioner for example. That is one thing you could consider.

[MZac]

If you change the number of keepers I'm firm on there has to be at least 2 seasons notice (current season and the next one). People draft based on number of keepers. You certainly can't go and arbitrarily change it mid season. Huge let down by the commish here. I'd definitely quit.