PLEASE HELP

[87Flyer]

i need as many guys as possible to answer this please. i have a person that has made a deal in a new league that thinks this deal is fair and shudnt be vetoed. please answer honestly and tell me what you think of this deal.
wolski, stafford, christensen, stumpel, hamill, 5th in 08 (48-60), 3rd in 09(24-36) for
AO, Latendresse and rolston

is this fair or is this a vetoeable trade. would you say the guy trading AO is a knowledgeable GM? thnx for the help.

[big_dl]

It\'s a bad deal, that\'s a lot of shit for AO but it doesnt look like it\'s dumping. With the exception of Stumpel everyone\'s he\'s getting has potential to be a quality NHL player and depending on what you read Hammill could be the real deal. I think it\'s just a really bad deal. Furthermore, AO hasnt put up huge numbers, 106 and 92 arent anything really special. The key to Ovechkin is the upside and maybe this guy doesnt see it.

Let me also that I dont think that unfair and vetoable are necessarily the same thing. To me a vetoable trade is an illegal trade. This has all been said before.

[Della Madonna]

hello,




None of the player he is receiveig will ever come close to the left nut of AO.

I offered St louis, Erat and a second Rounder (10-20) for AO and VrBata and and ligue refused the Vetoed the trade, some said i was offereing to much, but for me I felt that i was paying a honest price. I did not mind lossing the players because i have Stasny and Radz in the systme.

No matter how high you can see Hamil, the fact his that AO is a solid and proven player.

Personnaly i would not trade AO for the list of player you just mentioned.
Ist a steal of a lifetime in My opinion.

Whit the AO as this year is production will rise.

Beside Crosby which player had 198 point in is first 2 season in the last 10 years ?

vetoeable if you think its fixed.

This is my opinion

Thanks
MDM

[digitalmonkey]

From my league rules:

Any owner may request a vote on any trade. In this event a closed vote must take place and a majority is needed in order to overturn the trade. Please note: The ONLY reason to request a vote is if you believe owners are in collusion, NOT because you thought it was a bad trade - bad trades are part of sports folks.

[87Flyer]

so in essence then digitaal your saying that a deal of this nature is perfectly fine and should be left alone?

[DobberManiac]

the AO guy wins hands down

[dynamo45]

87Flyer wrote:

so in essence then digitaal your saying that a deal of this nature is perfectly fine and should be left alone?

If these two owners are not best friends and there apperas to be no collusion...then this is a bad trade no doubt.....but subject to veto? not a chance. You can\'t protect some owners against their own stupidity, and I agree with Monkeys league rule...

[87Flyer]

and wud u still agree with it if you knew that only 3 of the 12 guys in this pool were friends. what that means is ONLY WHEN THESE GUYS ARE TRADING can there EVER be a veto. ya sure that makes a lot of sense and is definitely a good rule. give me a break. think about the wording on this rule and then try again. then go around and check out some of the other leagues that have a rule for vetoing in place and tell me how many of them say that the only time a veto is ok is when its between friends. thats just ludicrous and to say thats alright is even more ludicrous.

now anyone who has seen me post knows that i dont like the idea of a veto at all but give me a break. wolski and stafford for AO, Latendresse and Rolston. if you really think that deal is fair then you need to pull ur head out of ur ass and give it a shake. i think its one thing for a guy to make a bad trade, it\'s a whole different story when one guy is taking advantage of another.

[big_dl]

People get taken advantage of all the time. Just cause someone\'s an idiot an doesnt know how to value players doesnt mean you should protect them from the trades they make. By my thinking you have 3 options here, let the deal go and berate the guy for being an idiot and then take advantage of him as soon as possible. Dont get mad just cause the other guy figured out first that this guy\'s a goof who can be duped out of any of his players. If you\'re going to veto you have to remove both from the league. A third option is to allow the trade and remove the guy trading AO from the league. He clearly brings down the level of competitiveness of the league as a whole.

In regards to the friend thing, I dont think that the only time a trade should be vetoed is if its between friends, you dont have to be friends to collude with somebody. The problem is it\'s a lot harder t prove if its not between friends.

My previous post was a little unclear but unless these 2 have a history of unbalanced trades between each other where they\'re setting each other up back and forth, this trade SHOULD stand!!

Let me also say that this trade is entirely ridiculous.

[87Flyer]

the bigger problem here is that this league has been open for all of a week. the entrants were supposed to all be knowledgeable. in that week about 4 of the GMs have traded every player in the top 15 aside from thornton and crosby. the same GM just happens to be getting all the top notch players from these \"knowledgeable\" GMs. i just dont see how a trade that involves Malkin and Elias for 10 draft picks and 2 3rd line players is a good one. then this AO trade. then the StLouis trade. then the bouwmester trade for mara, eaves, dumont and a 7th rnd pick. like this guy has prayed on all of these \"knowledgable\" GMs since the minute the draft ended. i guess you cud say the AO one kinda just put it over the top. while some of us havent really been out to see just how much we can draw out of the not so smart(most are 1st time keeper owners as we found out) GMs. its a little frustrating knowing that i just spent $50 to watch 1 guy rip off as many dougheads as possible and to go from draft day to this
AO, Malkin, Iginla
Gagne, Elias, Stlouis
Rolston, Backstrom, Cheechoo
Horton, Fristche, D.Brown

Liles, Bouwmester
Timonen, Blake
Aucoin, Kronwall

Fleury, Giguere

Not to shabby for a weeks work. guess the lesson here is rape and pillage as fast as you can and who gives a shit if 5 of the 11 quit halfway thru the year and this so called dynasty league lasts all of 1 year. well worth the $50. did i mention the guy getting these players just happens to be the guy who set up the league and is acting commissioner. LMFAO.

Post edited by: 87Flyer, at: 2007/08/31 00:21

[Keyser Soze]

The guy giving up AO is a moron!!

[Keyser Soze]

Sorry, and should be vetoed ASAP!

[smoothfun]

ao side wins , and yes it sounds like this guy is good at the trade game.that\'s the chance you take joining some of these pools where you\'ve no idea who the entrants are , but remember we all start somewhere and need to learn.this is my fourth year in my one and only pool , people i\'m familiar with , and have just now got my core six players that i will keep for a few years .actually have a shot at winning this year.i\'ve learned that valuable lesson , you must get the best player in a trade and not worry about giving up too much , withih sensible reason.

[lanky522]

If i were commish of this league, I\'d veto that without a second look. If i were in a league that voted for vetos, I\'d vote to veto it.

[raffi]

It all comes down to what the purpose of your veto rule is.

If it\'s to maintain competitiveness by preventing stupid moves by bonehead/unknowledgable owners, then this trade (and most of the others, by the sounds of it) should be vetoed.

If it\'s to prevent collusion, then unless you have a feeling that the commissioner is offering to pay these guys\' league fees out of his winnings, then no, it should not be vetoed.

Personally, I would not be interested in being part of a league with the first type of veto rule in place. First of all, it would allow idiot GM\'s to survive since the rules protect them from their own stupidity. Secondly, it\'s such a subjective thing that inevitably I\'m going to get one of my own trades vetoed just because it doesn\'t win a public opinion poll.

It\'s important to have rules against collusion but if you\'ve got a good group of guys then it should never need to be used.

Flyer87, if you feel so strongly about it, I\'d say your best bet is to trade for the rest of the good players off these guys\' teams, take the 2nd place money so at least you break even, and walk away after this year. It\'s no fun being in a league full of idiots.