PLEASE comment on Hertl VS Giroux!!!

[horrorfan]

Of course he'd be disappointed. He wanted the trade to go thru. He thinks Hertl is the real thing. And another goal tonight probably makes him think Hertl remains the greatest thing since sliced bread.

But that might change in two weeks time.

I'm not expecting most guys to agree with me on this. And, as I've said in the thread, I'm not a fan of vetoing trades.

But honestly, in this case (brand new league with brand new GMs) I think vetoing isn't a bad thing.

The flip side of your argument is that since it's a new league, you don't want to be starting off with this attitude of 'you can make trades as long as we agree with them'. If I were part of the deal and just joined the league, I'd be wondering if I made the right choice of being a part of it.

So he thinks Hertl is the greatest thing since sliced bread - let him think that way. We don't know what's going to happen in the future, and if it backfires for him then it's a lesson learned. What if Giroux has an awful year and Hertl wins rookie of the year? Though with Hertl's injury last night he may not be as upset but that's not the main point.

The main point is not about the players in question - it's this so called assumption that the trade committee (still, that's a joke) knows more than the other managers themselves. When you, I, anyone joins a league, they should have full control on how they manage their own teams. What's the point of playing if that is restricted? It's irrelevant that it's a new league vs an existing one.

[Reuben]

Alright. These are all good points.

And like I've said a few times - I'm not generally a fan of vetoing trades.

But (and I could be wrong) - this is a new GM who likely has very little clue about the value of Giroux vs the value of the next hot rookie.

It's obvious to us because we've all been in keeper pools for years. But it's not always obvious to new GMs in new leagues.

For that reason, I don't mind a veto in this case.

But I've written that in about six posts now, so I'll leave it at that.

If you (horrorfan) trade me Giroux for Hertl (who I own in a points-only league), I'll gladly take it and run. You should know better.

But if another not-quite-as-with-it GM offers me Giroux for Hertl (and we all know who those guys are in our leagues), I'll probably point out that he might want to wait a little longer before doing that deal. But I guess that's just me.

I'll leave it at that. Your guys views are all valid, and I think mine are too.

[horrorfan]

Alright. These are all good points.

And like I've said a few times - I'm not generally a fan of vetoing trades.

But (and I could be wrong) - this is a new GM who likely has very little clue about the value of Giroux vs the value of the next hot rookie.

It's obvious to us because we've all been in keeper pools for years. But it's not always obvious to new GMs in new leagues.

For that reason, I don't mind a veto in this case.

But I've written that in about six posts now, so I'll leave it at that.

If you (horrorfan) trade me Giroux for Hertl (who I own in a points-only league), I'll gladly take it and run. You should know better.

But if another not-quite-as-with-it GM offers me Giroux for Hertl (and we all know who those guys are in our leagues), I'll probably point out that he might want to wait a little longer before doing that deal. But I guess that's just me.

I'll leave it at that. Your guys views are all valid, and I think mine are too.

How do you know he's 'not-quite-as-with-it'? We take the information we know now and form opinions. If he wanted to take a chance and thought Giroux has peaked then it's up to him to make that decision, not others who are not involved in the deal.

Would you veto if the deal was Kessel for Hertl? How about Toews? How about E. Kane? Seguin? Benn? Ryan? Moulson? Where's the line?

That's why it's a slippery slope. Next time the deal may be a bit closer and the trade committee may still veto it because they're protecting a perceived inexperienced manager. Then every deal will be scrutinised and that ruins the fun.

It's better to learn by making a mistake than have others tell them what to do.

[Reuben]

Brand new league, two weeks in, making a trade offer like that. There's a ton of threads on this site about people making ridiculous deals/offers/drops to get Hertl. I think it's pretty safe to say my assumption (while not a sure thing) isn't wrong.

I'm amazed that in the rush on this thread to justify never vetoing a trade that suddenly legit fantasy hockey minds are tossing out there that Hertl for Giroux is totally fine. Please.

Search Giroux threads from the past. I guarantee his name is put out there with the top-10 players in the league when it comes to potential trades.

Earlier in this thread, everyone said they wanted no business in a pool that would have a trade like this in it.

Now that the trade has been vetoed - and I've reasonably tried to explain, as an onlooker, why I think that's an okay move - well now everyone thinks it's entirely reasonable to trade Hertl for Giroux. That nixing an ridiculous deal like that, two weeks into a pool, threatens the integrity of that keeper pool. That, hell, Hertl could be the next Datsyuk.

Give me a break.

I don't have a problem with a veto in this case. In another, more established league with veteran GMs, I wouldn't consider a veto.

I've stated my case. You've stated yours. We disagree and that's okay.

[bigbabybuda]

All I can say is you never veto a trade unless collusion is involved. It is a very slippery slope you go on when policing trades....

[dongjohnson]

Fully right to veto it... or at least require something else be thrown in. People are more amiable when you try the latter rather than the former.

[fanchisesport.com]

Is someone in you league is dumb enough to trade Giroux this early in the year for a rookie who's off to a fast start they should be stuck with the consequences.
In all seriousness, this deal makes absolutely no sense and I agree with the other comment, you should not have to justify why you're not allowing this deal to go through. Good luck.