Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 76

Thread: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

  1. #16
    Rep Power
    35

    Dobber Sports Genius

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    Quote Originally Posted by glorybe23 View Post
    Veto and boot the 15th place Brother out of the league for good measure.
    Lol that would show them

  2. #17
    theslymonkey's Avatar
    theslymonkey is offline
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,715
    Rep Power
    27

    Dobber Sports Stud

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    Quote Originally Posted by Pengwin7 View Post
    See... here's three guys that don't believe in the veto.
    But... let's pretend for a minute that the OP hadn't revealed that these guys were brothers.
    Pretend you don't know that yet.

    Pretend... pretend... that all that he says is this "All of these guys have been doing hockey pools for years".
    OK?
    Pretend this is all we've got to go on... that there's 16 guys that have been doing hockey pools for years.

    Veto... or not veto?
    My post was before I knew they were brothers or the Commish. I would still Veto, and I almost never Veto anything.

    14 Team, Keep14 Farm5, 82GP Cap/Position
    Skaters: Points only, Goalies 2ptWin/3ptSO
    Start: 4C,4LW,4RW,6D,2G
    C- Crosby, Zibanejad, Couturier, Zacha, Frost
    LW- Marchand, Huberdeau, McTavish, Rackell, Kuzmenko
    RW- Konecny, Necas, Caufield, Jarvis, Lafreniere
    D- Hughes, Carlson, Werenski, Chychrun, Andersson, Dobson, Weegar
    G- Andersen, Merzlikins, Daccord, Jones
    Farm- Johnston, Foerster, Tarasov, Hutson, Reinbacher
    Picks-1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11

  3. #18
    roenick27's Avatar
    roenick27 is offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,478
    Location
    NY
    Rep Power
    31

    Dobber Sports Ace

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    Quote Originally Posted by Pengwin7 View Post
    See... here's three guys that don't believe in the veto. (normally)
    BUt they're now saying that this one... this one is OK... to veto.

    But... let's pretend for a minute that the OP hadn't revealed that these guys were brothers.
    Pretend we don't know that yet.

    Pretend... pretend... that all that he says is this "All of these guys have been doing hockey pools for years".
    OK?
    Pretend this is all we've got to go on... that there's 16 guys that have been doing hockey pools for years.

    Veto... or not veto?




    Man, you're killing me here.
    I've been waiting for this specific case for YEARS... for somebody else to have it happen to them.... so the Anti-Veto crowd could understand why vetoes are required.
    I always am on the side of no collusion=no veto. However, I also agree that if there is real veto talk, there is a chance that there is some collusion going on. A trade this bad I think needs to have further discussions/looking into before it goes through. As others have pointed out before, a look at trade history is warranted and tbh, as a commish, I think this discussion needs to go public in the league.

  4. #19
    Rep Power
    0

    Dobber Sports Rookie

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    I agree to asking the league, horrible trade. Again, sorry for posting in the wrong trade area. I was venting and posted in the first place my eyes saw the word "trade"

  5. #20
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Grand Master

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    You're kind've being an ass Peng.

    Whether they're brothers or not, it's clear this is collusion. I don't need to know nor do I care if they are or aren't brother to let logic dictate this is collusion. Hell, you could tell me these 2 people had never met in their lives and I could still logically tell you the person in 8th place sent an email to the guy in 15th and said "I'll give you your buy in back if you trade me Ovi".

    So yea, veto. BECAUSE it's clear collusion. Because there is no type of any sort of logical thought process to any level of experienced (from true beginner to expert) that brings this trade into even the wildest realm of plausibility. The only way this sort of trade gets accepted is through a collusion process. So veto.

  6. #21
    Rep Power
    35

    Dobber Sports Genius

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    Quote Originally Posted by Pengwin7 View Post
    See... here's three guys that don't believe in the veto. (normally)
    BUt they're now saying that this one... this one is OK... to veto.

    But... let's pretend for a minute that the OP hadn't revealed that these guys were brothers.
    Pretend we don't know that yet.

    Pretend... pretend... that all that he says is this "All of these guys have been doing hockey pools for years".
    OK?
    Pretend this is all we've got to go on... that there's 16 guys that have been doing hockey pools for years.

    Veto... or not veto?




    Man, you're killing me here.
    I've been waiting for this specific case for YEARS... for somebody else to have it happen to them.... so the Anti-Veto crowd could understand why vetoes are required.
    It's true, I hate the veto and think that there is rarely any merit for vetoing a trade. Like you said, basically my moto is no collusion, no veto. I mostly think this because I see trades (especially mine) that are one-sided get vetoed but where the other owner is completely on board with it. I remember, I think last year but it was right before St. Louis got traded to NY and he was doing really well, that I just picked up Nyquist. This was back when Nyquist had that insane start and I was talking to an owner who was a huge Detroit fan. We can only keep 3 forwards and he was looking to the future. The trade was (if I remember right) Nyquist and Lack (Just after Luongo was traded) for Backstrom (C) and St. Louis. Was it unfair and in my favor? Ya, but the other owner was completely on board and not just for the sake of helping me. He genuine valued Nyquist too highly and I got punished for sending him an offer that he accepted. To me, a trade should only be vetoed when there is clearly some shady work. I would have been skeptical of this deal because someone's trading the #1 keeper in the league for two none keepers who haven't even been very good. The fact that they are brothers makes it clear that they are just trying to help each other and I think these are really the only situations where I would veto...where there's clearly shady business. If they weren't brothers and it's a keeper league, this trade just wouldn't happen. If these owners have been playing for years, this trade wouldn't be offered. Nobody would do it. But if by some slim chance the OVechkin owner hated Ovie, loved Stastny, and saw huge potential in Lecavalier, I'd let it go through

  7. #22
    hockeymanG23's Avatar
    hockeymanG23 is offline
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,173
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Genius

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    Veto. There is no possible justification for that trade, sounds like a shady commish.
    10 team full keeper roto 4C/LW/RW,6D,2G

    G,A,P,+/-,PIM,SOG,GWG,PPP,SHP,Hit,Blk,FOW
    W,GAA,SV,SV%,SHO

    C-Aho,Couturier,Matthews,O'Reilly
    LW-Ehlers,Giroux,Panarin,Rust
    RW-Kucherov,Palmieri,Pastrnak,Wilson
    D-Burns,Carlson,Gudas,Josi,Nurse,Pietrangelo
    G-Fleury,F.Andersen,Markstrom
    BN-Zacha

    Under 250 gp farm
    Beaucage,Berggren,Bokk,Brisson,Chytil,Dugan,Foerst er,Foote,Frost,Grewe,K.Johnson,Lindblom,Mikheyev,N ybeck,Peterka,Pospisil,Protas,Ranta,Raty,Stankoven ,Suzuki,Tuomaala
    Alexeyev,Brook,Foote,Graves,Poirier,Sanderson,Seid er,Wilde,Woo,Zamula
    Berdin,Brossoit,Commesso,Ersson,Husso,Knight,Koche tkov,Lafontaine,Oettinger,Primeau,Sandstrom,Stolar z,Ustimenko,Vladar

  8. #23
    Location
    Scotland
    Rep Power
    50

    The Wolverine

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    Nothing more to add other than I would veto this deal regardless of the context. I don't like the veto in general but this trade is ridiculous. Add in the context and it's a slam dunk. Brothers and one of them is commissioner? I would seriously consider leaving this league if I were any other manager.

  9. #24
    roenick27's Avatar
    roenick27 is offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,478
    Location
    NY
    Rep Power
    31

    Dobber Sports Ace

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    The issue IMO on these is there is no "line" that is crossed. So the line needs to be collusion. Everyone values guys differently.
    This is an interesting case though. Clearly a deal this bad has something going on. If it was Ovie for Strome and Marner, while lopsided, clearly the 15th place team is looking to the future and it makes some logical sense (still bad, but I can understand the thought process). This trade has none of that.

    I think going public (in the league) on a deal like this (And I normally don't think it's warranted) will discourage this in the future. If anything, IMO it will basically black ball the two GM's in the deal. Who will want to trade with them after this?

  10. #25
    Location
    Prairies
    Rep Power
    40

    Dobber Sports Demi-God

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    Quote Originally Posted by rataylor22 View Post
    You're kind've being an ass Peng.

    Whether they're brothers or not, it's clear this is collusion. I don't need to know nor do I care if they are or aren't brother to let logic dictate this is collusion. Hell, you could tell me these 2 people had never met in their lives and I could still logically tell you the person in 8th place sent an email to the guy in 15th and said "I'll give you your buy in back if you trade me Ovi".

    So yea, veto. BECAUSE it's clear collusion. Because there is no type of any sort of logical thought process to any level of experienced (from true beginner to expert) that brings this trade into even the wildest realm of plausibility. The only way this sort of trade gets accepted is through a collusion process. So veto.

    It's clear collusion to most people because the OP was kind enough to give us enough context.
    Or it's clear collusion to most people because the trade is SOOOOO unbalanced that it is (indeed) obvious.

    My point on vetoes is that we rarely get this much context.
    And my other point is that sometimes it's not THIS unbalanced.
    Sometimes it's significantly unbalanced... but not so obviously unbalanced as Stastny/Lecavalier.

    Let's try on some more cases:

    Team A gets: Ovechkin
    Team B gets: Stastny & Milan Lucic
    Collusion or not collusion now?
    Answer that one. (Seriously)

    Team A gets: Ovechkin
    Team B gets: Stastny & Max Domi
    Collusion or not collusion now?
    Answer that one. (Seriously)

    Team A gets: Ovechkin
    Team B gets: Sam Bennett & Max Domi
    Collusion or not collusion now?
    Answer that one. (Seriously)

    Everybody will have answer.
    Now let's say I add that it's a keep 16, cap pool.
    What do people say about the trades above?
    Now let's say I add that it's a keep 2 pool.
    What do people say about the trades above?

    Again - context is EVERYTHING in evaluating trades.
    And the only people that really have full context are those in the pool.


    At some point, a trade goes from:
    i) Highly unbalanced
    to
    ii) Slightly unbalanced
    to
    iii) Fair

    And different people will have different opinions depending on context provided.

    My big issue with people's stances on VETOs is that they show up (like you) and say "Oh, Ovechkin for Stastny/Lecavalier... of course it's VETO."
    Well - you are evaluating ONE trade.

    That doesn't mean you have a good system set-up.
    A good system has to have a fair end result for ANY trade:
    Ovechkin for Stastny/Lecavalier...
    Ovechkin for Stastny/Lucic...
    Ovechkin for Stastny/Domi...
    Ovechkin for Bennet/Domi...

    With a 75% veto vote... that's a system... a system where the people that know (the GMs) can make the right judgment for the league.

    If there's no veto rule in place, the trade may be forced to hold.
    And for those people that don't believe in allowing for the veto... this trade goes THROUGH in your league.

    People can't just show up when they want and yell VETO and say "Oh... it's obvious... so it's OK that I want a veto now.".
    You have to be OK with a league VETO... or not OK.

    People have to pick a side.

  11. #26
    Dingy's Avatar
    Dingy is offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    330
    Location
    Charlottetown PE
    Rep Power
    13

    Dobber Sports Blue-Chipper

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    I usually don't like vetos either BUT there has to be some common sense. There needs to be some strategy that is in place. Tanking is one thing, even if it was for a 1st round pick, a prospect something I would have trouble hitting Veto. But this is a top 3 player for two older guys who cannot be kept and serve no purpose for the team receiving them. There is no benefit. So, I don't care if they are brothers or strangers to each other, I would definitely veto and question the league commissioner about it further.
    12 Team Roto Keeper
    G A +/- SOG PPP FOW HITS BLKS PIM
    W GA GAA SV SA SV% SHO
    10 Keepers
    F- Kopitar Kesler Thornton Benn Draisital Pacioretty Kuznetsov Backes D.Sedin Ryan Burakovsky
    D- Subban Faulk Byfuglien DeHann Martinez Trouba
    G- Halak Dubnyk Talbot
    BN- Bjugstad Dubinsky Ryan Gudas Tanev Hanzal Marleau

    12 Team H2H
    B- H/AB R H HR RBI SB K TB AVG OBP
    P - IP W HLD SV K ERA WHIP K/9

    B: Hosmer Donaldson Correa Trout Harper Heyward Sano Weiters Duffy Pillar Incarte Hernandez Realmuto Peraza Alvarez Span
    P: Cole Sale Fernandez Cueto Hamels Robertson Giles Wilson Colome Watson Samardzija Bauer Knebel
    F: Turner Travis Margot Stephenson Gouirrel Jr

  12. #27
    Rep Power
    0

    Dobber Sports Rookie

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    The trade got vetoed, thanks guys!

  13. #28
    roenick27's Avatar
    roenick27 is offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,478
    Location
    NY
    Rep Power
    31

    Dobber Sports Ace

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    Not trying to hijack the thread etc, but I always value Pengwins beakdowns. But I was interested in this part of your thoughts:
    Obviously, you're pro veto (throwing out the fact that you feel veto or non-veto, there needs to be a rule in place etc). In your leagues, is there a "punishment" for trying to veto a trade that should not be vetoed/not voted to be vetoed? I know it sounds silly, but I've personally had trades that were voted on to be vetoed(didn't meet the 75% etc ratio) but were very eve, or very close to even. There were a lot of good knowledgeable GM's in there, some are definitely on here. I asked publicly, what's the reason for the veto? The responses I got back were:
    1) didn't respond any further
    2) " I just didn't like it"
    3) One GM I'm in other leagues with: "He didn't feel it was a good trade" It was also with a team that was about tied for 3rd (early in the season) with this Vetoing GM


    Needless to say I walked out.

    I just feel like every action has to have an equal and just reaction. If someone wants to veto, they need to explain themselves rationally, and there needs to be some sort of "deterrent" to vetoing to stop a trade that will help a team ahead / behind you etc.


    Quote Originally Posted by Pengwin7 View Post
    It's clear collusion to most people because the OP was kind enough to give us enough context.
    Or it's clear collusion to most people because the trade is SOOOOO unbalanced that it is (indeed) obvious.

    My point on vetoes is that we rarely get this much context.
    And my other point is that sometimes it's not THIS unbalanced.
    Sometimes it's significantly unbalanced... but not so obviously unbalanced as Stastny/Lecavalier.

    Let's try on some more cases:

    Team A gets: Ovechkin
    Team B gets: Stastny & Milan Lucic
    Collusion or not collusion now?
    Answer that one. (Seriously)

    Team A gets: Ovechkin
    Team B gets: Stastny & Max Domi
    Collusion or not collusion now?
    Answer that one. (Seriously)

    Team A gets: Ovechkin
    Team B gets: Sam Bennett & Max Domi
    Collusion or not collusion now?
    Answer that one. (Seriously)

    Everybody will have answer.
    Now let's say I add that it's a keep 16, cap pool.
    What do people say about the trades above?
    Now let's say I add that it's a keep 2 pool.
    What do people say about the trades above?

    Again - context is EVERYTHING in evaluating trades.
    And the only people that really have full context are those in the pool.


    At some point, a trade goes from:
    i) Highly unbalanced
    to
    ii) Slightly unbalanced
    to
    iii) Fair

    And different people will have different opinions depending on context provided.

    My big issue with people's stances on VETOs is that they show up (like you) and say "Oh, Ovechkin for Stastny/Lecavalier... of course it's VETO."
    Well - you are evaluating ONE trade.

    That doesn't mean you have a good system set-up.
    A good system has to have a fair end result for ANY trade:
    Ovechkin for Stastny/Lecavalier...
    Ovechkin for Stastny/Lucic...
    Ovechkin for Stastny/Domi...
    Ovechkin for Bennet/Domi...

    With a 75% veto vote... that's a system... a system where the people that know (the GMs) can make the right judgment for the league.

    If there's no veto rule in place, the trade may be forced to hold.
    And for those people that don't believe in allowing for the veto... this trade goes THROUGH in your league.

    People can't just show up when they want and yell VETO and say "Oh... it's obvious... so it's OK that I want a veto now.".
    You have to be OK with a league VETO... or not OK.

    People have to pick a side.

  14. #29
    butch's Avatar
    butch is offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    7,120
    Location
    ohhh ,canada
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Master

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    might be time to find another league too

  15. #30
    Location
    TERRACE is hockey
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Giant

    Default Re: VETO? Stastny & Lecavalier for Ovechkin

    I'm anti-veto most the time, bit this IS collusion. Just not proved.
    10 team Full Keeper Roto League
    4C-4LW-4RW-6D-2G-5bench-unlimited farm.

    C= eichel,horvat,malkin,kuznetsov
    LW= forsberg,kreider,lee,b.tkchuch,hertle,granlund
    RW= reinhart,radulov,hoffman,laine,hayes
    D= doughty,ghostebehere,karlsson,jones,klefbom,dahlin ,skjei
    G= price,murray,grubauer,georgiev,ullmark,samsonov

    under250gp=nichushkin,tuch,mathesson,marino,pujuja rvi,hosang,terry,andersson,j.hughes,patrik,crouse, zadina,podkolzin,k.miller,nedeljkovic,kravtsov,hay ton

    --G,A,P,PPP,SHP,GWG,PIMS,+/-,SOG,hits,FOW,blks-Wins,GAA,SV%,saves,SO

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •