Contentious Trade-Savvy or Ridonkulous?

[lucafen4]

Lets just say... that other owner is more f---'d next year than you are this year. Being H2H anything can happen. if Stammer goes down, your guys get hot, who knows? I've seen multiple just stacked teams flop in the playoffs. There's no guarantees. and with 4 1st round picks, you can take 1 prospect 3 roster players - 3 really solid roster players and repeat in round 2. I for one would be shocked if you are not a top 3 team next year.

[MasterByte]

Anyone in your league take any issue with the trade? I can see that being something people would get upset over, but I think it was pretty cool to see it actually happen!

As for how to classify this, what it really comes down to is whether or not you wanted/needed a rebuild, which can only really be determined by analyzing your pre-trade roster. If you were looking to rebuild, then you kicked it off with a bang! Good job

[MasterByte]

I very much agree with this. Stacked teams are less likely to drop players for who is hot, and more likely to to have players who are resting or healing up approaching the stanley cup playoffs. Making the playoffs and winning them are two separate games in my eyes.

^^ referring to lucafen's post above, forgot to quote ^^

[StuntMan12]

Anyone in your league take any issue with the trade? I can see that being something people would get upset over, but I think it was pretty cool to see it actually happen!

As for how to classify this, what it really comes down to is whether or not you wanted/needed a rebuild, which can only really be determined by analyzing your pre-trade roster. If you were looking to rebuild, then you kicked it off with a bang! Good job

There was one manager who raised his concerns. I did as well. I am happy for Emu to make a trade that potentially benefits his team and in such a genius way BUT I'm worried that the other manager who may not make the play-offs (even with making that deal) just quits the league since next season is almost going to be a complete write off.

BUT ... I did move my first two round picks for next year for upgrades on my team this season (TO EMU OF COURSE .... lol) so I cant really complain.

God bless Emu ... he is one creative manager who looks for any holes in the rules to gain an advantage. Genius really. Hope it works out for him.

[Fighting_Emu]

I don't know if you're underestimating Stamkos or overestimating prospects but definitely one of those things is true. You're not going to find anyone close to Stamkos level without 1st overall draft pick, and even then you're probably waiting a few years before that player gets to that level - if he does. Very few prospects can actually reach Stamkos' level.

Well Im not arguing that. I am arguing that this isn't even my point. If I find a say... 70 point player with one of those picks- which I think is very reasonable- then where I make my gains is replacing the Caligulla and Scandellas on my roster with Arvidssons and Barries. The whole premise here is the format:

We start 20 players off a 26 man roster. With 16 teams our list of rostered players is extremely extensive. Im not saying I can pluck another Stamkos off a tree- Im saying I can add 10-20- even 30 points down my roster several times with these extra picks. Its an anomaly of our format in my estimation. We roster extremely weak options. If I can replace the Bjugstads with Zibanejads and Neals Im adding 15 or so points EASY several times. I think that mitigates the loss of one superstar. We have virtually no wire to stream it is hen pecked clean. You make your gains in the draft and maybe one or two homerun picks off free agency that somehow slipped through the cracks at the beginning of the year and then youre pretty much locked in. Its format- and I think its exploitable. I could be wrong- we'll see. I also would not recommend this in most settings. I think Ive identified what is a weak spot in ours- and Im taking a shot at leveraging it.

Again I could be wrong- but to me that's the argument. I never meant to imply I could grab a player to magically replace Stamkos- quite the opposirte actually. My contention is that I can replace the rostered garbage at the bottom of my roster enough times that I don't even need Stamnkos in the first place. Finding a reasonable plug in at 70- or so points (which Im optimistic I can do by next year)- is literally just gravy. Its not the crux of my strategy.

Also I don't believe Stamkos is 120 point player (or even 100 for that matter) year in year out. hes still an injury risk to boot. But again- its replacing the 25-30 point players we ARE CURRENTLY rostering for safe and 55-60 point options 5,6 even 7 times down my lineup. That's my debate. I don't think Stamkos is replacable- never my argument.

[Jouko-Pouko]

Well Im not arguing that I could be wrong- but I am arguing that this isn't even my point. If I find a say... 70 point player with one of those picks- which I think is very reasonable- then where I make my gains is replacing the Caligulla and Scandellas on my roster with Arvidssons and Barries. The whole premise here is the format:

We start 20 players off a 26 man roster. With 16 teams our list of rostered players is extremely extensive. Im not saying I can pluck another Stamkos off a tree- Im saying I can add 10-20- even 30 points down my roster several times with these extra picks. Its an anomaly of our format in my estimation. We roster extremely weak options. If I can replace them with Zibanejads and Neals Im adding 15 or so points EASY several times. I think that mitigates the loss of one superstar.

Again I could be wrong- but to me that's the argument. I never meant to imply I could grab a player to magically replace Stamkos- quite the opposirte actually. My contention is that I can replace the rostered garbage at the bottom of my roster enough times that I don't even need Stamnkos in the first place. Finding a reasonable plug in at 7- or so points (which Im optimistic I can do by next year)- is literally just gravy. Its not the crux of my strategy.

Also I don't believe Stamkos is 120 point player (or even 100 for that matter) year in year out. hes still an injury risk to boot. But again- its replacing the 25-30 point players we ARE CURRENTLY rostering for safe and 55-60 point options 5,6 even 7 times down my lineup. That's my debate. I don't think Stamkos is replacable- never my argument.

Like I said, I can definitely see the benefit for next season. But it's a clear downgrade to your keepers, and there's no way around that. You better win next season because you'll feel bad about the trade after that otherwise.

[Fighting_Emu]

Lets just say... that other owner is more f---'d next year than you are this year. Being H2H anything can happen. if Stammer goes down, your guys get hot, who knows? I've seen multiple just stacked teams flop in the playoffs. There's no guarantees. and with 4 1st round picks, you can take 1 prospect 3 roster players - 3 really solid roster players and repeat in round 2. I for one would be shocked if you are not a top 3 team next year.

I discussed the idea of the manager leaving with stuntman before I accepted. At the end of the day I have to do whats right for my roster. This is a gamble I decided I was ready to make and I cant really base my decision on wether or not he sticks around.

Also for the record- two points:

I asked the other gm and he ensures us hes staying

and

I actually volunteered to hgo along with a veto if the league had a serious problem with it. There was discussion but no real disagreement in the end.

[lucafen4]

one thing I noticed that everyone seems to be skipping over. And that's the fact that the season is only 1/3 over. There's still tons of time for F.E. to make further trades involving roster players, picks, prospects to boost his 6 keepers before the draft. That downgrade in roster isn't permanent. he can bump it up pre-draft tenfold if he stays as crafty

[Jouko-Pouko]

one thing I noticed that everyone seems to be skipping over. And that's the fact that the season is only 1/3 over. There's still tons of time for F.E. to make further trades involving roster players, picks, prospects to boost his 6 keepers before the draft. That downgrade in roster isn't permanent. he can bump it up pre-draft tenfold if he stays as crafty

I'll admit that I'm no expert in limited keepers since I mostly do dynasty leagues but I doubt you can acquire a Stamkos level keeper in a league like that. I guess it's possible depending on what kind of managers are in the league but unlikely IMO. Stamkos level players just aren't usually available in limited keeper leagues.

[lucafen4]

I'll admit that I'm no expert in limited keepers since I mostly do dynasty leagues but I doubt you can acquire a Stamkos level keeper in a league like that. I guess it's possible depending on what kind of managers are in the league but unlikely IMO. Stamkos level players just aren't usually available in limited keeper leagues.

it really depends on what you can offer & the level of prospect system. A team might be floating with I'll just toss out six names Ovechkin, Eichel, Stamkos, Josi, Andersen, Benn -- as their six keepers. They may have then drafted Schwartz & Nylander in the seasons draft.

If another owner approaches saying, I'll give you Hischier & #2 overall (Svechnikov/Granlund level player) for Eichel... you might do that deal as you get two really high level prospects and can sub in either Schwartz or Nylander as your sixth keeper.

The addition of picks and prospects - especially contributing, blue-chip prospects can usually pry a high end keeper away from a top team that has depth & sees Hischier as essentially a free 7th keeper & the #2 O/A pick as a huge boost moving into the next season.

Other method is to strike at a weak team that has only a couple grade A keepers. You can attempt to exploit this by offering two B+ players to nab the A player giving them better top 6 depth. In the two limited keepers I have been in over the past 3yrs, each league usually averages between 10 & 15 trades pre-draft

[Fighting_Emu]

it really depends on what you can offer & the level of prospect system. A team might be floating with I'll just toss out six names Ovechkin, Eichel, Stamkos, Josi, Andersen, Benn -- as their six keepers. They may have then drafted Schwartz & Nylander in the seasons draft.

If another owner approaches saying, I'll give you Hischier & #2 overall (Svechnikov/Granlund level player) for Eichel... you might do that deal as you get two really high level prospects and can sub in either Schwartz or Nylander as your sixth keeper.

The addition of picks and prospects - especially contributing, blue-chip prospects can usually pry a high end keeper away from a top team that has depth & sees Hischier as essentially a free 7th keeper & the #2 O/A pick as a huge boost moving into the next season.

Other method is to strike at a weak team that has only a couple grade A keepers. You can attempt to exploit this by offering two B+ players to nab the A player giving them better top 6 depth. In the two limited keepers I have been in over the past 3yrs, each league usually averages between 10 & 15 trades pre-draft

I hadnt considered this actually- lol! I do have an embarassment of riches at this point- I think 5 first rounders? 4 seconds? In a 20 round draft i think Im all picked out in the 7th- haha! And I actually do have a couple monor parts I can move to contenders still

[Fighting_Emu]

I discussed the idea of the manager leaving with stuntman before I accepted. At the end of the day I have to do whats right for my roster. This is a gamble I decided I was ready to make and I cant really base my decision on wether or not he sticks around.

Also for the record- two points:

I asked the other gm and he ensures us hes staying

and

I actually volunteered to hgo along with a veto if the league had a serious problem with it. There was discussion but no real disagreement in the end.

Yea this is true- fair point. By year 3 Ill have taken a loss- but again in 3 years a lot can happen- especially in a trade heavy league like this. Im not saying youre wrong though- I take a theoretical hit by then for sure. I dont think I NEED to win though. In my humble estimation Ive set myself up for a real nice shot by next year hopefully (knock on wood)- but I dont think you can guarantee a victory in a 16 team league no matter what moves you make (unless your forum name is stuntman ).

In any case- its a great debate. Itll be an interesting case study.

[SuperMario]

God bless Emu ... he is one creative manager who looks for any holes in the rules to gain an advantage. Genius really. Hope it works out for him.

This can be good or bad, depending on how much it is done. I believe in the "spirit of the rule" personally, and if loopholes are found, they should be pointed out and closed, and no one should benefit from it.

[Fighting_Emu]

This can be good or bad, depending on how much it is done. I believe in the "spirit of the rule" personally, and if loopholes are found, they should be pointed out and closed, and no one should benefit from it.

Well like I said- I was more than willing to go along with a veto (and i am very , very much ANTI-VETO normally)- if the league had a serious issue with it. That didnt happen. We had a polite conversation and much like this thread couldnt even decide if Im on the winning end- lol! I dont think this is a true "loophole" I think its a design function that lets you take a certain type of calculated gamble if you want to and the opportunity pis even there:

1) You need a trade partner willing to make this type of swap.
2) There is a short term cost in that I have to sacrifice a year.
3) There is a long term cost in that I lose the best player.
4) There is still no guarantee I even win next year.

Like i said I would have been ok with a veto. At this point Im totally ok with opening up the rules for discussion in coming years as well.

I stated at the beginning- it is my humble opinion that this owner would have floated this offer out to most owners in the league who had an elite talent potentially available. After doing the research i decided that if there was an opportunity here I wanted to be the one to take the risk rather than be on the outside looking in if/when someone else accepted it. I didnt even make this offer- and i dont think Ive proven conclusively that Ive even won it- lol!

[lucafen4]

Well like I said- I was more than willing to go along with a veto (and i am very , very much ANTI-VETO normally)- if the league had a serious issue with it. That didnt happen. We had a polite conversation and much like this thread couldnt even decide if Im on the winning end- lol! I dont think this is a true "loophole" I think its a design function that lets you take a certain type of calculated gamble if you want to and the opportunity pis even there:

1) You need a trade partner willing to make this type of swap.
2) There is a short term cost in that I have to sacrifice a year.
3) There is a long term cost in that I lose the best player.
4) There is still no guarantee I even win next year.

Like i said I would have been ok with a veto. At this point Im totally ok with opening up the rules for discussion in coming years as well.

I stated at the beginning- it is my humble opinion that this owner would have floated this offer out to most owners in the league who had an elite talent potentially available. After doing the research i decided that if there was an opportunity here I wanted to be the one to take the risk rather than be on the outside looking in if/when someone else accepted it. I didnt even make this offer- and i dont think Ive proven conclusively that Ive even won it- lol!

if you play the keeper ladder game right during the offseason - after the 18/19 season - you should end up with A. the best farm system and B. a top 5 set of keepers.