Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 25 of 25

Thread: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

  1. #16
    Rep Power
    14

    Dobber Sports Prodigy

    Default Re: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

    I agree with everyone about letting the trade stand. The GM receiving McDavid gambled hoping the other owner would panic and trade him McDavid for cheap. The McDavid owner was smart and waited for more information before trading. It's not his fault the receiving GM was not paying attention regarding the injury news. Remember, the receiving GM could have withdrew his offer for McDavid pending further injury news but he knew he wouldn't be able to get McDavid for cheap if healthy. The receiving GM gambled and lost, pure and simple. Don't punish the smart GM who did his due diligence.

  2. #17
    Dennis's Avatar
    Dennis is online now
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    2,994
    Location
    Hamilton, ON
    Rep Power
    43

    Dobber Sports Veteran

    Default Re: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

    Quote Originally Posted by LawMan View Post
    A follow-up question: If it was announced McDavid was out for the season and then the trade processed would anyone want to reverse in that situation? If so what is the difference between that and the actual circumstances?
    No. I don't see any difference in the situation regardless on how inured McDavid is. A GM tried to buy-low on a banged up McDavid and got a banged up McDavid.

  3. #18
    Location
    Ottawa
    Rep Power
    50

    The Great One

    Default Re: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

    Quote Originally Posted by LawMan View Post
    Thanks for the feedback everyone. I have to say I was surprised it was unanimous in favor of letting the trade stand.

    I am of the opposite opinion; I believe the trade should be reversed.

    My reasoning is as follows:

    Yes, the GM receiving McDavid knew McDavid was questionable and took a risk offering the trade, he took a gamble on an unknown outcome. Had the other GM accepted before the Questionable became 2-3 weeks then everyone made a trade with the same information and it should clearly stand.

    However, the GM sending McDavid got to wait for new information before accepting. The sending GM did not have to gamble because he knew the outcome. Now the sending GM was still gambling on whether it was 2 or 3 weeks (or even less or more) but he clearly had more and better information available to him.

    The offering GM advised the league that had he seen the updated 2-3 week timeline, the one the sending GM got to see, he would have cancelled the trade before it processed. To be clear this was 1 hours after the trade was accepted when he first saw the news. Thus, we had a race to log-on with the receiving GM wanting to cancel the trade and the sending GM wanting to accept it, ultimately the sending GM logged on first and got his desired result. This is in my opinion unfair.

    The reason trades are left open for days in fantasy hockey is a practical one, people have lives to run and it allows a receiving GM to review and respond. However, where this is a major change in the information available, which I consider this to be, and the receiving GM gets to use that information while the sending GM cannot that unfair. The analogy I use is one from poker. The sending GM was betting on the flop (some information) but the receiving GM was calling after seeing the final 2 cards (more information but not complete information).

    A follow-up question: If it was announced McDavid was out for the season and then the trade processed would anyone want to reverse in that situation? If so what is the difference between that and the actual circumstances?
    A season long injury to McDavid also wouldn't change my opinion. The GM who sent the offer is fully aware he's taking a risk by sending an open-ended offer. I choose to complete all deals via email before going fantrax to try to reduce the likelihood of this stuff.

    If this situation really bother yours, then you should talk to your league to see if there is support for changing the rules so that this sort of thing doesn't happen moving forward.

  4. #19
    Location
    Philadelphia area
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Grand Master

    Default Re: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

    Given your ruling, I think you need to change your league settings to nopt allow injured players to be traded, ever.

    It's the only way that you;ll be able to make sense of all of these cases going forward.
    Want a Signature? Go to Settings, and you'll find Edit Signature down the list on the left.

  5. #20
    Skippy's Avatar
    Skippy is offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    849
    Rep Power
    22

    Dobber Sports Initiate

    Default Re: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

    The trade should not be reversed and you shouldn’t do anything as Commish about it because if you do, you are abusing your powers in my opinion.

    Going forward, take a vote about a new rule all you want, but this trade is good.

  6. #21
    Referee3083's Avatar
    Referee3083 is online now
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,796
    Location
    CA
    Rep Power
    32

    Dobber Sports Stud

    Default Re: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

    Quote Originally Posted by LawMan View Post
    Thanks for the feedback everyone. I have to say I was surprised it was unanimous in favor of letting the trade stand.

    I am of the opposite opinion; I believe the trade should be reversed.

    My reasoning is as follows:

    Yes, the GM receiving McDavid knew McDavid was questionable and took a risk offering the trade, he took a gamble on an unknown outcome. Had the other GM accepted before the Questionable became 2-3 weeks then everyone made a trade with the same information and it should clearly stand.

    However, the GM sending McDavid got to wait for new information before accepting. The sending GM did not have to gamble because he knew the outcome. Now the sending GM was still gambling on whether it was 2 or 3 weeks (or even less or more) but he clearly had more and better information available to him.

    The offering GM advised the league that had he seen the updated 2-3 week timeline, the one the sending GM got to see, he would have cancelled the trade before it processed. To be clear this was 1 hours after the trade was accepted when he first saw the news. Thus, we had a race to log-on with the receiving GM wanting to cancel the trade and the sending GM wanting to accept it, ultimately the sending GM logged on first and got his desired result. This is in my opinion unfair.

    The reason trades are left open for days in fantasy hockey is a practical one, people have lives to run and it allows a receiving GM to review and respond. However, where this is a major change in the information available, which I consider this to be, and the receiving GM gets to use that information while the sending GM cannot that unfair. The analogy I use is one from poker. The sending GM was betting on the flop (some information) but the receiving GM was calling after seeing the final 2 cards (more information but not complete information).

    A follow-up question: If it was announced McDavid was out for the season and then the trade processed would anyone want to reverse in that situation? If so what is the difference between that and the actual circumstances?
    But your whole argument hinges on the fact that the news and subsequent acceptance of the trade happened within 1 hour. So you’re claiming that was too short of a timeframe. Let me ask you, if you reverse this trade on that basis, then where do you draw the line the next time this type of situation happens? 2 hours, 4 hours, 1 day, 3.5 hours unless the news come out after 10pm EST in which case you then have 2 hours after 8am the following morning, except if the other GM is on the west cost, then you invoke the Pacific time zone exception, which allows for an extra 3 hours to cover the time zone difference???

    Hopefully you see where I’m going here. The one hour is completely arbitrary. If you put a trade offer out and leave it there, especially when an injury is in question, you take the risk of good/bad news coming out that your trade partner can use to their advantage. If you don’t like that risk, then don’t make the offer.
    12 Team Weekly H2H, Daily Lineups. Keep 7 + 1 Prospect (<164 NHL games).
    Scoring:
    PLAYER: G(3), A(2), D Pts(addt'l 0.7), +/-(0.5), PPP(addt'l 1), SHP(addt'l 0.5), SOG(0.4), BLK(0.8)
    GOALIE: W(2), GA(-1.5), Saves(0.3), SO(3)
    Positions - 3C, 2RW, 2LW, 4D, 2G, 5 Bench, 4 IR, 1 prospect

    C - J Hughes(LW), Hintz, Malkin, Pinto
    LW - M Tkachuk(RW), Robertson
    RW - Rust, Necas, Zuccarello
    D - Makar, Fox, Bouchard, Roy, Krug
    G - Oettinger, Thompson, Wedgewood
    Prospect Keeper - L Hughes(D)
    IR - Hill(G)

    2024 Picks - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11

  7. #22
    Location
    Beaumont, AB
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Icon

    Default Re: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

    I also believe the trade should be reversed.

    In the NHL, trades don't get approved without medical exams being done so why should that be different in your fantasy league. A trade offer was made based on a different set of information than the trade was accepted on. This tells me that the "contract" was not valid since both parties were not agreeing to the same thing.

    It would be the same if I offered someone a trade of Sebastian Aho for Leon Draisaitl. The other team accepts the deal and then I end up giving the other team Sebastian Aho the dman instead of the forward. There is no league in the world that would let that trade go through so a trade involving a player that was not injured vs a player that was out for 25% of the remainder of the season should be treated the same way.

  8. #23
    GavinC's Avatar
    GavinC is offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    525
    Rep Power
    19

    Dobber Sports Apprentice

    Default Re: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

    Quote Originally Posted by chuckcouples View Post
    I also believe the trade should be reversed... It would be the same if I offered someone a trade of Sebastian Aho for Leon Draisaitl. The other team accepts the deal and then I end up giving the other team Sebastian Aho the dman instead of the forward.
    Dude, no disrespect... but are you high?
    Ice Cap

    Dynasty, 32 team cap league (1:1 NHL Cap/Floor), H2H weekly, points (G: 1 / A: 1 / Blks: 0.1 / HTS: 0.1 / SOG: 0.1 / W: 1 / SO: 1 / SV: 0.05)
    Start 12 F, 6 D, 1 G, 4 Bench, 27 Minors/Prospects

    Roster

  9. #24
    Rep Power
    18

    Dobber Sports Initiate

    Default Re: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

    Quote Originally Posted by LawMan View Post
    Thanks for the feedback everyone. I have to say I was surprised it was unanimous in favor of letting the trade stand.

    I am of the opposite opinion; I believe the trade should be reversed.

    My reasoning is as follows:

    Yes, the GM receiving McDavid knew McDavid was questionable and took a risk offering the trade, he took a gamble on an unknown outcome. Had the other GM accepted before the Questionable became 2-3 weeks then everyone made a trade with the same information and it should clearly stand.

    However, the GM sending McDavid got to wait for new information before accepting. The sending GM did not have to gamble because he knew the outcome. Now the sending GM was still gambling on whether it was 2 or 3 weeks (or even less or more) but he clearly had more and better information available to him.

    The offering GM advised the league that had he seen the updated 2-3 week timeline, the one the sending GM got to see, he would have cancelled the trade before it processed. To be clear this was 1 hours after the trade was accepted when he first saw the news. Thus, we had a race to log-on with the receiving GM wanting to cancel the trade and the sending GM wanting to accept it, ultimately the sending GM logged on first and got his desired result. This is in my opinion unfair.

    The reason trades are left open for days in fantasy hockey is a practical one, people have lives to run and it allows a receiving GM to review and respond. However, where this is a major change in the information available, which I consider this to be, and the receiving GM gets to use that information while the sending GM cannot that unfair. The analogy I use is one from poker. The sending GM was betting on the flop (some information) but the receiving GM was calling after seeing the final 2 cards (more information but not complete information).

    A follow-up question: If it was announced McDavid was out for the season and then the trade processed would anyone want to reverse in that situation? If so what is the difference between that and the actual circumstances?
    I understand the premise of what you are saying. In my opinion, the fault here was on the sending GM leaving the trade offer active. If he put on a constraint of time or injury status to protect himself, then we would be having a different conversation. We all know that in real life, this trade would never have gone through because the NHL team would have made a medical check a pre-req which McDavid would have failed. There really is no equivalent in FH. We also know that in most FH systems if the receiver accepts the trade, the sender has no more say in it. We also know that NHL teams aren't always 100% forthcoming with injury news and that even slight injuries can be much more severe than initially thought. Both managers also knew that for some reason McDavid can't be kept at the end of this year so he was a temporary loan.

    The trade sender was trying to take advantage of the receiver by getting the top player in the league based on an injury. The McDavid owner flipped the tables by waiting until he knew more about the injury. Once he realized the severity, he jumped on the trade since it helped his team. This type of trade was only going to help one team. It seems to me that this was a "perfect storm" so to speak and is one that probably shouldn't be "regulated" since it would be very hard to do.

    I liken this to a severe injury to a starting goalie and a manager in the league is johnny on the spot and grabs the backup from the WW. Is it fair that the manager who has the starter didn't get the backup? No, but someone has to win in this situation and someone has to lose.
    In a 10 league where we start 3C, 3LW, 3RW, 4D and 2 G daily. It is a H2H league - we keep 3 players (1 G max), are allowed a max of 2 keeps for each player. The number in brackets is the number of keeps I have left:

    G, A, +/-, PIMs, PPG, PPA and Shots.
    C - Larkin, Couturier, Kopitar, Cirelli
    LW - OV, Panarin (1), Schenn (C), Ehlers (RW), Kreider
    RW - Kucherov (0), Seguin (C), Palmieri, Voracek, Yamamoto
    D - Yandle, DeAngelo

    W, GAA, SV% and Saves.
    G - Rask, Varlamov, Hart, Mrazek
    IR+ - Tarasenko

  10. #25
    Rep Power
    18

    Dobber Sports Initiate

    Default Re: Commissioner Question - Trades and Injury Announcements

    Quote Originally Posted by Dennis View Post
    No. I don't see any difference in the situation regardless on how inured McDavid is. A GM tried to buy-low on a banged up McDavid and got a banged up McDavid.
    Agreed. If the sender said in the notes, that this trade offer is null and void if the injury is longer than 1 week, then we would be having a different conversation. The sender took a chance by making a trade offer for a player with an injury - once the offer wasn't accepted right away he could have withdrawn it to wait for more details.
    In a 10 league where we start 3C, 3LW, 3RW, 4D and 2 G daily. It is a H2H league - we keep 3 players (1 G max), are allowed a max of 2 keeps for each player. The number in brackets is the number of keeps I have left:

    G, A, +/-, PIMs, PPG, PPA and Shots.
    C - Larkin, Couturier, Kopitar, Cirelli
    LW - OV, Panarin (1), Schenn (C), Ehlers (RW), Kreider
    RW - Kucherov (0), Seguin (C), Palmieri, Voracek, Yamamoto
    D - Yandle, DeAngelo

    W, GAA, SV% and Saves.
    G - Rask, Varlamov, Hart, Mrazek
    IR+ - Tarasenko

Posting Permissions

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