Dealing with Lockout/Draft Picks Poll

Team Po-Po schrieb:

Trying to get up to speed on this one. Lots of reading and I hate reading!

Anyway, I do want to say that I am not a big fan of this poll and the way the options have been worded. I don't like the fact that I am voting on options that have yet to be decided exactly. Other then option three which makes me laugh a bit. Makes me want to say "Come on Brandon! How dare you suggest such a silly option!" Hehehehe.

What I am saying is that I would like to know what the first two options exactly are. How many players are being carried over in the first option and is it Gregs or Johns version? I think they are slightly different?

In option two what variation are we suggestions?

So should we not clarify what each option actually entails? It will help me make an informed decision.

Once you are up to speed on the issue, I would be interested in hearing some general thoughts on this issue from you John.

This is getting a bit ridiculous everybody is confused nobody has any idea what's going on.
We keep talking about all these different options on what to do when the lockout happens and what to do in 2013 etc

But we HAVE YET TO EVEN DECIDE if we are indeed going to do anything at all.
All i'm saying is have a simple poll saying

YES - lets make some changes cause of the lockout
NO - Make no changes cause of the lockout

If we vote NO then everything we have talked about in the last 2 or 3 days is pointless, and we can figured out what to do for 2013.
If we pick YES then lets make a poll or have a dicussion on what we are going to do right now and up to 2013

That's all i meant.

So far in both polls, the majority have voted to do nothing at all.


By the way all this action on here today is getting me more and more excited for this lockout season!! lol

I want to see where we stand and decide on what the rule will be before I vote. But there are waaaay too many things that we don't know for lockout situation. After this draft we are all equal and so we should all get to drop the same number and have random draft order next year if there isn't a season in my opinion. Or we keep this draft for next year. Or we do something like Matt and greg suggest. I want to know how we decide next seasons draft order? lots of unaswered questions and voting to keep the same doesn't mean much to me because I don't know how we decide who will pick first or how many keepers.

Im excited too! Off to work, look forward to reading what people think.

by voting No Changes would mean that we draft accordingly go ahead with the season accordingly and then figure out what we should do about 2013

by voting yes we should make changes then we need to start with this draft that will happen in a few days.

It would be nice to just get our upcoming draft figured out. As to whether or not we are even doing it.
Alot of this other stuff can wait

PS i think we should just vote for the party and take the year off, its a WIN-WIN situation for everybody LOL

Shoreside Situations schrieb:

This is getting a bit ridiculous everybody is confused nobody has any idea what's going on.
We keep talking about all these different options on what to do when the lockout happens and what to do in 2013 etc

But we HAVE YET TO EVEN DECIDE if we are indeed going to do anything at all.
All i'm saying is have a simple poll saying

YES - lets make some changes cause of the lockout
NO - Make no changes cause of the lockout

If we vote NO then everything we have talked about in the last 2 or 3 days is pointless, and we can figured out what to do for 2013.
If we pick YES then lets make a poll or have a dicussion on what we are going to do right now and up to 2013

That's all i meant.

I am on board with most of what you are saying however clarify one thing for me if you don't mind. If vote NO which is to make no changes - does this mean that in the event of a full year lockout that we go on as usual. To bad so sad for the 2012 draft etc and start up 2013?

Yes Gord.
By voting No, the 2012 draft would move along just as it would if there was a season.
Leaving only the draft order and the number of keepers we would all keep for 2013 to be discussed.

By voting YES, we have alot to talk about haha. Our upcoming draft would be the most important thing to figure out. Also draft order, keepers, compensation for picks due to lockout etc etc.

AT least with this simple YES or NO vote we can then figure out what we actually need to discuss.
Now obviously i am not a commish, so Matt and/or Greg would have the final say on all this

One other thing, and maybe i'm the only one who feels this way

But most of us knew that a lockout was going to happen or potentially happen.
they have talked about this for over a year now. All the talks they have had were about a lockout in THIS season coming up.

To have to compensate for an owner who traded away players for picks is to me a bit silly. Making trades for picks was a risk that any GM made all by themselves knowing a lockout was looming.
So to now have to reward that GM with extra picks or extra keepers because of that doesnt seem fair at all.

Team Po-Po schrieb:

Shoreside Situations schrieb:

This is getting a bit ridiculous everybody is confused nobody has any idea what's going on.
We keep talking about all these different options on what to do when the lockout happens and what to do in 2013 etc

But we HAVE YET TO EVEN DECIDE if we are indeed going to do anything at all.
All i'm saying is have a simple poll saying

YES - lets make some changes cause of the lockout
NO - Make no changes cause of the lockout

If we vote NO then everything we have talked about in the last 2 or 3 days is pointless, and we can figured out what to do for 2013.
If we pick YES then lets make a poll or have a dicussion on what we are going to do right now and up to 2013

That's all i meant.

I am on board with most of what you are saying however clarify one thing for me if you don't mind. If vote NO which is to make no changes - does this mean that in the event of a full year lockout that we go on as usual. To bad so sad for the 2012 draft etc and start up 2013?

Hi Gord,

I am discussing this situation with Greg, and we will let everyone know what our decision is regarding this issue. It will likely be after we hear from Ray. We will either hold another poll after we have spoken with Ray and possibly received further feedback from other GMs that we haven't heard from yet, or we will make an executive decision that we feel is in the best interests of the entire league. It has been a long time since we have done something like that, but in this case it may be necessary.

For that reason, the polls that both Jarrett and I have set up are non-binding.

Ouch !!! My head hurts!!! What are we voting on ? And why do we need Super Ray to fly in and fix it? Lol...I have been friends with him over 25 years, I never knew he held the wonder twin powers capable of fixing fantasy hockey leagues!!! Lol...Shape of a beer mug! Go get em Ray! LMAO!!!

I am more interested to see if he actually got on one of those boards and how truly ugly his Hawaiian shirt selection may have been. Zeus ...Apollo get off of Mr Stock's leg.

I think all of you are getting too worked up on this. The simplest method is this. His the draft off as long as possible. Then draft with the intention there will he an NHL season of some sort.

If no season at all, revert back to this set of keepers that we have now as if nothing has happened and change the dates on all future drafts. September 2012 becomes September 2013, January 2013 becomes 2014, etc. everything just gets moved up. No one loses anything, the players are the same without having played to get injured, etc. That is the fairest of all scenarios.

It's not difficult to keep a spreadsheet of who was kept and what draft picks were acquired for this years draft and beyond. And still draft with the belief that there will be some type of season.

If, what most of you are proposing is true, then the integrity of this league just gets flushed down the toilet.
To be continued....

Buffalo Cab Co. schrieb:

I think all of you are getting too worked up on this. The simplest method is this. His the draft off as long as possible. Then draft with the intention there will he an NHL season of some sort.

If no season at all, revert back to this set of keepers that we have now as if nothing has happened and change the dates on all future drafts. September 2012 becomes September 2013, January 2013 becomes 2014, etc. everything just gets moved up. No one loses anything, the players are the same without having played to get injured, etc. That is the fairest of all scenarios.

It's not difficult to keep a spreadsheet of who was kept and what draft picks were acquired for this years draft and beyond. And still draft with the belief that there will be some type of season.

If, what most of you are proposing is true, then the integrity of this league just gets flushed down the toilet.
To be continued....

hey ray, just to clarify, you want what matt was propsoing? do a draft and if a lockout happens revert to the charts right now?

also your proposing to hold off on the draft??

In the end I really don't care what way we decide to go. I would like however to point out a couple of things.

First a minor one - When the topic was first brought up, the majority of those who voiced their opinion were in favour of Brandons "silly" option. Then some came up with other options that were most likely done to to find a happy medium. I find that honourable. So for those, including myself, who appear to have integrity and other concerning issues please find help prior to the beginning of the season! I can refer you if required as I have already started the process. Hehehe.

Major one - Taking the actual issue out of this, I am having troubles with the process that had taken place here. I am assuming that anyone is entitled to start a poll? If not then one of the commissioners would have said so and the initial poll would have been stopped. Then Matt felt it necessary to use his co-commissioners powers to modify the poll to a format that was clearer and to his satisfaction including more options. I am assuming that this was in his right as no one appeared to have an issue with it. I am good up until this point. Then all of a sudden Matt use another co-commissioner set of powers and cancel the entire poll. Interesting enough there were 4 votes for Brandons "silly" option out of five votes.

I am very confused and concerned about this entire process?

Anyway I am done and will sit and wait on the edge of my chair to hear what the commissioners final decision will be.

Team Po-Po schrieb:

In the end I really don't care what way we decide to go. I would like however to point out a couple of things.

First a minor one - When the topic was first brought up, the majority of those who voiced their opinion were in favour of Brandons "silly" option. Then some came up with other options that were most likely done to to find a happy medium. I find that honourable. So for those, including myself, who appear to have integrity and other concerning issues please find help prior to the beginning of the season! I can refer you if required as I have already started the process. Hehehe.

Major one - Taking the actual issue out of this, I am having troubles with the process that had taken place here. I am assuming that anyone is entitled to start a poll? If not then one of the commissioners would have said so and the initial poll would have been stopped. Then Matt felt it necessary to use his co-commissioners powers to modify the poll to a format that was clearer and to his satisfaction including more options. I am assuming that this was in his right as no one appeared to have an issue with it. I am good up until this point. Then all of a sudden Matt use another co-commissioner set of powers and cancel the entire poll. Interesting enough there were 4 votes for Brandons "silly" option out of five votes.

I am very confused and concerned about this entire process?

Anyway I am done and will sit and wait on the edge of my chair to hear what the commissioners final decision will be.

Hi Gord,

You have every right to be confused, as I myself am trying to wrap my head around all of this. Let me try to explain my line of thinking on how this unfolded yesterday. But before I do, I should first offer a little background on our league and how decisions were made in the "early years," when we were still sorting out a few things.

In the first couple of years, it was really just Greg and I that created polls for the purposes of voting on a topic. The preferred method of dealing with a topic was to first start a thread and to let everyone state their opinions about it until we had heard from everybody. In general we would discuss, propose, and re-propose based on the direction of the debate, but there was a sense during this process that we would always search for a solution that was best for the league as a whole, without unduly injuring one (or a small minority) of GMs. Then we would do one of three things.

1) For simple issues, and if it was obvious what the league wanted based on the debate, we would simply alter the rule.

2) Sometimes Greg or myself would start a poll, which would be voted on and passed accordingly.

3) Very occasionally, Greg and I would use our commissioner's rank to simply make a decision. I can only think of one example off the top of my head -- that being of the removal of Butch from our league. The manifesto did not discuss the process for the removal of a GM from the league, so Greg and I were forced to make an executive decision on the fly.

Over the last year or two we've of course had a few new members. The dynamics have changed, and in many ways for the better. Greg and I really do encourage a democratic process, and in general we don't mind if other GMs get involved with creating polls and such on most issues. Some of the league members have gotten used to this, even though Greg and I still maintain our commissioner's rights to decide on certain contentious issues.

Now back to what happened yesterday:

In my mind, this issue about what to do with Sept 2012 draft picks should a full-season lockout occur, should have started with a thread where we could debate the topic for several days, throw some different potential solutions around, and once we had heard from everybody, Greg and I would have decided what to do from that point. We would have either created a (carefully worded) poll based on the major viewpoints, or we would have made an executive decision. Again, we are the commissioners and therefore it is our responsibility to put the league first and come up with a solution that will not benefit or hurt any one team (or minority of teams) more than the others. It's all about keeping a level playing field.

When Jarrett created the poll yesterday I felt that I had to make a snap decision. In hindsight, I should have simply contacted Greg by PM and we would have figured out what to do. Instead, we got into the lengthy and heated debate that created hurt feelings and really wasn't very productive.

I (incorrectly) assumed that by trying to explain why Brandon's option would unduly hurt some teams and unduly benefit others, that any sane GM would be able to see the conflict of interest. All one needs to do is look at the Claude Giroux/Duncan Keith trade to see how MUCH of a conflict of interest there is. Pretty clear cut in my mind. I don't think Ray was off-base by suggesting that the "entire integrity of the league would be flushed down the toilet" in such a scenario. In other words, commissioners that would allow such a lopsided decision (Brandon's option) to become law, are not doing their job to ensure a level playing field for everybody.

Back to yesterday:

By creating what I thought was a "better-worded" poll I figured our league would see that SOMETHING would need to be done, and that it would spark an "informed" debate about what the options are. I could care less what option we choose, but it should maintain that level playing field for everyone.

When I saw that Brandon and Jarrett vehemently opposed my own wording in the second poll, I realized that I too had probably jumped the gun and therefore did my best to backpeddle. I decided to do what I should have done in the first place: cancel the poll(s) and discuss with Greg about a proper course of action.

So that is where we find ourselves now. Greg and I would like to hear more from Ray (because he is the one that would suffer the most from Brandon's proposal), and then we will have to figure out what to do. The options right now are to create another poll with wording that ensures every GM who votes knows what they are voting for. For example, based on Scoop's written responses yesterday, I am not convinced that he knew exactly what he was voting for.

This is a difficult quagmire of an issue, but rest assured that Greg and I will attempt to deal with it in as fair a way as possible.

Stay tuned!

Yes Brandon, having been on vacation and awakening from a red-eye flight in Dallas, I saw these posts. All very confusing and with a foggy head hard to decipher all these opinions. In the leagues where I am commissioner, we will just wait to hold the draft as late as possible awaiting word on a season or not.

So here, everyone wants to hold a draft without knowing for sure what is going to happen. If we proceed with a draft and then no season, we should 'revert' back to where we stand at this exact moment, thereby, no one loses anything and no one gains anything. If we have a draft and there is somewhat of a season, everything is fine.

I think we need to chat this out before we vote on what to do. I would like to know all the rules before voting myself. Also I would point out that I'm not a fan of drafting then reverting back if there is no season. I think that would favour those that traded for draft picks as a new set of prospects would come in and the draft would be deeper. Those that traded picks away would, rightly, feel gypped. If a GM did trade away draft picks because he thought they had lower value because of the pending lockout then they should not be punished. And I didn't think Brandon's idea was bad I just wanted to see if we could find a way that was fair for all. Also I don't think reverting back would work because we all like to trade and there wouldn't be much fun if we knew that when we worked for a trade it may mean nothing. I think either draft , drop, and redraft. Or we draft, keep, have small draft and push 2013 to 2014. The way this league is set up I think is to draft, drop, and redraft. If we can't come up with something that a majority think is fair we have to go with what everyone expected.

I'd also like to add that after this draft we would be equal in rankings so if we redraft I feel we would all keep the same number and have random draft order for 2013.

Im not gonna lie i voted to do nothing. Might not be the greatest choice as some gms would suffer. But by postponing our whole season we all suffer. What are we supposed to so for the next 6 months?
If do nothing is conpletely out of the question, then i suggests we do what afew gms have mentioned and that is draft this year as planned. Then say in rays case he has 3 1st rd picks, he can then hold onto 2 extra keepers as he has 2 extra picks. Now obviously we would have to have a cut off round where after say 3rd round nobody would get any extra keepers.
At least this way we can draft make trades have fun all year long and those with those extra picks wont be completely screwed. Then also for those gms who traded away picks in this draft and even next year wouldnt have to wait till 2015 to get there picks back.

if we keep the whole team you would get a first round pick next year, then miss your first round pick in 2014 rather than 2013.

Besides Shore missing his first round draft pick for a different year I don't know why this isn't the obvious option. It seems to solve all our issues. We can trade and start drafting now. We can get excited about a possible season and in the end if there is no season we still have that team all summer to trade with and in 2013 we all get a 1 in 10 shot at the top prospect. We don't even have to drop anyone. we can just draft the 3 remaining spots to 33 for one year(unless you've done a 2 for 1 trade then you would have to open a spot). this seams to solve everyones issues... or am i missing something? And Jerrett, I'll make a nice very fair trade with you so you can get your pick back. everyones happy

I am glad to see that we are back to debating this issue intelligently. I particularly appreciate Jarrett's acknowledgement that some teams would unduly suffer under Brandon's proposal, and his attempt to offer another positive, solution-oriented option.

I just want to say that I am not set on any one option, just so long as the playing field is kept relatively level. There could be a number of different solutions. But it's fair to say that those Sept 2012 draft picks have SOME value -- some of them a LOT of value.

I decided to create a scale that attempts to assign the Sept 2012 picks a value. I started with the first overall pick and gave it a value of 100, the second overall pick a value of 99, the 3rd overall pick a value of 98, etc, all the way down to the 100th overall pick, which I assigned a value of 1. This should give us a rough approximation of the inherent value of the picks each of us holds for September 2012. I stopped at round ten because we don't trade draft picks beyond that round.

Here are the results:

Ray -- 839 points
Matt -- 659 points
Chris -- 641 points
Greg -- 526 points
John -- 494 points
Scott -- 443 points
Gord -- 416 points
Scoop -- 404 points
Brandon -- 344 points
Jarrett -- 284 points

As you can see, there is a pretty substantial difference in the value of the Sept 2012 picks held by the different GMs. Interesting that the two GMs who are most opposed to "losing" the value of these picks (Matt and Ray) have the most to lose, whereas the two GMs who are proposing a "tough love" approach have the least to lose. In fact, they have a lot to gain because much of the value they received for these traded picks are currently held in their keepers.

Based on the above points, another idea that I would suggest that is a variation on Jarrett's most recent suggestion (as well as the one's Greg and John have previously made), would be to grant Ray with 8 additional keepers next year (because he has 800+ value points in draft picks). I would have six extra keepers (600+ value points in draft picks). All the way down to Jarrett receiving two extra keepers (200+ value points in draft picks).

This would provide us with a rough way of assigning value to the cumulative draft picks for September 2012 in the event of a lockout.

We would then be able to trade freely this season, which I feel is important. And we would randomly assign a draft position for next season for a mini two- or three-round prospect draft, so everybody would get fair dibs on next year's top prospects.

The 2013 and 2014 draft picks would be moved forward by a year.

I would also be fine with John's suggestion that all of us simply keep the teams we drafted this year, which would also allow trading to occur throughout the season.

Hello everyone. Hot days for the Nutbars of late. Interesting days as well.....

I think the best way to solve this puzzle will be ultimately through a fresh poll. I will be happy to create it, but before I go off willy nilly and do that, I need to make sure I understand everything clearly.

That will require a reread of all the posts for me and then a big glass of red wine to create the poll. I can't drink at work so this will have to wait until this evening.

In the meantime, I urge everyone to get in touch with their 3rd Shakra and think deep, cleansing thoughts.

Perhaps even a colon cleanse might be appropriate, given the complexity of the issue.

G

PS I owe some people PMs but I cannot do that at work...........that will also need to wait. Sorry.