Krejci Trade

For those who have not done so already, please go to ESPN and vote on the most recent trade between Keegan and Greg. There is one GM that does not approve, but I'm not going to say which one.

Cheers,
Matt

Not to be difficult, I'm not voting. This is in no way a trade that is vetoable. There is zero collusion, therefore no veto. I'm not going to get into the habit of managing other GM's teams if I don't like the trade. I'm not a fan of this trade, but that doesn't mean we have to step in as a league and manage both Greg and Keegans teams.

I tend to agree with you Jay. If we get into the habit of managing trades like this, it could open up a real can of worms in the future.

Thanks for being up front about it.

Cheers,
Matt

No problem bud. I've been vetoed once in a league, and it didn't end pretty. The league disbanded because of it. Not that I'm a total nag about it. Or that I was the catalyst to the whole thing. But if another GM makes a bad trade, its not up to us to correct it. Plain and simple. From there every trade anyone did started having veto votes, it was stupid, and not fun.

This is now the second time we've had a few people veto a trade where we've needed to discuss it. I don't know if its the same person, but we need to get it out there why we have the veto rule in place. It says so in the manifesto, "only extreme situations"

Okay, let's play hockey!

pretty much all of the trades have just been pushed through, and we need to make it consistent. either push them all through, and then if someone really has a problem they post a msg on here and if they get 5 other people to agree then the trade should be veoted. chances of that are not likely, but we need to have a clear and concise way of dealing with trades, because sometimes they go through after a minute and sometimes it takes a day or two thus giving the chance for people to veto. i personally think it is a fair a trade, and even if not, would not vote against it unless it was an EXTREMELY lopsided trade.

I dont even see the trade on ESPN so i have no opinion.

yah are you talking about the richards trade etc...
or is there a new trade actaully involving krejic

Yeah, I'm talking about the Richards/Jokinen/draft picks for Sedin/Gomez/draft picks trade. It's the latest trade logged under our "trades" section on the forum.

The inconsistency with pushing trades through is more an issue of when Greg and/or I get around to pushing it through. In general we try and get trades pushed through ASAP, but sometimes when we are busy or out of Internet reach we don't get around to it for a day or two. That's the only reason for the inconsistency.

And again, I tend to agree with Jay that the only reason trades shjould be voted on or vetoed is because of obvious collusion or lopsidedness.

Scoop made a good point earlier in the year. When he's seen trades happen in his other league he sometimes thinks a trade is extremely lopsided in one direction. However, there are occasions when he is wrong, and the team that at first appears to lose the trade actually ends up winning.

The Crosby trade earlier this year is another good example. I've had GMs come to me on both sides saying that they felt both Brandon and Joel "stole the show" with the trade. Only time will tell who will actually win that trade, though.

I think our Crosby trade is a great example of how trades can be viewed good or bad from either side. I ran the trade past 4 people after the fact and opinions were certainly split, and split by a wide margin, on whether it was good or bad for me.

In my opinion that makes the deal a great one, because it means it's double-edged, and those are the best kind!

I can think of only one trade I have ever voted to veto in any league I have been in and it was between 2 guys who knew each other really well trying to help the one guy make a playoff run in a VERY obvious way. Needless to say I am no longer a part of that league (was years ago)

Thanks for your veteran perspective Joel.