48 Hr waiting Period

I know this was brought up during the season.
So here it is again
the waiting period for trades

thanks for doing all this. I think we got a bunch of things to cover this offseason and im glad we are diving in

Looks like a tight vote.
Most important to me is that our trades be ESPN driven and that nobody is asking for trades to be pushed through. That kind of thing introduces inconsistencies that could end up favouring one team over another.

We shoukd be able to have it setup so that when the other teams accepts the trade on espn the trade occurs immediate and does not need a gm to push it through.

There are four options for us:

1. No trade review.
2. 24h
3. 48h
4. 72h

So, like I said earlier, the most important thing for me is that we let the site do the work. To be truthful, I don't mind which of the above we choose.

When i created the poll. I meant to have it as
No review or keep 48HR review.

We will be losing the ability to veto with no waiting period as well. We never have had a veto before but right now it's set up that if all 8 of the other GMs think it's team stacking than the trade is vetoed. I do worry about this a bit. Because we have had people come and go in this league and as much as I don't want to think anyone would trade to stack a team I don't really know half the people except through this site. Not to mention new people that may come in in the future.

Good point. Why wait for it to actually happen when this safeguard is already in place. If you just want to change the viewing time so you can do a trade on Saturday or Sunday and have the players in your lineup, then that's not a good excuse IMHO. We all have lived with this rule for all this time and it hasn't had a huge negative impact as far as I can see.

Like John says, you never know what the future holds and just because we haven't had cause to use the rule, doesn't mean it's not working.

Let me get off the soapbox now, my legs are tired.

The poll is not whether to get rid of veto's or not.

If 8 GM's think a trade is lopsided that it should still be vetoeod.

Just to get rid of the waiting period. If a trade is made on any day between Monday-Saturday night, then there is still a 48hrs waiting period till the 2 gms can use there new players the following Monday anways.

I like the idea of not having it for a few reasons

1) ESPN's 48 hrs waiting period is actually more like 49hrs. It's never consistent it always varies.
2) I find most GM's are easier to get ahold of on weekends.
3) Also if a trade is made Saturday Night or Sunday then you get to use you new players that Monday and you dont have to wait an additional 7 days.

That's just my opinion.
I know when this was brought up before we could never agree on it, so that's why the Poll was made.

The issue would be that the 48 hour review time was the time that we had to look at a trade and possibly discuss it. If we had a trade that was through immediately on a sunday night then if we did decide it was stacking on tuesday we would have to try to make it retroactive and the week would have already started. The way we have it now the site does everything for us and no intervention would be needed. It may not even be possible to change back after a week starts.

What you say makes sense John and i'm not disagreeing with you.

But if someone pulls off a lopsided trade the last minute like that, then they shouldn't even be in our league.
For the most part from what i have seen is that the new people who get added to our league usually have to know someone or be friends with another GM.

We have had over 200 trades and none of them have ever been vetoed. Also unless someone pulled off a last minute trade like i mention above then the trade still would/could get veteod.

To me it's not a big deal, if someone wants to abuse this then there basically putting there Fantasy Hocky life on the line as it wouldn't sit well with the other GMs

With that being said, I will be happy to change my vote if you or anyone else is seriously worried/upset about this.

It doesn't upset me. But I do have concerns that having the two days to review helped keep people honest. And I do feel there is still strategy whether we gets trades through immediately or not. Sometimes I like trading on sunday knowing I'll have one week left with my players. I just don't see why we would make it harder when we can all vote on the site in the 48 hour review period and never have to worry about retroactive or contacting GMs to over ride trades. But i'm ok with democracy solving this. Just putting in my two cents.

your 2 cents are worth more like 25 cents John lol! Your a smart guy!

I guess i'm almost giving the benefit of the doubt thinking that it could never happen.

Still 3 people left to vote, things could still go either way

I'm unconcerned with the wait period. Instant is fine. 72 hours is fine.

Veto needs to be another element. Perhaps this has one full week to transpire and occurs in a different process that involves the league.

It would mortify me to see a veto ever happen.

In my one pool this year, I made an absolutely horrible deal at the trade deadline. Too many picks & Luongo to get Fleury. All year, I waited on Luongo and goaltender shopped. I was well aware that I was grossly over paying. However, I wished to drive for a championship. Fleury was the difference for me the first week I had him.

I get little sympathy in that league, as I've done too well for too long.

No veto occurred, but if there are veto's it was clearly a trade that could have been vetoed.

Thus, if a veto was to ever take place, I would suggest that that manager is in danger of being removed from the league at that moment in time too.

SCOOP

There are definitely strong views on vetoes in this league. We have it set up here that if we veto we are calling people cheaters. I don't feel this should be the way it is viewed. I think it should be viewed that if all 8 other managers veto a trade it's not that those two are cheaters but drastically out of touch with the other 8 on their value of players. This would make a veto a little offensive but not calling people outright cheaters. But this is the first pool I've ever been in that sees a veto as this bad. And I know there was one person that said he would leave if there was ever a veto (he left anyway). I won't leave if we can't veto. And if others really feel that strongly about it then I'll live without it.

Lets smoke that last person out!

I will start....I have voted!

I voted

me too

as have I

Me.
As.
Well.

I have voted as well

Yup, I voted.

I have voted

Tigers voted

Looks like Chris we are waiting for on this one