2023-24 HFBoards Yahoo Fantasy Premier Keeper League - Playoffs!

[archangel2]

Yahoo update, in case anyone was wondering if the extended schedule will be included in our league.

"Based on what we know about the NHL schedule today, we have made the decision to not extend the 2020-2021 Yahoo Fantasy Hockey season beyond May 8th. We will be excluding all postponed games during this time period. We have made this decision because adding these games to the end of the season will negatively impact competition for a number of teams during critical weeks late in the season."

yep-I am f***ed

 

[archangel2]

did I say I was f***ed?

 

[Canucker]

Are you scared?

Of course! You have McJesus on your side. lol

 

[archangel2]

put a fork in me--I am done

 

[CRDragon]

@FacepalmBenning

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

I fear I may not make the playoffs. Tragic.

 

[Balls Mahoney]

@FacepalmBenning

You should be thanking me for teaching you the power of Greasy Russians.

I don't even know what this season was. I attribute every fault of this season to space madness like delirium from the lockdowns and the long suffering demoralization experienced from Jim Benning STILL being the goddamn General Manager of the Vancouver Canucks.

 

[CRDragon]

Hey uh...any players that are NA are not allowed to be picked up. @Canucker @archangel2 on Cole Caufield and Jonas Johansson
It's been a few days.

 

[Canucker]

Hey uh...any players that are NA are not allowed to be picked up. @Canucker @archangel2 on Cole Caufield and Jonas Johansson
It's been a few days.

Caufield was called up to the Taxi Squad.

 

[CRDragon]

Taxi squad isn't exactly "on the roster". Are there any players on Taxi squad that doesn't have NA?

Open for discussion.

 

[Canucker]

Taxi squad isn't exactly "on the roster". Are there any players on Taxi squad that doesn't have NA?

Open for discussion.

Honestly, I don't care really...if you think he's not eligible and i should drop him I'm ok with it, I'd be fine taking Kadri back...I just saw that he had been "called up" and felt it was within the rules...but the rules aren't clearly defined regarding the "taxi squad" because of the changes in this messed up season.

ARTICLE 6: ADDS/DROPS
a. Teams are allowed 3 adds per week as defined by Yahoo Fantasy Hockey (league based setting).
b. Not Active (NA) players are ineligible to be added to a roster unless there is confirmed news that the player is becoming active (e.g. called up, activated from injured reserve, served the last day of their suspension).

 

[CRDragon]

...but the rules aren't clearly defined regarding the "taxi squad" because of the changes in this messed up season.

Exactly. But there's now "call up" to taxi squad, and "call up" to main roster. The reason for taxi squad is to allow players to be called up and not having to quarantine for 7 days, so they would normally be in the minors if it wasn't for the case, thus unavailable and "Not Active".

 

[Canucker]

Exactly. But there's now "call up" to taxi squad, and "call up" to main roster. The reason for taxi squad is to allow players to be called up and not having to quarantine for 7 days, so they would normally be in the minors if it wasn't for the case, thus unavailable and "Not Active".

There are salary cap implications to this as well, Caufield would be on the main roster right now if they had cap room for him. Regardless, if you don't think this is within the rules, and this is how the rules will be interpreted going forward, I'm OK if you reverse the move.

 

[ArtursSilovsShirt]

I don’t see an issue with the Caufield add

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

I was going to add Caufield when he was called up.

 

[BrockH]

I feel like taxi squad shouldn't qualify to be added. The "called up" is an example ("e.g.") not a rule, and the example was written in a context where there wasn't such a thing as a taxi squad. The more relevant phrase is "becoming active", and being called up is no longer a guarantee that a player will become active. The rule as written (and it's intention) should supersede an outdated example.

 

[Canucker]

I feel like taxi squad shouldn't qualify to be added. The "called up" is an example ("e.g.") not a rule, and the example was written in a context where there wasn't such a thing as a taxi squad. The more relevant phrase is "active", and I don't think anyone would consider them an active part of the NHL roster while on the taxi-squad (e.g. if they're injured, they're treated as though injured while in the minors).

"Called up" is an example of a qualifier for the rule. If you want to make the rule the way you are stating it, thats fine and I'm good with that...but in its current form it's ambiguous, because the Taxi squad has never been defined in the current rules.

 

[BrockH]

"Called up" is an example of a qualifier for the rule. If you want to make the rule the way you are stating it, thats fine and I'm good with that...but in its current form it's ambiguous, because the Taxi squad has never been defined in the current rules.

I disagree. A qualifier is different than an example. The examples were trying to be helpful because, I agree, the phrase "becoming active" is ambiguous. I tried to help with that by giving examples which would serve as "news that a player is becoming active". However, if someone satisfies an example in a way that is clearly not satisfying the rule (there is no indication that the player is becoming active) then the rule should stand, not the example.

 

[archangel2]

Hey uh...any players that are NA are not allowed to be picked up. @Canucker @archangel2 on Cole Caufield and Jonas Johansson
It's been a few days.

Just too bad JJ WAS NOT LISTED AS NA when I picked him up. He got moved to NA about 3 hours after I added him

Not like he was my keeper or anything like that.


I got f***ed by the canucks and covid

 

[Canucks LB]

I don't think we have determined exact rules on the Taxi Squad and pick ups when the season started.
So for that reason, I have no issues with the Caufield Pick up.
Just my two cents.

 

[CRDragon]

I feel like taxi squad shouldn't qualify to be added. The "called up" is an example ("e.g.") not a rule, and the example was written in a context where there wasn't such a thing as a taxi squad. The more relevant phrase is "becoming active", and being called up is no longer a guarantee that a player will become active. The rule as written (and it's intention) should supersede an outdated example.

I'm with this, it's the intention of the rule. However, it's a little awkward to make a decision because I'm playing Canucker this week in a playoff round.

Going through the CBA more in depth, here are the duties of the commissioner:

a. Two commissioners will jointly share the administrative duties of the league. They are not there to make rulings, but rather to handle the workings of the league, providing guidance and functionality.

I've thought about this a little bit, my suggestion is to reverse Canucker's transaction (you'd want an extra player against me anyways) and bring the transaction to a tribunal (protocols...). However, it's been a while since a tribunal's been formed so instead, it'll undergo a league wide vote. All league members except for Canucker can cast a vote, with the deadline on Saturday 11:59pm. If the league approves Canucker's transaction, I will reinstate the transaction on Sunday. If the league reject's Canucker's transaction, then there will be no change to the roster. Based on the decision of the league vote, it will apply to all transactions from here on out to players on the taxi squad until the end of our playoffs. The rule will be revisited again the following season if there is another case of taxi squad usage.

Is this a fair process? @Canucker

@BrockH @FacepalmBenning @CaptainBo @Lucbourdon @donut @archangel2 @ahmon @StrictlyCommercial @nameless1 @VanillaCoke

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

I feel like it is a bit more nuanced than every taxi squad player is fair game. In Caufield's case there was a bunch of media about him getting called up, which usually triggers a race to add the player.

 

[Balls Mahoney]

I am of the opinion if they're available in the Yahoo pool, they should be valid. But I don't feel strongly about this and can see the logic of taxi squads not being valid.

I think grabbing a prominent taxi squad prospect is as valid as my grabbing Tarasenko and carrying him for a couple weeks on IR. Both are unavailable players being carried for future strategy. We as general managers are willing to take the short term loss for potential long term gains.

But this season has been a complete wash for me. My brain has trouble wrapping around COVID hockey. So I vote to allow the taxi squad transactions but I also add a clause that I don't feel strongly about it and I'm probably not the most informed or best opinion on this.

 

[Canucker]

I'm with this, it's the intention of the rule. However, it's a little awkward to make a decision because I'm playing Canucker this week in a playoff round.

Going through the CBA more in depth, here are the duties of the commissioner:


I've thought about this a little bit, my suggestion is to reverse Canucker's transaction (you'd want an extra player against me anyways) and bring the transaction to a tribunal (protocols...). However, it's been a while since a tribunal's been formed so instead, it'll undergo a league wide vote. All league members except for Canucker can cast a vote, with the deadline on Saturday 11:59pm. If the league approves Canucker's transaction, I will reinstate the transaction on Sunday. If the league reject's Canucker's transaction, then there will be no change to the roster. Based on the decision of the league vote, it will apply to all transactions from here on out to players on the taxi squad until the end of our playoffs. The rule will be revisited again the following season if there is another case of taxi squad usage.

Is this a fair process? @Canucker

@BrockH @FacepalmBenning @CaptainBo @Lucbourdon @donut @archangel2 @ahmon @StrictlyCommercial @nameless1 @VanillaCoke

Thats completely fair. Thanks.

 

[Canucker]

I feel like it is a bit more nuanced than every taxi squad player is fair game. In Caufield's case there was a bunch of media about him getting called up, which usually triggers a race to add the player.

I agree....plus I think the intent was to call him up so he was there and able to play once they cleared the roster spot and cap space for him...I don't think it was Mtl's intent to have him sitting in the press box as a depth player.

But regardless, I'm aware that this is a grey area in the rules in a stupid covid season so it has the potential to be reversed....still feel it was a worthy attempt to grab a player that was probably coveted by several GM's....if i didn't grab him someone else would have.