OK, so there are trades. Now what?

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
Not that it matters, but I'm pretty sure ATD12 was the draft with a 3 trade max. ATD2010 aka ATD13 was basically unlimited trading, IIRC. If it wasn't, well... multiple GMs got away with violating the max trade rule.

Really? Wow, I didn't realize that. I guess that invalidates my statement a few posts back when I analyzed trading patterns based on whether there was a limit on trading. so clearly the imposed limit did, in fact, limit trading but as I found, the picks-per-trade, and percentage of "big" trades, did not change either way.
 

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
You know...the issue around trades is not the number of them any individual GM makes, but the balance of the trades, themselves (and to a lesser extent, the timing if the pick is on the clock). The trade issue had been simmering in the ATD for some time before it it broke open in ATD11 (IIRC) with the deal between Eagle and I think it was paper that had paper giving up a king's ransom to move up for Messier, I think.

I use this example because Eagle has made probably more than 50 trades in his career as an ATD GM, and only one of them was a problem. It's not the number of trades that is at issue here. It only takes one lopsided trade to throw off competitive balance in the league. Why don't we just accept that the body of GMs has veto right on any trades and stop with the micromanagement?
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
You know...the issue around trades is not the number of them any individual GM makes, but the balance of the trades, themselves (and to a lesser extent, the timing if the pick is on the clock). The trade issue had been simmering in the ATD for some time before it it broke open in ATD11 (IIRC) with the deal between Eagle and I think it was paper that had paper giving up a king's ransom to move up for Messier, I think.

I use this example because Eagle has made probably more than 50 trades in his career as an ATD GM, and only one of them was a problem. It's not the number of trades that is at issue here. It only takes one lopsided trade to throw off competitive balance in the league. Why don't we just accept that the body of GMs has veto right on any trades and stop with the micromanagement?

I agree with your post, and I hate micromanagement too. the committee idea was set up so that any one member of it could shut a trade down right away and prevent stalling of the draft. they should be trusted to make the decision that the body of GMs would, only faster, and with authority granted to do so.
 

Leafs Forever

Registered User
Jul 14, 2009
2,802
3
You know...the issue around trades is not the number of them any individual GM makes, but the balance of the trades, themselves (and to a lesser extent, the timing if the pick is on the clock). The trade issue had been simmering in the ATD for some time before it it broke open in ATD11 (IIRC) with the deal between Eagle and I think it was paper that had paper giving up a king's ransom to move up for Messier, I think.

I use this example because Eagle has made probably more than 50 trades in his career as an ATD GM, and only one of them was a problem. It's not the number of trades that is at issue here. It only takes one lopsided trade to throw off competitive balance in the league. Why don't we just accept that the body of GMs has veto right on any trades and stop with the micromanagement?

The issue with just accepting that the body of GM's have veto right is probably that is it nearly impossible for GM's to come on a consensus, it seems to me, enough to possibly veto a deal. Even in that example you have, the veto vote (to my knowledge) actually let the deal go through (though a lot of people complained, naturally, and EB and paper negotitated a fairer deal afterwards)

Though there have been plenty of qestuonable trades, I don't think there's ever actually technically been a successful veto of a trade. Closest thing are GMs rengotiating after some pressure.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Though there have been plenty of qestuonable trades, I don't think there's ever actually technically been a successful veto of a trade. Closest thing are GMs rengotiating after some pressure.

The one bad trade from ATD2010 was vetoed by the commissioner (VI), on the request of a couple of other GMs. Then it was re-worked by the GMs as you said.

Edit: Hopefully, the draft order is released soon and we can stop talking about this.
 

Stoneberg

Bored
Nov 10, 2005
3,947
73
Halifax
Since we're close to a draft order I'm throwing it out there that if I'm anywher higher than 30 I'll be willing to swap picks with anyone picking after 30.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
The one bad trade from ATD2010 was vetoed by the commissioner (VI), on the request of a couple of other GMs. Then it was re-worked by the GMs as you said.

Edit: Hopefully, the draft order is released soon and we can stop talking about this.

sorry about the delay guys. I am dealing with life at the moment, and of course, we have 12 days before the draft is set to start, so it's all good.
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
As long as there is no trading of picks on the clock or anything else that will cause the draft to slow down, I don't care about trades.
 

Leafs Forever

Registered User
Jul 14, 2009
2,802
3
The trading of picks on the clock is so circumnavigable that it's pointless. (pick the player your trading partner wants)

No trading AT ALL if you are at the clock would create what you're looking for.
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
The trading of picks on the clock is so circumnavigable that it's pointless. (pick the player your trading partner wants)

No trading AT ALL if you are at the clock would create what you're looking for.

That's part of the "anything else" that would slow us up.

If you get caught doing that you mentioned, you should lose your current pick (make a double pick next round)
 

EagleBelfour

Registered User
Jun 7, 2005
7,467
62
ehsl.proboards32.com
The easiest and proper way to trade a pick on the clock is to announce the trade before you're on the clock, and making the trade conditional that a certain player is still available. Both GM are present or send a list, and when the time come, if the player is still available, the trade is accepted and the pick is made, and if the player was taken, the trade is void and the owner of the pick makes his selection.

At least, that's how I've done it in the past.
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
The easiest and proper way to trade a pick on the clock is to announce the trade before you're on the clock, and making the trade conditional that a certain player is still available. Both GM are present or send a list, and when the time come, if the player is still available, the trade is accepted and the pick is made, and if the player was taken, the trade is void and the owner of the pick makes his selection.

At least, that's how I've done it in the past.

As long as we aren't waiting for people to say, "I had a deal ready here, so let's wait for *%&% to get here and confirm it".

These types of conditional trades need to be announced publicly before the pick is on the clock, and the complete agreement should be sent to 70s.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->