Cap - the market will adjust accordingly once it determines that GMs make terrible trades.

RAIF:

Suggestion 1 : They would be demoted to AGM of their former team.
Suggestion 2 : v1 has nothing to do with firing in v2.
Suggestion 3 : GMs get fired if they make constant trades that the BOE deems destructive
Suggestion 4 : the BOE will not involve itself with what the individual GM wants to do. That is their private decision to make, not the BOE to determine which players should be traded.

So then why not just have the limit just in case?

There isn't a TDL. From the start of v2 until the draft regular season. from draft until start of season is offseason

ok

i mean, we could have the limit but it would have to be pretty big, like 7 or 8 trades limit on deadline day.

Has an NHL team ever made 7 or 8 trades on deadline day?

Nah the most is probably 4 or 5 but that's just speculated

DirtyDangles ---> engaged
F50Marco ---> engaged
Jt_Miller ---> hasn't engaged
Math ---> hasn't engaged
plNHL ---> hasn't engaged
ricochetti ---> engaged
WerenskiWarrior ---> hasn't engaged
WhisperWhisper ---> hasn't engaged

But people are supporting the idea, and having that before hand would be crucial to the success of V2 IMO.

I feel that GMs shouldn't be exempt from a second chance because they made some downright terrible trades in v1. If anything, the BOE can issue a warning saying that if they make trades like that that they did in v1 in v2, there job security would be suspect.

The market will determine who is good and who is bad based on the very first trade that is made. GMs will be called out more because the BOE rates their trades. It will be a warning shot to everyone once a GM is fired 

1 horrendous trade and they get fired or 2 really bad trades.

2 horrendous trades could upset the balance of the game which is why I feel 1 should be grounds for dismissal.

Ex. John klingberg for Zaitsev and Letang (50%)

Ex... Karlsson for Barrie @Zach <3

one asinine trade shouldn't correlate to dismissal. if that individual makes a trade like Klingberg for Zaitsev and Letang 50% again, they will be fired. A warning would be issued to the GM that makes a trade like that to explain to them why the trade was bad and how another similar trade would be detrimental to the integrity of the game

Well as I said, 2 horrendous trades from 3-4 people could completely upset the balance of the game.

Then they would be reverted via discretion of the BOE and subsequently the GM who made the trades would be fired.

Well firing GMs would usually be later i'd guess. If the BOE feels a trade was meant as a joke, it will not be allowed, but if the team later doesn't look great and a trade turned out to be bad, eventually the GM could get fired. Just my opinion.

Connection went wonky earlier. This was supposed to be posted before the last several posts.

RE: Retained salary - Having a poor retention decision rated poorly, doesn't negate the impact when it happens.

(Mr_Cap) BOE overturning trades - I must have overlooked this part as well. I thought the point of the BOE was to approve trades prior to them being made official. Similar to how teams submit the paperwork IRL and then the league has to approve. This would be a more efficient process I would think. Rather than having GM's make a mess by processing and re-processing trades. You should consider a trade submission thread, coupled with an official trade thread. The BOE approves of the submitted trades and announces them in the official thread once they are approved.
Forgive me if I missed this as well: Does a void/rejected trade proposal count towards the trade number restriction?

-------------



Not so much "joke" trades, which should be pretty obvious to deny, but "unrealistic" trades might be a better term.

- All of my 2018 picks for a player, for example, which has happened a few times in v1, is just ridiculous. Even if the value is "fair", no team does that, ever.
- Retaining 50% of a 7 year, $7M dollar contract is not realistic. Especially when it is a player currently deserving of $7M/year. You trade him in year 6 or 7 at 50%, at most.
- Every player with a cap hit higher than it should be based on their performance, is not a "cap dump". Fayne, who has spent most of his time in the minors, is a cap dump. If a player has played 60 or more NHL games in the last season, he's probably not a cap dump. You might have to retain, take salary back, and/or give them up for a low return, but you're ordinarily better off keeping the player than giving up assets to get rid of him.

Joke trades will not be tolerated. GM firings would be utilized if the BOE feels that a series of trades are detrimental to the team and/or the integrity of the v2 game.

Rico - I like the idea of having the BOE pass trades, but the BOE isn't supposed to be policing what teams trade, unless it is seriously detrimental to the game. Having the BOE simply veto a trade would be easier instead of processing a maximum of 60 trades a month (4 x 15)

Heres an example of a trade that would be rated poorly, but not revered IMO:


Matt Duchene


Conor Sheary
2018 1st round pick (PIT)

Based on advanced analytics, Sheary only thrives when with Crosby. When without, he is a bottom-six player at best. This trade would not be vetoed IMO because the trade isn't horrendous seeing as how Duchene's contract is up shortly, but the return isn't max potential.

Very Ironic.

Either way technically works or serves the purpose. It's just easier to filter things from the start than to clean them up after the fact.
I won't be the one doing the cleaning, so consider it as a caution for anyone that will be on the BOE.

Anyway, I've noted my concerns/opinions.

Aside from the limits (minimum/maximum numbers) of trades debate, I'd say the rest is acceptable as is.
Room for improvement, perhaps, but acceptable.

I approve of the plan as is. I'd like to see a couple of changes, but I'm not concerned enough to withhold support.

EDIT: Provided you fix that decimal/percent thing. It drives me nuts.

I refuse to change the decimal precent LOL. Nah, I'll change it an put you down.

Bump - still waiting on the following:
DirtyDangles ---> engaged
F50Marco ---> engaged
Jt_Miller ---> hasn't engaged
Math ---> hasn't engaged
plNHL ---> hasn't engaged
WerenskiWarrior ---> hasn't engaged
WhisperWhisper ---> hasn't engaged

I approve as well as long as we have more discussions on number of trades restrictions.