SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/GM Game

Discussion Between BOG And Other GMs

Aug. 16, 2017 at 6:50 p.m.
Stickied
TonyStrecher
V3 Canucks GM, BOG
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 1,932
Likes: 653
This thread is for discussion between the BOG members and other GMs.

You may bring up any issues relating to the GM Game in this thread.

Please try to be respectful if you are complaining about something.


BOG Members:
ricochetii
phillyjabroni
Turner33
Bo53Horvat
TonyStrecher
DarylthePony
Duster
Sep. 10, 2017 at 1:13 p.m.
#376
ricochetii
Go Habs Go
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,667
Likes: 4,091
Quoting: phillyjabroni
Quoting: ricochetii
If you want to make an arrangement off the books, that's one thing. What you are trying to do is make a backroom deal official and binding.
It can not be official and binding, because you are not allowed to include Shattenkirk in a trade until January.
Regardless of when it takes place, you are still posting a trade in the official trade thread that is illegal today.

Wait and post the trade after January 1st when it isn't illegal, and don't complain about it if one of the parties backs out prior to that date.

Expansion draft trades were a unique case, as we were simulating the end of the season according to our own timeline. Things were a mess back then so it's not a good precedent, but it was restricted to teams out of the playoffs at one point at least. You can't trade a player and still have him play for you.

The BOG can absolutely veto a trade if there are ineligible parts involved. We've done it multiple times with teams trading players they don't have and there is a rule preventing the trading of 2017 UFA's specifically. Nobody has said anything about the value of the trade or collusion, that's not the issue.


I never said the BOG cannot revert the trade, I am saying that we are simply stamping it in time.

My contention is that if we allowed deals to be made, that would become official at a later date, why are we know saying that it is not allowed? If you remove the context of the expansion, the same thesis is there.

Expansion Trades : deals that were made "unofficially" that would be made official at a later time.
This Trade : deals that was made "unofficially" that would be made official at a later time.

Teams were not supposed to back out on expansion deals, I would expect that Jack would't back out of this one.
I just want there to be some way to stamp the trade for future reference that is easily accessible, whether that is in the trade thread or in our descriptions, I don't really care. I just want there to be a way to stamp it on CapFriendly and not have to rifle thru Twitter to find the exact deal

edit : Jack not backing out as in the same context of the expansion trade. meaning since the thesis is constant and backing out is still unethical.


Context.

Expansion trades were "official at a later date" because some teams were still in the playoffs and it was not conducive to our timeline to wait.
Regardless, there was no rule in place that said "this specific group of players can not be traded".
I know you're capable of making the distinction, you're just reaching for justification.

As for the rest. You are making an agreement "off the books". You can't have an "off the books" arrangement "on the books".
If that means you have to deal with a minor inconvenience or keep a personal record somewhere, you'll have to deal with that.

If you come to the forum and start something because someone else decided not to live up to an "off the books" arrangement, I will slap you (figuratively).
Sep. 10, 2017 at 1:24 p.m.
#377
phillyjabroni
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,392
Likes: 2,885
The off the books trade is accepted, just awaiting official trade date.

I get your points and such, but I think Jack and I can work out a deal on the trade and such in order to keep it on the up and up.

My next question is that can we make a deal, and official deal, that involves us sending compensation if someone backs out, regardless of the GM.

Not saying that we will do this, but I want to clairify prior to making it and having he'll break loose
Sep. 10, 2017 at 3:21 p.m.
#378
ricochetii
Go Habs Go
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,667
Likes: 4,091
Quoting: phillyjabroni
The off the books trade is accepted, just awaiting official trade date.

I get your points and such, but I think Jack and I can work out a deal on the trade and such in order to keep it on the up and up.

My next question is that can we make a deal, and official deal, that involves us sending compensation if someone backs out, regardless of the GM.

Not saying that we will do this, but I want to clairify prior to making it and having he'll break loose


There's no way (I can see) to accomplish what you are trying to achieve in a legal, legitimate, and officially recognized manner.
You want to make an illegal transaction, legally binding. That's just not possible.
(It's kind of like selling something stolen and then going to the police when the other guy refuses to pay.)
Sep. 10, 2017 at 3:34 p.m.
#379
phillyjabroni
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,392
Likes: 2,885
Quoting: ricochetii
Quoting: phillyjabroni
The off the books trade is accepted, just awaiting official trade date.

I get your points and such, but I think Jack and I can work out a deal on the trade and such in order to keep it on the up and up.

My next question is that can we make a deal, and official deal, that involves us sending compensation if someone backs out, regardless of the GM.

Not saying that we will do this, but I want to clairify prior to making it and having he'll break loose


There's no way (I can see) to accomplish what you are trying to achieve in a legal, legitimate, and officially recognized manner.
You want to make an illegal transaction, legally binding. That's just not possible.
(It's kind of like selling something stolen and then going to the police when the other guy refuses to pay.)


Will Twitter deals, where the trade steps are fully followed and can be proved via screenshots, hold up on CapFriendly? Meaning, if both parties consensually agree to a trade, and then re-confirm it, is that considered "official" if a party backs out for whatever reason?

My deal excluded, this is for future reference. For example, verbal agreements hold up in court. I want to confirm that a deal on Twitter (or any offline location), that follows all procedures, is that a "legal, binding deal"?
Sep. 10, 2017 at 3:38 p.m.
#380
DirtyDangles
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 13,508
Likes: 3,060
No matter how you try and dance around it, it is an illegal trade that is in no way legally binding.
Peterman liked this.
Sep. 10, 2017 at 3:41 p.m.
#381
phillyjabroni
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,392
Likes: 2,885
Quoting: DirtyDangles
No matter how you try and dance around it, it is an illegal trade that is in no way legally binding.


The trade itself is illegal for the time being. I am trying to see what my options are in terms of insurance on the trade. My question is that is an offline deal, that follows the proper steps, a legally binding deal?
Sep. 10, 2017 at 3:45 p.m.
#382
DirtyDangles
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 13,508
Likes: 3,060
Quoting: phillyjabroni
Quoting: DirtyDangles
No matter how you try and dance around it, it is an illegal trade that is in no way legally binding.


The trade itself is illegal for the time being. I am trying to see what my options are in terms of insurance on the trade. My question is that is an offline deal, that follows the proper steps, a legally binding deal?


Nothing offsite is binding until put in the thread.
Sep. 10, 2017 at 3:47 p.m.
#383
phillyjabroni
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,392
Likes: 2,885
Quoting: DirtyDangles
Quoting: phillyjabroni


The trade itself is illegal for the time being. I am trying to see what my options are in terms of insurance on the trade. My question is that is an offline deal, that follows the proper steps, a legally binding deal?


Nothing offsite is binding until put in the thread.


By what measures? If, for example, i agree to a trade involving a depth player and a pick offline. I then proceed to type up the trade after we re-confirm the trade. Just before I hit "submit" I get a notification that they want to void the trade. Does the trade stand or how would that work?

This is what I mean. Can we consider a deal that follows the proper procedures, and you have evidence of that, a binding trade?
Sep. 10, 2017 at 3:52 p.m.
#384
ricochetii
Go Habs Go
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,667
Likes: 4,091
Quoting: phillyjabroni


The trade itself is illegal for the time being. I am trying to see what my options are in terms of insurance on the trade. My question is that is an offline deal, that follows the proper steps, a legally binding deal?


Twitter (or other off-site communication) is not enforceable. It has to be posted on-site in the official trade thread to make it so.
There's no insurance option for what you're trying to accomplish. All you can do is hope the other guy lives up to his word, is still GM when the time comes, and still agrees to the trade at that time.

You can do all the groundwork you want to set up a trade, but when it comes to the final commitment and making it official, both parties still have to agree.

Edit: Right now, you have offer and acceptance, you only need confirmation, which can't be done until January 1st.
Sep. 10, 2017 at 3:54 p.m.
#385
F50marco
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 19,588
Likes: 6,728
Sorry Philly that trade is 100% circumvent. If it is only used as a time stamp fine but it cant go into the trade thread yet and both teams are fully eligible to trade those players in the meantime if they encounter a better offer. Except for Shattenkirk obviously

There is no going back against your word or integrity or whatever. This is clear circumvent of the rules. You can still make it but it can't be official yet and there are no strings attached until Jan 1st. It has to be kept as a promise deal which would be kept offline from the official GM game.
Sep. 10, 2017 at 3:59 p.m.
#386
phillyjabroni
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,392
Likes: 2,885
Quoting: phillyjabroni
Quoting: DirtyDangles


Nothing offsite is binding until put in the thread.


By what measures? If, for example, i agree to a trade involving a depth player and a pick offline. I then proceed to type up the trade after we re-confirm the trade. Just before I hit "submit" I get a notification that they want to void the trade. Does the trade stand or how would that work?

This is what I mean. Can we consider a deal that follows the proper procedures, and you have evidence of that, a binding trade?
Sep. 10, 2017 at 4:43 p.m.
#387
Mr_cap
NBABound
Avatar of the user
Joined: Oct. 2016
Posts: 5,655
Likes: 1,392
Quoting: phillyjabroni
Quoting: phillyjabroni


By what measures? If, for example, i agree to a trade involving a depth player and a pick offline. I then proceed to type up the trade after we re-confirm the trade. Just before I hit "submit" I get a notification that they want to void the trade. Does the trade stand or how would that work?

This is what I mean. Can we consider a deal that follows the proper procedures, and you have evidence of that, a binding trade?


This is equivalent to a promise ring. All it means is its a promise. Or like a handshake agreement. The person can go against it because its not an actual agreement. Nothing written on paper, which is known by society as 'official'.
Sep. 10, 2017 at 4:46 p.m.
#388
F50marco
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 19,588
Likes: 6,728
Quoting: Mr_cap
Quoting: phillyjabroni


This is equivalent to a promise ring. All it means is its a promise. Or like a handshake agreement. The person can go against it because its not an actual agreement. Nothing written on paper, which is known by society as 'official'.


Exactly. You can't get any assurances written in concrete. Its still possible to make the trade but it can't be official until then. Sorry.
Sep. 14, 2017 at 9:02 a.m.
#389
DirtyDangles
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 13,508
Likes: 3,060
Why don't we just stick with 5 BoG members. At least we know they will stay active.
Sep. 14, 2017 at 11:13 a.m.
#390
phillyjabroni
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,392
Likes: 2,885
Quoting: DirtyDangles
Why don't we just stick with 5 BoG members. At least we know they will stay active.


With the increasing activity that will inevitably occur with the addition of v2, rolling with 5 BOG seems to be a logical and doesn't seem like 7 BOG members are as relevant now.

5 BOG going forward seems like the way to go, in my opinion.
Sep. 14, 2017 at 11:32 a.m.
#391
Daryl
get ur corsi up
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 5,953
Likes: 1,558
Quoting: phillyjabroni
Quoting: DirtyDangles
Why don't we just stick with 5 BoG members. At least we know they will stay active.


With the increasing activity that will inevitably occur with the addition of v2, rolling with 5 BOG seems to be a logical and doesn't seem like 7 BOG members are as relevant now.

5 BOG going forward seems like the way to go, in my opinion.


I agree.
Sep. 14, 2017 at 2:17 p.m.
#392
PrincessChloe
May contain nuts
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2017
Posts: 6,612
Likes: 2,016
Uh, can I sign Ron Hainsey please?
Sep. 14, 2017 at 2:50 p.m.
#393
rangersandislesfan
Black Lives Matter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 29,920
Likes: 4,651
Can i add Jagr to my team?
Sep. 14, 2017 at 3:12 p.m.
#394
PrincessChloe
May contain nuts
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2017
Posts: 6,612
Likes: 2,016
Quoting: rangersandislesfan
Can i add Jagr to my team?


You certainly can b/c you signed him in Round 2. But there are a bunch of other useful guys who went unsigned in Round 2...
Sep. 14, 2017 at 3:19 p.m.
#395
ricochetii
Go Habs Go
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,667
Likes: 4,091
Edited Sep. 14, 2017 at 3:27 p.m.
Quoting: Icegirl


You certainly can b/c you signed him in Round 2. But there are a bunch of other useful guys who went unsigned in Round 2...


Anyone still remaining as a free agent will have to wait and be signed in season and pass through the waiver process.
Yes, you can sign Jagr Rangers.
Sep. 14, 2017 at 6:02 p.m.
#396
rangersandislesfan
Black Lives Matter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 29,920
Likes: 4,651
Quoting: Icegirl
Quoting: rangersandislesfan
Can i add Jagr to my team?


You certainly can b/c you signed him in Round 2. But there are a bunch of other useful guys who went unsigned in Round 2...


what was the contract? 650K for 1 year, correct?
Sep. 14, 2017 at 6:02 p.m.
#397
rangersandislesfan
Black Lives Matter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 29,920
Likes: 4,651
also, is v2 starting tomorrow still? even without a Red Wings GM?
Sep. 14, 2017 at 6:09 p.m.
#398
Duster
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2017
Posts: 1,590
Likes: 162
Quoting: rangersandislesfan
also, is v2 starting tomorrow still? even without a Red Wings GM?


I believe Jack_Eichel signed on for them
Sep. 14, 2017 at 6:11 p.m.
#399
phillyjabroni
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,392
Likes: 2,885
Quoting: rangersandislesfan
also, is v2 starting tomorrow still? even without a Red Wings GM?


Jack_Eichel is next in line; still awaiting confirmation for whether or not he wants to do it.
Duster liked this.
Sep. 14, 2017 at 6:16 p.m.
#400
ricochetii
Go Habs Go
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,667
Likes: 4,091
Quoting: rangersandislesfan
Quoting: Icegirl


You certainly can b/c you signed him in Round 2. But there are a bunch of other useful guys who went unsigned in Round 2...


what was the contract? 650K for 1 year, correct?


No. First pick was 900k for 1 year. Check the sheet if you aren't sure.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll