TonyStrecher

V3 Canucks GM, BOG

Member Since

May 2, 2017

Location

Vancouver

Forum Posts

1932

Posts per Day

2.49

Forum Threads

Biography

GM Game History:
V1: Penguins AGM, Rangers GM, BOG Member
V2: Canucks GM, BOG Member
V3: Canucks GM, BOG Member

POSTS

THREADS

LIKES

ARMCHAIR-GM TEAMS

Forum: GM Game 2019-20May 15 at 5:17

Thread: 2019-20 GM Game - Messages to the BOG

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>A_K</b></div><div>This is forever a hot topic - please see our latest rule adjustments to the trade revision/reversal process in the <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LEj5icst7Q6oP-Ov9d1iNLykAg-NpcLBp0A0WShYbk8/edit?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">rules doc</a>

tl;dr BOG votes on flagged trades. It takes a majority vote to reverse. Reversed trades still count against trade limits for each team. If GMs want to revise a reversed deal, it will be done as a separate trade, posted in the Official Trades thread, and subject to BOG further review/reversal. BOG can advise, but will not re-create revised deals - it must be done by the GMs.

Use the Msg to BOG thread for any questions on this ruling.

***do not post in this thread, Mike***</div></div>

I want to start off by mentioning that all you guys on the BOG are awesome and I really appreciate all the hard work you guys put into the game.

Before I get to how horrible this rule is, do you honestly think it's fair to apply it to trades that happened before it was actually a rule? You can't make up a new rule and then apply it to trades that happened in the past. If there was anything left that I could resign from in protest I would. This is a horrible misuse of power.

Now let's start with changing the rules to only a majority being needed to reverse a trade. Before I was kicked from the BOG chat yesterday, I helpfully mentioned that I thought this was a horrible idea and now I'll elaborate on why that is.

First off I urge you guys to look over the trade votes from V3, every one of the BOG members voted to keep a trade that was eventually kept, but would have been reversed if we only needed a majority to reverse.

27 trades were brought up for revision in V3 and 12 of them received enough votes to be kept, meaning that if your trade was voted on for revision, there was a 55.6% chance that it would need to be revised.

Looking at those 27 trades, if we changed the rules to only needing a majority of votes for revisions, only 6 of them would have received enough votes to be kept. That increases the likelihood of a trade voted on for revision actually needing revision to 77.8%.

If you look at trades that weren't unanimous, meaning that at least one BOG member voted for both keep and revise, there are 13 trades where BOG members disagreed. Of those 13 trades, 7 received enough votes to be kept, meaning that if your trade was brought up for revision and just one BOG member thought your trade was fine, it would only have a 46.2% chance of needing to be revised.

Make it so only a majority of votes are needed for revision and only ONE of those 13 trades would have received enough votes to be kept. That changes the chance of a trade where BOG members disagree amongst themselves being reversed to 92.3%.

So to recap using the trades from V3 as a sample size, you're increasing the chances of a trade where BOG members have disagreement about whether it's fair or not getting enough votes to be reversed from 46.2% to 92.3%. Basically you are eliminating the power of any disagreement within the BOG. As soon as one BOG member votes for revision, the chances of it being reversed, using V3 as a sample size, would be 96.3%.

What really interests me about this rule is why the hell you guys actually want to do it, I honestly don't see a single good reason why it is a good idea. I would highly reccomend that you guys go back to the V3 rules that any trade that gets more than one keep vote will be kept, especially considering that you are now harshly punishing GMs who have their trades revised.

That brings me to the second part of the rule, you have decided to punish GMs who have their trade reversed by counting reversed trades towards the offseason limit.

First off I'd like to point out that this rules will not only effect GMs who make good trades, it will also have the exact same effect on teams who are taken advantage of and make bad trades. Punishing GMs who get taken advantage of simply makes no sense.

Even just punishing GMs who make good trades and maybe take advantage of other GMs by counting their reversed trades towards the limits makes no sense. I have always been strongly against the trade limits, because they only lead to two things, increased inactivity and boredom with the game and teams making trades that count towards future months limits weeks in advance (something that led to a number of issues in V3). If you want to punish GMs who may take advantage of other GMs, fine them draft picks or something, don't reduce their trade limit. If you're really set on this rule, I would reccomend at least increasing all teams offseason trade limits. All you're asking for with this rule is increased inactivity and confusion over future months trades. If you want to make this game better, the absolute last thing that you want to do is limit trades any more than they already are.

Thanks again for all your hard work

Forum: GM Game 2018-19May 8 at 3:36

Thread: 2018-19 GM Game - General Discussion

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Apr 25 at 5:47

Thread: 2018-19 Gm Game - Messages to the BOG/Commisioner

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Max</b></div><div>Where did I harass her in game? Because I’ve been sure not to mention her or anything related to the Zucker incident in game and that’s all you guys have authority over</div></div>

Hmm, let me think,

There was #****Kayla
There was Max: 3, the ****: 0
There was Kayla can go **** herself

Oh and that was after we gave you ONE last chance not three.

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Apr 25 at 5:12

Thread: 2018-19 GM Game - General Discussion

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Max</b></div><div>No posts, but stuff on twitter that I was told has no say over what the BOG does</div></div>

Just to be clear you were fired over posts on CapFriendly. As you said we have no control over what you do on Twitter

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Apr 25 at 4:03

Thread: 2019-2020 GM Game - Edmonton Oilers

<a href="/users/Max" target="_blank">@Max</a> I regret to inform you that the BOG has voted unanimously to fire you from your position as GM of the Edmonton Oilers.

You received repeated warnings/last chances regarding your abusive language towards Kayla. Yet you continue to you call her a **** or whatever else you've been calling her almost two months after the BOG made a decision on the original issue between you two.

This type of repeated verbal abuse is absolutely not tolerated in the GM Game especially when it is specifically targeting a woman. If this abusive behaviour continues, we will talk to the mods about banning you from posting on on the CapFriendly forums.

Thanks,
BOG

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Apr 24 at 10:23

Thread: 2018-19 GM Game - General Discussion

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>TMLSage</b></div><div>Tip: Stop tagging me in that thread then.</div></div>

I tagged you both times because you posted there both times

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Apr 24 at 10:16

Thread: 2018-19 GM Game - News and Important Info Thread

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>TonyStrecher</b></div><div>Hey guys just a quick reminder that this thread is only for BOG members to post IMPORTANT information that everyone needs to know

<a href="/users/TMLSage" target="_blank"><a href="/users/TMLSage" target="_blank">@TMLSage</a></a> <a href="/users/Max" target="_blank"><a href="/users/Max" target="_blank">@Max</a></a> <a href="/users/flamesfan419" target="_blank">@flamesfan419</a> <a href="/users/Bo53Horvat" target="_blank">@Bo53Horvat</a></div></div>

<a href="/users/TMLSage" target="_blank"><a href="/users/TMLSage" target="_blank">@TMLSage</a></a> <a href="/users/Max" target="_blank"><a href="/users/Max" target="_blank">@Max</a></a> <a href="/users/Icegirl" target="_blank">@Icegirl</a> and everyone else, next non BOG member to post in this thread gets fined a draft pick

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Apr 4 at 6:43

Thread: Gm game NASHVILLE PREDATORS

<a href="/users/Math" target="_blank">@Math</a> If you want to do 2 RFA extensions, my email is harrisonnhl@gmail.com

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Apr 4 at 4:12

Thread: 2018/19 GM Game - UFA Awards

:canucks

Brogan Rafferty - 1 year at $925,000

Sorry <a href="/users/Icegirl" target="_blank">@Icegirl</a>

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 31 at 2:50

Thread: 2018-19 GM Game - Waiver Placements

:canucks

Markus Hanikainen

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 31 at 2:42

Thread: 2018-19 GM Game V3 Toronto Maple Leafs

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Rodzikhockey93</b></div><div>make it a 3rd and ill add a later pick</div></div>

I can do 2019 4th (BOS) and Carcone for Leivo and 2019 7th (TOR) or my original offer. If you like either deal you're welcome to post it before the deadline tonight.

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 28 at 6:17

Thread: 2018-19 Gm Game - Messages to the BOG/Commisioner

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>rangersandislesfan</b></div><div>Just a few questions: First, i can tell my AGM where i'm at with RFA negotiations before they're officially announced, right? Also, do i have to give my list of RFAs i'm qualifying before RFA negotiations start? It doesn't seem like i need to based on what <a href="/users/TonyStrecher" target="_blank">@TonyStrecher</a> said in the News and Important Info thread, but i'm just checking to make sure.</div></div>

Yes you may discuss all you negotiations with you AGM. No you do not need to give a list of all the RFAs you're qualifying at this point, that will happen later in June during the second RFA window

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 28 at 5:20

Thread: 2018-19 GM Game V3 Toronto Maple Leafs

Josh Leivo for Michael Carcone and 2019 5th (VAN)? If not, what would you want for him?

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 28 at 5:01

Thread: 2018-19 GM Game - News and Important Info Thread

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 28 at 4:32

Thread: GM Game 2018-19 - Rules Thread

RFA Rules Added:

All teams will have the opportunity to re-sign two RFAs each between April 1st and April 9th. There will be another chance to re-sign RFAs in June. Teams do not need to choose the two player that they want to sign at the beginning of negotiations, if negotiations for one player do not work out, they may change to another.

For all RFA signings normal RFA rules including qualifying offers apply.

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 28 at 4:20

Thread: GM Game V3 Sabres Guess Whos Back

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>jmac490</b></div><div>:blackhawks (<a href="/users/TMLSage" target="_blank">@TMLSage</a>)

Patrik Laine
Sean Malone
OTT 5th 2019

:sabres (<a href="/users/jmac490" target="_blank">@jmac490</a>)

Kevin Labanc
Adam Fox
2020 3rd Philadelphia</div></div>
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>TonyStrecher</b></div><div>This trade has been flagged by the BOG. All assets are frozen until our voting is complete.

thanks,
BOG</div></div>

This trade received two or more keep votes and does not need to be reversed or revised. All assets involved are unfrozen.

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 28 at 4:20

Thread: GM Game 2018-19 - Chicago Blackhawks - Moves

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 28 at 2:17

Thread: GM Game V3 Sabres Guess Whos Back

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 28 at 2:17

Thread: GM Game 2018-19 - Chicago Blackhawks - Moves

Forum: GM Game 2018-19Mar 27 at 5:32

Thread: 2018-19 GM Game - Waiver Placements

:canucks

Stefan Noesen

12 3 Last

Page 1 of 97

DISPLAY SETTING

LOCALE

ARCHIVE

CBA

PLAYERS

EASTERN CONFERENCE

WESTERN CONFERENCE

CALCULATORS

TOOLS

TonyStrecher

V3 Canucks GM, BOG

Member Since

Location

Forum Posts

Posts per Day

Forum Threads

Biography