All right gang, it's time to nip these trade issues in the bud once and for all.
I assume most of you by now have been following the recent round of posts on this thread pertaining to unbalanced trades and how they affect roster size, and what can be done about building those under-sized rosters up to their 40 man capacity.
The biggest obstacle I see against simply allowing picks at the end of the FA Draft or Supp. Draft is that it potentially allows owners to go around the imposed maximums we currently have on said drafts.
Now, we have previously voted on the amound of rounds in the Supplemental Draft so that will remain unchanged at 3 round maximum. If an owner with less than 40 players going into a Supplemental Draft wishes to add players, he can simply drop less players. [b:dc498f9b20]No one will be allowed to add more players than the maximum amount of rounds (3) [i:dc498f9b20]unless you make a trade for another owner's supplemental draft picks[/i:dc498f9b20].[/b:dc498f9b20]
As far as the annual Free Agent Draft is concerned the current maximum is 15 rounds. We have already voted on the minimum number of drops that must be made (5) so that will remain unchanged as well. HOWEVER, [u:dc498f9b20][b:dc498f9b20]dissolving the maximum [/b:dc498f9b20][/u:dc498f9b20]will allow any teams with less than 40 man rosters heading into a FA Draft to simply add as many players as necessary (in addition to the picks they get for dropped players).
For those who voted against expanding the Supplemental Draft for fears of dillution, I really don't think this might a real concern in the FA Draft for several reasons.
Looking at the various rosters in our league, I really do not see many that will be dropping the current maximum number of players (15). Some of those that might, I believe will actually be simply swapping out players of one side (LH or RH) for park preferences and the like and others might easily fall under the category of "one man's junk is another man's pleasure". In any case, all the players that an owner will drop heading into a FA Draft will be available as FA IN THAT Draft so dillution really should not be an issue. I simply do not see someone dropping over half of their current teams. However, that is NOT to say that I do not understand the fears or concerns of those that may feel otherwise.
However, the dillution of the FA Draft maximum is the only real fool-proof solution I see to those wanting to use it to bring undersized rosters back up to 40 man capacities heading . [b:dc498f9b20]REMEMBER THOUGH, the lowest number of players a roster has at the present is 39, so under the current rules, [i:dc498f9b20]all that owner would have to do is drop one less than the maximum (14) and they could have one additional pick to get back to 40 [/i:dc498f9b20](unless they trade one of their Draft picks and then they would have that many less as well). [/b:dc498f9b20]
There is nothing that says an owner HAS to drop 15 players you know. :wink:
Another con might be that since the USKL does NOT currently have a Prospect Draft (like the HCKL) that an unlimited amount of rounds in the FA Draft could mean a dillution of the rookie talent. A counter to that would be that those players will be available to all (with no maximums) and it would present an interesting dillemma/decision for owners to play for the now or the future, making them drop perhaps a perfectly productive player for the upcoming season.
This is just some of the various Pros and Cons that I can think of, so without further delay or rambling by me it is time to put it to a vote:
[size=15:dc498f9b20][u:dc498f9b20][b:dc498f9b20]THE PROPOSAL:[/b:dc498f9b20][/u:dc498f9b20][/size:dc498f9b20] [i:dc498f9b20]To abolish the current maximum on the number of rounds each owner may participate in (barring trades) during the FA draft. [/i:dc498f9b20] This would mean that an owner could drop as many players as they would like and replace them with Free Agents. It also means that rosters that are undersized heading into a FA Draft will be allowed to draft as many players in addition to their drops as necessary to get their rosters back up to a 40 man capacity. (For what it's worth -- this is/will be the same way the HCKL will be run for those of you that play in that league as well).
[color=red:dc498f9b20][b:dc498f9b20]NOTE:[/b:dc498f9b20][/color:dc498f9b20] Regardless of the outcome of this vote, the [size=15:dc498f9b20][b:dc498f9b20]FOWLDAWG COROLLARY [/b:dc498f9b20][/size:dc498f9b20]will NOW go into effect. [i:dc498f9b20][b:dc498f9b20]This means that if you choose to trade say for example a 9th round pick in an upcoming FA Draft that you are then required to drop that many players so that you will actually HAVE a 9th round pick. This forces both owners in a trade of Draft picks to protect the integrity of the trade.[/b:dc498f9b20][/i:dc498f9b20]
Ayes: [b:dc498f9b20]Cummings2, Qksilver, sandlotshrink, Fowldawg, Stoney18, AF Dickie, Bubba Hotep, Cubit[/b:dc498f9b20]
Nays:
Still to vote: Detroit-Tigers, Fowldawg, Ninersphan, Kaviksdad, Nythawk
(Sorry Chuck, but for those of those that hadn't been following I wanted to keep more of the post intact -- [b:dc498f9b20]don't worry about copy/pasting y'all -- just post your aye or nay and I'll take care of the rest!!!)[/b:dc498f9b20] :D
The Original USKL -- TSN Version 2011 (Chat Room)
by cirills » Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:10 am
All right gang, it's time to nip these trade issues in the bud once and for all.
I assume most of you by now have been following the recent round of posts on this thread pertaining to unbalanced trades and how they affect roster size, and what can be done about building those under-sized rosters up to their 40 man capacity.
The biggest obstacle I see against simply allowing picks at the end of the FA Draft or Supp. Draft is that it potentially allows owners to go around the imposed maximums we currently have on said drafts.
Now, we have previously voted on the amound of rounds in the Supplemental Draft so that will remain unchanged at 3 round maximum. If an owner with less than 40 players going into a Supplemental Draft wishes to add players, he can simply drop less players. [b:19f70472ee]No one will be allowed to add more players than the maximum amount of rounds (3) [i:19f70472ee]unless you make a trade for another owner's supplemental draft picks[/i:19f70472ee].[/b:19f70472ee]
As far as the annual Free Agent Draft is concerned the current maximum is 15 rounds. We have already voted on the minimum number of drops that must be made (5) so that will remain unchanged as well. HOWEVER, [u:19f70472ee][b:19f70472ee]dissolving the maximum [/b:19f70472ee][/u:19f70472ee]will allow any teams with less than 40 man rosters heading into a FA Draft to simply add as many players as necessary (in addition to the picks they get for dropped players).
For those who voted against expanding the Supplemental Draft for fears of dillution, I really don't think this might a real concern in the FA Draft for several reasons.
Looking at the various rosters in our league, I really do not see many that will be dropping the current maximum number of players (15). Some of those that might, I believe will actually be simply swapping out players of one side (LH or RH) for park preferences and the like and others might easily fall under the category of "one man's junk is another man's pleasure". In any case, all the players that an owner will drop heading into a FA Draft will be available as FA IN THAT Draft so dillution really should not be an issue. I simply do not see someone dropping over half of their current teams. However, that is NOT to say that I do not understand the fears or concerns of those that may feel otherwise.
However, the dillution of the FA Draft maximum is the only real fool-proof solution I see to those wanting to use it to bring undersized rosters back up to 40 man capacities heading . [b:19f70472ee]REMEMBER THOUGH, the lowest number of players a roster has at the present is 39, so under the current rules, [i:19f70472ee]all that owner would have to do is drop one less than the maximum (14) and they could have one additional pick to get back to 40 [/i:19f70472ee](unless they trade one of their Draft picks and then they would have that many less as well). [/b:19f70472ee]
There is nothing that says an owner HAS to drop 15 players you know. :wink:
Another con might be that since the USKL does NOT currently have a Prospect Draft (like the HCKL) that an unlimited amount of rounds in the FA Draft could mean a dillution of the rookie talent. A counter to that would be that those players will be available to all (with no maximums) and it would present an interesting dillemma/decision for owners to play for the now or the future, making them drop perhaps a perfectly productive player for the upcoming season.
This is just some of the various Pros and Cons that I can think of, so without further delay or rambling by me it is time to put it to a vote:
[size=15:19f70472ee][u:19f70472ee][b:19f70472ee]THE PROPOSAL:[/b:19f70472ee][/u:19f70472ee][/size:19f70472ee] [i:19f70472ee]To abolish the current maximum on the number of rounds each owner may participate in (barring trades) during the FA draft. [/i:19f70472ee] This would mean that an owner could drop as many players as they would like and replace them with Free Agents. It also means that rosters that are undersized heading into a FA Draft will be allowed to draft as many players in addition to their drops as necessary to get their rosters back up to a 40 man capacity. (For what it's worth -- this is/will be the same way the HCKL will be run for those of you that play in that league as well).
[color=red:19f70472ee][b:19f70472ee]NOTE:[/b:19f70472ee][/color:19f70472ee] Regardless of the outcome of this vote, the [size=15:19f70472ee][b:19f70472ee]FOWLDAWG COROLLARY [/b:19f70472ee][/size:19f70472ee]will NOW go into effect. [i:19f70472ee][b:19f70472ee]This means that if you choose to trade say for example a 9th round pick in an upcoming FA Draft that you are then required to drop that many players so that you will actually HAVE a 9th round pick. This forces both owners in a trade of Draft picks to protect the integrity of the trade.[/b:19f70472ee][/i:19f70472ee] [color=indigo:19f70472ee][i:19f70472ee] One subset of this to note[/i:19f70472ee][/color:19f70472ee], is that IF you somehow make several unbalanced trades leaving you with a complete 40 man roster heading into the FA Draft, [b:19f70472ee]AND[/b:19f70472ee] you have a FA Draft pick coming to you as well, you WILL have to drop a player in advance of that pick as well.
Ayes: [b:19f70472ee]Cummings2, Qksilver, sandlotshrink, Fowldawg, Stoney18, AF Dickie, Bubba Hotep, Cubit, Detroit-Tigers, kaviksdad[/b:19f70472ee]
Nays:
Still to vote: Ninersphan and Nythawk
([b:19f70472ee]Almost Unanimous gang, don't worry about copy/pasting y'all -- just post your aye or nay and I'll take care of the rest!!!)[/b:19f70472ee] :D
I assume most of you by now have been following the recent round of posts on this thread pertaining to unbalanced trades and how they affect roster size, and what can be done about building those under-sized rosters up to their 40 man capacity.
The biggest obstacle I see against simply allowing picks at the end of the FA Draft or Supp. Draft is that it potentially allows owners to go around the imposed maximums we currently have on said drafts.
Now, we have previously voted on the amound of rounds in the Supplemental Draft so that will remain unchanged at 3 round maximum. If an owner with less than 40 players going into a Supplemental Draft wishes to add players, he can simply drop less players. [b:19f70472ee]No one will be allowed to add more players than the maximum amount of rounds (3) [i:19f70472ee]unless you make a trade for another owner's supplemental draft picks[/i:19f70472ee].[/b:19f70472ee]
As far as the annual Free Agent Draft is concerned the current maximum is 15 rounds. We have already voted on the minimum number of drops that must be made (5) so that will remain unchanged as well. HOWEVER, [u:19f70472ee][b:19f70472ee]dissolving the maximum [/b:19f70472ee][/u:19f70472ee]will allow any teams with less than 40 man rosters heading into a FA Draft to simply add as many players as necessary (in addition to the picks they get for dropped players).
For those who voted against expanding the Supplemental Draft for fears of dillution, I really don't think this might a real concern in the FA Draft for several reasons.
Looking at the various rosters in our league, I really do not see many that will be dropping the current maximum number of players (15). Some of those that might, I believe will actually be simply swapping out players of one side (LH or RH) for park preferences and the like and others might easily fall under the category of "one man's junk is another man's pleasure". In any case, all the players that an owner will drop heading into a FA Draft will be available as FA IN THAT Draft so dillution really should not be an issue. I simply do not see someone dropping over half of their current teams. However, that is NOT to say that I do not understand the fears or concerns of those that may feel otherwise.
However, the dillution of the FA Draft maximum is the only real fool-proof solution I see to those wanting to use it to bring undersized rosters back up to 40 man capacities heading . [b:19f70472ee]REMEMBER THOUGH, the lowest number of players a roster has at the present is 39, so under the current rules, [i:19f70472ee]all that owner would have to do is drop one less than the maximum (14) and they could have one additional pick to get back to 40 [/i:19f70472ee](unless they trade one of their Draft picks and then they would have that many less as well). [/b:19f70472ee]
There is nothing that says an owner HAS to drop 15 players you know. :wink:
Another con might be that since the USKL does NOT currently have a Prospect Draft (like the HCKL) that an unlimited amount of rounds in the FA Draft could mean a dillution of the rookie talent. A counter to that would be that those players will be available to all (with no maximums) and it would present an interesting dillemma/decision for owners to play for the now or the future, making them drop perhaps a perfectly productive player for the upcoming season.
This is just some of the various Pros and Cons that I can think of, so without further delay or rambling by me it is time to put it to a vote:
[size=15:19f70472ee][u:19f70472ee][b:19f70472ee]THE PROPOSAL:[/b:19f70472ee][/u:19f70472ee][/size:19f70472ee] [i:19f70472ee]To abolish the current maximum on the number of rounds each owner may participate in (barring trades) during the FA draft. [/i:19f70472ee] This would mean that an owner could drop as many players as they would like and replace them with Free Agents. It also means that rosters that are undersized heading into a FA Draft will be allowed to draft as many players in addition to their drops as necessary to get their rosters back up to a 40 man capacity. (For what it's worth -- this is/will be the same way the HCKL will be run for those of you that play in that league as well).
[color=red:19f70472ee][b:19f70472ee]NOTE:[/b:19f70472ee][/color:19f70472ee] Regardless of the outcome of this vote, the [size=15:19f70472ee][b:19f70472ee]FOWLDAWG COROLLARY [/b:19f70472ee][/size:19f70472ee]will NOW go into effect. [i:19f70472ee][b:19f70472ee]This means that if you choose to trade say for example a 9th round pick in an upcoming FA Draft that you are then required to drop that many players so that you will actually HAVE a 9th round pick. This forces both owners in a trade of Draft picks to protect the integrity of the trade.[/b:19f70472ee][/i:19f70472ee] [color=indigo:19f70472ee][i:19f70472ee] One subset of this to note[/i:19f70472ee][/color:19f70472ee], is that IF you somehow make several unbalanced trades leaving you with a complete 40 man roster heading into the FA Draft, [b:19f70472ee]AND[/b:19f70472ee] you have a FA Draft pick coming to you as well, you WILL have to drop a player in advance of that pick as well.
Ayes: [b:19f70472ee]Cummings2, Qksilver, sandlotshrink, Fowldawg, Stoney18, AF Dickie, Bubba Hotep, Cubit, Detroit-Tigers, kaviksdad[/b:19f70472ee]
Nays:
Still to vote: Ninersphan and Nythawk
([b:19f70472ee]Almost Unanimous gang, don't worry about copy/pasting y'all -- just post your aye or nay and I'll take care of the rest!!!)[/b:19f70472ee] :D
- cirills
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by cummings2 » Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:34 am
Can I have a Corollary named after me? Kinda cool.
You know, something like the [b:e36dc2baf5][u:e36dc2baf5][i:e36dc2baf5][size=18:e36dc2baf5]Cummings2 corollary [/size:e36dc2baf5][/i:e36dc2baf5][/u:e36dc2baf5][/b:e36dc2baf5]is no need to copy paste on proposals...just vote :D
...
Sorry guys, super tired from long hours of work and my 27 hours of teaching in 3 days start shortly... silly, tired, sleep deprived...and ready to serve America's Artistic youth :wink: ... :roll:
You know, something like the [b:e36dc2baf5][u:e36dc2baf5][i:e36dc2baf5][size=18:e36dc2baf5]Cummings2 corollary [/size:e36dc2baf5][/i:e36dc2baf5][/u:e36dc2baf5][/b:e36dc2baf5]is no need to copy paste on proposals...just vote :D
...
Sorry guys, super tired from long hours of work and my 27 hours of teaching in 3 days start shortly... silly, tired, sleep deprived...and ready to serve America's Artistic youth :wink: ... :roll:
- cummings2
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by Ninersphan » Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:09 pm
Do I have to vote?? It's already passed. This thing has my head spinning as much as lucky man thread on advanced mathemati...er...uhm...strat-o probabilities. :shock:
I'll go with the majority.
I'll go with the majority.
- Ninersphan
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by cirills » Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:25 pm
All right gang, it's time to nip these trade issues in the bud once and for all.
I assume most of you by now have been following the recent round of posts on this thread pertaining to unbalanced trades and how they affect roster size, and what can be done about building those under-sized rosters up to their 40 man capacity.
The biggest obstacle I see against simply allowing picks at the end of the FA Draft or Supp. Draft is that it potentially allows owners to go around the imposed maximums we currently have on said drafts.
Now, we have previously voted on the amound of rounds in the Supplemental Draft so that will remain unchanged at 3 round maximum. If an owner with less than 40 players going into a Supplemental Draft wishes to add players, he can simply drop less players. [b:916356bb7c]No one will be allowed to add more players than the maximum amount of rounds (3) [i:916356bb7c]unless you make a trade for another owner's supplemental draft picks[/i:916356bb7c].[/b:916356bb7c]
As far as the annual Free Agent Draft is concerned the current maximum is 15 rounds. We have already voted on the minimum number of drops that must be made (5) so that will remain unchanged as well. HOWEVER, [u:916356bb7c][b:916356bb7c]dissolving the maximum [/b:916356bb7c][/u:916356bb7c]will allow any teams with less than 40 man rosters heading into a FA Draft to simply add as many players as necessary (in addition to the picks they get for dropped players).
For those who voted against expanding the Supplemental Draft for fears of dillution, I really don't think this might a real concern in the FA Draft for several reasons.
Looking at the various rosters in our league, I really do not see many that will be dropping the current maximum number of players (15). Some of those that might, I believe will actually be simply swapping out players of one side (LH or RH) for park preferences and the like and others might easily fall under the category of "one man's junk is another man's pleasure". In any case, all the players that an owner will drop heading into a FA Draft will be available as FA IN THAT Draft so dillution really should not be an issue. I simply do not see someone dropping over half of their current teams. However, that is NOT to say that I do not understand the fears or concerns of those that may feel otherwise.
However, the dillution of the FA Draft maximum is the only real fool-proof solution I see to those wanting to use it to bring undersized rosters back up to 40 man capacities heading . [b:916356bb7c]REMEMBER THOUGH, the lowest number of players a roster has at the present is 39, so under the current rules, [i:916356bb7c]all that owner would have to do is drop one less than the maximum (14) and they could have one additional pick to get back to 40 [/i:916356bb7c](unless they trade one of their Draft picks and then they would have that many less as well). [/b:916356bb7c]
There is nothing that says an owner HAS to drop 15 players you know. :wink:
Another con might be that since the USKL does NOT currently have a Prospect Draft (like the HCKL) that an unlimited amount of rounds in the FA Draft could mean a dillution of the rookie talent. A counter to that would be that those players will be available to all (with no maximums) and it would present an interesting dillemma/decision for owners to play for the now or the future, making them drop perhaps a perfectly productive player for the upcoming season.
This is just some of the various Pros and Cons that I can think of, so without further delay or rambling by me it is time to put it to a vote:
[size=15:916356bb7c][u:916356bb7c][b:916356bb7c]THE PROPOSAL:[/b:916356bb7c][/u:916356bb7c][/size:916356bb7c] [i:916356bb7c]To abolish the current maximum on the number of rounds each owner may participate in (barring trades) during the FA draft. [/i:916356bb7c] This would mean that an owner could drop as many players as they would like and replace them with Free Agents. It also means that rosters that are undersized heading into a FA Draft will be allowed to draft as many players in addition to their drops as necessary to get their rosters back up to a 40 man capacity. (For what it's worth -- this is/will be the same way the HCKL will be run for those of you that play in that league as well).
[color=red:916356bb7c][b:916356bb7c]NOTE:[/b:916356bb7c][/color:916356bb7c] Regardless of the outcome of this vote, the [size=15:916356bb7c][b:916356bb7c]FOWLDAWG COROLLARY [/b:916356bb7c][/size:916356bb7c]will NOW go into effect. [i:916356bb7c][b:916356bb7c]This means that if you choose to trade say for example a 9th round pick in an upcoming FA Draft that you are then required to drop that many players so that you will actually HAVE a 9th round pick. This forces both owners in a trade of Draft picks to protect the integrity of the trade.[/b:916356bb7c][/i:916356bb7c] [color=indigo:916356bb7c][i:916356bb7c] One subset of this to note[/i:916356bb7c][/color:916356bb7c], is that IF you somehow make several unbalanced trades leaving you with a complete 40 man roster heading into the FA Draft, [b:916356bb7c]AND[/b:916356bb7c] you have a FA Draft pick coming to you as well, you WILL have to drop a player in advance of that pick as well.
Ayes: [b:916356bb7c]Cummings2, Qksilver, sandlotshrink, Fowldawg, Stoney18, AF Dickie, Bubba Hotep, Cubit, Detroit-Tigers, kaviksdad, ninersphan[/b:916356bb7c]
Nays:
Still to vote: Nythawk
([b:916356bb7c]Almost Unanimous gang!!!) (You snooze you lose Hawk!)[/b:916356bb7c] :D
I assume most of you by now have been following the recent round of posts on this thread pertaining to unbalanced trades and how they affect roster size, and what can be done about building those under-sized rosters up to their 40 man capacity.
The biggest obstacle I see against simply allowing picks at the end of the FA Draft or Supp. Draft is that it potentially allows owners to go around the imposed maximums we currently have on said drafts.
Now, we have previously voted on the amound of rounds in the Supplemental Draft so that will remain unchanged at 3 round maximum. If an owner with less than 40 players going into a Supplemental Draft wishes to add players, he can simply drop less players. [b:916356bb7c]No one will be allowed to add more players than the maximum amount of rounds (3) [i:916356bb7c]unless you make a trade for another owner's supplemental draft picks[/i:916356bb7c].[/b:916356bb7c]
As far as the annual Free Agent Draft is concerned the current maximum is 15 rounds. We have already voted on the minimum number of drops that must be made (5) so that will remain unchanged as well. HOWEVER, [u:916356bb7c][b:916356bb7c]dissolving the maximum [/b:916356bb7c][/u:916356bb7c]will allow any teams with less than 40 man rosters heading into a FA Draft to simply add as many players as necessary (in addition to the picks they get for dropped players).
For those who voted against expanding the Supplemental Draft for fears of dillution, I really don't think this might a real concern in the FA Draft for several reasons.
Looking at the various rosters in our league, I really do not see many that will be dropping the current maximum number of players (15). Some of those that might, I believe will actually be simply swapping out players of one side (LH or RH) for park preferences and the like and others might easily fall under the category of "one man's junk is another man's pleasure". In any case, all the players that an owner will drop heading into a FA Draft will be available as FA IN THAT Draft so dillution really should not be an issue. I simply do not see someone dropping over half of their current teams. However, that is NOT to say that I do not understand the fears or concerns of those that may feel otherwise.
However, the dillution of the FA Draft maximum is the only real fool-proof solution I see to those wanting to use it to bring undersized rosters back up to 40 man capacities heading . [b:916356bb7c]REMEMBER THOUGH, the lowest number of players a roster has at the present is 39, so under the current rules, [i:916356bb7c]all that owner would have to do is drop one less than the maximum (14) and they could have one additional pick to get back to 40 [/i:916356bb7c](unless they trade one of their Draft picks and then they would have that many less as well). [/b:916356bb7c]
There is nothing that says an owner HAS to drop 15 players you know. :wink:
Another con might be that since the USKL does NOT currently have a Prospect Draft (like the HCKL) that an unlimited amount of rounds in the FA Draft could mean a dillution of the rookie talent. A counter to that would be that those players will be available to all (with no maximums) and it would present an interesting dillemma/decision for owners to play for the now or the future, making them drop perhaps a perfectly productive player for the upcoming season.
This is just some of the various Pros and Cons that I can think of, so without further delay or rambling by me it is time to put it to a vote:
[size=15:916356bb7c][u:916356bb7c][b:916356bb7c]THE PROPOSAL:[/b:916356bb7c][/u:916356bb7c][/size:916356bb7c] [i:916356bb7c]To abolish the current maximum on the number of rounds each owner may participate in (barring trades) during the FA draft. [/i:916356bb7c] This would mean that an owner could drop as many players as they would like and replace them with Free Agents. It also means that rosters that are undersized heading into a FA Draft will be allowed to draft as many players in addition to their drops as necessary to get their rosters back up to a 40 man capacity. (For what it's worth -- this is/will be the same way the HCKL will be run for those of you that play in that league as well).
[color=red:916356bb7c][b:916356bb7c]NOTE:[/b:916356bb7c][/color:916356bb7c] Regardless of the outcome of this vote, the [size=15:916356bb7c][b:916356bb7c]FOWLDAWG COROLLARY [/b:916356bb7c][/size:916356bb7c]will NOW go into effect. [i:916356bb7c][b:916356bb7c]This means that if you choose to trade say for example a 9th round pick in an upcoming FA Draft that you are then required to drop that many players so that you will actually HAVE a 9th round pick. This forces both owners in a trade of Draft picks to protect the integrity of the trade.[/b:916356bb7c][/i:916356bb7c] [color=indigo:916356bb7c][i:916356bb7c] One subset of this to note[/i:916356bb7c][/color:916356bb7c], is that IF you somehow make several unbalanced trades leaving you with a complete 40 man roster heading into the FA Draft, [b:916356bb7c]AND[/b:916356bb7c] you have a FA Draft pick coming to you as well, you WILL have to drop a player in advance of that pick as well.
Ayes: [b:916356bb7c]Cummings2, Qksilver, sandlotshrink, Fowldawg, Stoney18, AF Dickie, Bubba Hotep, Cubit, Detroit-Tigers, kaviksdad, ninersphan[/b:916356bb7c]
Nays:
Still to vote: Nythawk
([b:916356bb7c]Almost Unanimous gang!!!) (You snooze you lose Hawk!)[/b:916356bb7c] :D
- cirills
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by Cubit » Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:06 pm
[quote:58597e2b70="Ninersphan"]Do I have to vote?? It's already passed. This thing has my head spinning as much as lucky man thread on advanced mathemati...er...uhm...strat-o probabilities. :shock:
I'll go with the majority.[/quote:58597e2b70]
:lol:
I got credited for voting for it and did not even understand it!
Aye!
Ayaiyai!
I'll go with the majority.[/quote:58597e2b70]
:lol:
I got credited for voting for it and did not even understand it!
Aye!
Ayaiyai!
- Cubit
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by fowldawg » Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:07 pm
Cubit...
Its basically saying (someone correct me if I am wrong):
A. You may drop as many players as you want going to the Free Agent draft and you MUST drop at least 5 players
B. You draft until you have a roster of 40 players
C. If you trade a draft pick in the 6th Round or higher you must drop a number of players equal to the # Round you traded before teh draft (ie. To trade you my 10th round pick, I must drop 10 players preceding the draft).
Its basically saying (someone correct me if I am wrong):
A. You may drop as many players as you want going to the Free Agent draft and you MUST drop at least 5 players
B. You draft until you have a roster of 40 players
C. If you trade a draft pick in the 6th Round or higher you must drop a number of players equal to the # Round you traded before teh draft (ie. To trade you my 10th round pick, I must drop 10 players preceding the draft).
- fowldawg
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
Return to Individual League Chat
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests