Lucky17's Yahoo! FBB H2H League: 2011-12 season: Draft on Wed, Oct 12, noon EST?

[Lucky17]

Hey Lucky,

I believe this setting is incorrect,

"Trade Review:      League Votes"

I believe it should be your approval, correct?

Mk

No, we've switched. As I recall this was discussed around the trade deadline last season.

Yep. People should have the veto option through Yahoo! rather than by posting on the boards.

[mkogav]

Hey Lucky,

I believe this setting is incorrect,

"Trade Review:      League Votes"

I believe it should be your approval, correct?

Mk

No, we've switched. As I recall this was discussed around the trade deadline last season.

I don't remember that discussion, but the change is fine with me anyway.

Mk

[Roy H.]

My intent was to provide a 72-hour window from the time I uploaded rosters to allow GMs to submit waiver claims on guys they wanted.

People who were following the league thread on the blog were aware of the roster cut deadline, and the roster upload. I have to admit I'm not sympathetic if someone can't submit whatever claims they want to in that 72-hour window.

This won't affect any GMs who were on the ball and active. I say we simply let the current waiver period expire.

... but it hasn't been 72 hours yet, even.  The window opened, it seems, at around 11:30pm Saturday night.  It closed this morning, presumably around 3:00am, but let's say 7:45am, when YH made his claim.

That's a window of about 32 hours, rather than 72.  I sympathize with wanting to punish inactive owners, but I think it's unfair when they were promised something ("3 days" from 11:30pm on Saturday), and they instead get less than half that.  I also think it's a lot to ask of people to want them to be so active that they have to check in every day; the only day they could make a claim was Sunday, or very late Saturday night.

[Lucky17]

My intent was to provide a 72-hour window from the time I uploaded rosters to allow GMs to submit waiver claims on guys they wanted.

People who were following the league thread on the blog were aware of the roster cut deadline, and the roster upload. I have to admit I'm not sympathetic if someone can't submit whatever claims they want to in that 72-hour window.

This won't affect any GMs who were on the ball and active. I say we simply let the current waiver period expire.

... but it hasn't been 72 hours yet, even.  The window opened, it seems, at around 11:30pm Saturday night.  It closed this morning, presumably around 3:00am, but let's say 7:45am, when YH made his claim.

That's a window of about 32 hours, rather than 72.  I sympathize with wanting to punish inactive owners, but I think it's unfair when they were promised something ("3 days" from 11:30pm on Saturday), and they instead get less than half that.  I also think it's a lot to ask of people to want them to be so active that they have to check in every day; the only day they could make a claim was Sunday, or very late Saturday night.

I have no idea why Yahoo! screwed with the majority of the "undrafted" players. Waiver period has worked so far for only a handful.

I'm proposing nixing all FA pickups until the original waiver period ends, which should be at some point 48-72 hours after I uploaded the rosters.

I have extended the current waiver period to Oct 5, and will continue to manually rescind all FA pickups until then.

[The Walker Wiggle]

I have no idea why Yahoo! screwed with the majority of the "undrafted" players. Waiver period has worked so far for only a handful.

What's happened is that all players with outstanding waiver claims remain on waivers. While the rest have been dumped a day (two days?) early into free agency.

So in this making the best of a bad situation scenario. Should GMs PM you if they'd like to make a waiver claim on an F.A. (For example YH on James Johnson?) I think if we can't move all F.A.'s back to waivers it's better not to extend the waiver period past tonight.

[Lucky17]

What's happened is that all players with outstanding waiver claims remain on waivers. While the rest have been dumped a day (two days?) early into free agency.

Unbelievable.

Frankly, I would prefer not to field FA requests. I don't have the time right now. I was happy to conduct offline drafts, but my whole reason for uploading rosters was to shift league activities to Yahoo, rather than continuing to do it here.

[The Walker Wiggle]

What's happened is that all players with outstanding waiver claims remain on waivers. While the rest have been dumped a day (two days?) early into free agency.

Unbelievable.

Frankly, I would prefer not to field FA requests. I don't have the time right now. I was happy to conduct offline drafts, but my whole reason for uploading rosters was to shift league activities to Yahoo, rather than continuing to do it here.

Fair enough and thanks again Lucky as always. (Also let me know if the unfriendly Adam Silver can do anything to help.)

[Gainesville Celtic]

So it appears that right now any team can make a waiver claim on any player previously claimed by another team.

What I would suggest -- to (a) keep the workload minimal on Lucky17 and (b) make it fair for everyone is to:


1. Allow all GMs to make claims on those 12-15 players folks previously put claims in on. Those should be processed tonight at 11:59 PDT (as they should have been last night) i assume since they say (W, Oct 5)?

(Unfortunately I don't see a way to get that cat back into the bag -- GMs with low waiver claims who might have gotten a steal w/ crafty scouting might get a minor penalty in this scenario).


2. Post a Commissioner's Note & a bolded post here (or change the title as you have in the past) that Free Agency will start at a time-certain of xxx (11 am EST?) on Tuesday (assuming that is after wavier claims being processed by Yahoo!)

This is mostly to keep people from bugging Lucky17 about they didn't know or they were waiting, etc... and to avoid those associated headaches for our commish.

In a sense, it would work similar to the Celticsblog draft model of giving everyone equal notice of when their time is.... given the glitch on Yahoo!'s part.

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

{I'm curious if Mkgoav is really trading JJ or is the fact that L17 can't reverse just another glitch (i.e. Yahoo! thinks there's a claim on him or something).}

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

I too am willing to help out in any way so the full burden doesn't fall to you Lucky!

[The Walker Wiggle]

Ok folks, so I'd agreed to a trade with Rondo2287 that has gotten rather murkier given today's events. And it seems league matters are somewhat more settled now. You may have noticed the Landry Fields for Dahntay Jones announcement on the Yahoo page. That's just a technicality. I'm sending him Fields to drop and because a player has to be included. The actual deal is:

Rondo2287 receives the right to swap 2011 1sts with the Draft Dodgers or else the Draft Dodgers' 2011 2nd round pick.

Draft Dodgers receives "future prospects" in the form of a TBA player claimed off waivers by Rondo2287.

I've also asked Lucky to process the trade ahead of the normal 24 hour review period given the uncertain state of waiver claims. Does anybody object? I don't want Rondo to have to drop anyone other than Fields, although he's offered, generous guy that he is.

[mkogav]

Ok folks, so I'd agreed to a trade with Rondo2287 that has gotten rather murkier given today's events. And it seems league matters are somewhat more settled now. You may have noticed the Landry Fields for Dahntay Jones announcement on the Yahoo page. That's just a technicality. I'm sending him Fields to drop and because a player has to be included. The actual deal is:

Rondo2287 receives the right to swap 2011 1sts with the Draft Dodgers or else the Draft Dodgers' 2011 2nd round pick.

Draft Dodgers receives "future prospects" in the form of a TBA player claimed off waivers by Rondo2287.

I've also asked Lucky to process the trade ahead of the normal 24 hour review period given the uncertain state of waiver claims. Does anybody object? I don't want Rondo to have to drop anyone other than Fields, although he's offered, generous guy that he is.

Not sure about this. I am a little confused by what's going on.

My read into it is,  by processing this trade early, it would seem that a player, X, will be claimed/picked up quicker than normal. This would possibly cause an issue if another GM has eyes for that player, but b/c the trade was forced through and Rondo dumps Fields for player X, they would loose out.

I would be less resistant if this wasn't the initial waiver period. Given the problems with the waiver claims so far, this seems like it would complicate things.

Like I said, the propose is a little confusing. Please correct me if I have it wrong.

Mk

[Lucky17]

WW wants the trade to go through so that Rondo can have Fields on his roster in time to drop him as part of his waiver claim for Player X.

Assuming Rondo's claim goes through (as normal), Player X will then be traded to WW, in exchange for Jones, who will be sent back to Rondo.

The swap of picks (or the 2nd rounder) will be the return that Rondo gets for the use of his waiver priority.

[Roy H.]

Am I being too competitive if I object to bending the rules to help out two of my competitors?  If not, I object.

I'm not a huge fan of these fictional trades, based around waiver priority.  If Rondo is going to get an asset for using his waiver priority, he should have to drop one of his own players, rather than making a trade that is essentially reversed (i.e., trading Jones, and then getting him back again.)  I'd feel weird about the trade even without bending the rules, but it feels even weirder to have the Commissioner make an exception to allow this.

[Gainesville Celtic]

thanks for clarification Lucky... I was confused.,

WW wants the trade to go through so that Rondo can have Fields on his roster in time to drop him as part of his waiver claim for Player X.

Assuming Rondo's claim goes through (as normal), Player X will then be traded to WW, in exchange for Jones, who will be sent back to Rondo.

The swap of picks (or the 2nd rounder) will be the return that Rondo gets for the use of his waiver priority.

if that's the case -- and in some ways good thinking on WW's part, wish I'd thought of it -- it should have been executed in time to work... not ask for a special dispensation after the fact.

Said deal could have been arranged during last week (or last month even), for example, but to do it now seems like it's borne of evaluating the yahoo! glitch and trying to take advantage of it.

Maybe i'm misunderstanding, but i'd say  no to speeding up the wait period. It's akin to me making a trade then asking Lucky to fast-track it so player X can play in that nigth's game for my team, no?

[Gainesville Celtic]

In non-waiver wire news......

several teams have asked about Kirk Hinrich. I'm warming up to the idea of moving him... a few names in exchange don't excite me, but a couple do.

so if you're looking for a PG, feel free to send me an offer. Assuming you're not looking to give a PG back, I'm most likely looking for a big (SF/PF/C) back, but am open to anything really.

[mkogav]

WW wants the trade to go through so that Rondo can have Fields on his roster in time to drop him as part of his waiver claim for Player X.

Assuming Rondo's claim goes through (as normal), Player X will then be traded to WW, in exchange for Jones, who will be sent back to Rondo.

The swap of picks (or the 2nd rounder) will be the return that Rondo gets for the use of his waiver priority.

So, WW is basically trading for Rondo's waiver position. I don't not have a problem with that as I have offered the player I am claiming with the #2 around the league. What is a problem for me is forcing the trade through, which goes against the league rules.

If the trade was made earlier and processed before the waiver claims came in, that's fine by me. Or if Rondo had an extra roster spot then that's fine, but I don't see forcing the trade through.

At one point last season or maybe the season before, Lucky and I were going to do a trade, CDR for Drazic I believe, but we were up against a similar timing issue, I can't remember to many details, but the league said no. Same here IMO.

If Rondo wants to drop a different player (currently on his roster) for the claim and then make the trade after, that would work.

Mk