Appreciate the discussion here! I'm just thinking out loud to keep things moving.
This is the current relevant section of the constitution
8. At the end of the season the commissioner will conduct an Games Played Audit of the 12 non-playoff teams. For each player with either an O-Rank or Season (total) Rank of 100 or better which misses more than 20 games that he plays in real life (i.e. Basketball Reference “games played” minus Y! Team Log “GP” > 20 games) that team shall be penalized 5 post-lottery draft spots. GMs may appeal this penalty to the league. Reversal requires an majority vote (i.e. 11 votes).2
I should point out that right now the current rule doesn't speak to what would even happen in this instance.
This means, at the very least, it's not been an issue (yet). Which is good!
But it also means, that it's a good thing to address proactively -- so thanks DinoG!
FWIW, I've been operating on this assumption as commish -- that once a pick was traded it wasn't subject to penalties. So I'd be fine with codifying it in the rules.
I agree with FWF then:
Proposed Amendment #1:
Once a draft pick is traded, it becomes the absolute property of the acquiring team. Any penalties levied against the prior team for failing the games played audit, will not be set against the traded draft pick.
I second this but I think we need to finish the thought and specify what DOES happen to the offending team. Next year's pick is docked, and this must be indicated clearly to any team trading for it?
The games audit/missed games penalty was intended to simply discourage teams from not setting their lineups -- and thereby shifting the competitive balance (i.e. affecting playoff races b/c a, say, 7th seed happens to play a team late that's stopped setting it's lineups).
I'm less worried about teams attempting to artificially manipulate their draft position like LB33 did in the points league. If I think that's going on I may just ask that person to leave.
TBH, the most important thing to me (as another GM) is having 19 other active GMs (i.e. setting lineups, answering trade requests, working the wire, participating in league discussions, etc.)Therefore, I'll even make this suggestion -- if a GM both trades it's first AND runs afoul of Rule #8 (above) I'd see it as grounds for removal.
IMO there's really no reason -- wether you have your pick or not -- to not set your lineups. And I think you almost have to TRY to run afoul of Rule #8. Remember the audit is only looking at top 100 players on non-playoff teams. If you can't set your lineups but have the wherewithal to deal away a first round pick... maybe a dedicated league like this isn't for you.
And it doesn't get into the issue of manipulation or locking up activity like Mk raises...