Trade Challenges - 1718-093 and 1718-095

[Chris_Savard]

We have received a challenge on two recent trades made by the BUDS. Trade #1718-093 and Trade #1718-097.

The constitution states the following (various snippets)...


The rules that govern our League operations will be balanced to allow all owners fair and equal opportunity to be successful. The League is designed to be fun and promote healthy hockey debate amongst its members.

Majority always rules.

By participating in the League, the owners agree to abide by the general sportsmanship rules set forth in this constitution and to always make decisions in an effort to protect and foster the friendship/camaraderie amongst League owners.

All trades must be approved by league owners. If an owner files a complaint, the remaining team owners will determine if the trade is valid.


Please post your response to both trades below, either ALLOW or DENY. It is expected that all GMs will be civil in the discussion of these challenges. I will update the voting when I can. (12 votes required for a majority)

The Challenge

Sorry to see Jerry leave the CFHL.

A few gms discussed this last night and we all agree that the 2 most recent trades by the Buds are suspect.
Here's a summary of our thoughts:

1. No problem with the Irish deal that sent Tavares to Irish. It was completed last season, Tavares was an Islander and Buds got a lot in return

2. Trade with Houligans is suspect. Jaden Schwartz is the best player in this deal. He's a point per game guy. Nylander is also an intriguing player, but possibly not protectable. Buds get a draft upgrade from 11th to 8th (which is garbage) AND it was done a week ago when Buds knew they were leaving. Buds lose this trade big time.

3. Trade with Outlaws is suspect. Goalie Fredrik Anderson is the best player in this deal. The other players are probably not being protected. Last years points are much higher for Anderson over Talbot AND he's projected to do much better this year. A draft pick upgrade from 10th to 8th isn't worth it. The timing of the trade (mid August) is also suspect. Buds lose this trade big time.

4. It's not fair to the new gm acquiring this team to have a weaker team than it was a month ago. It's also not fair to other gms who end up in Houligans and Outlaws divisions cuz they are definitely stronger.

5. We don’t think the Buds would of made these deals if he was planning on staying in the league.


Given the timing of the trades, and the one-sided deals, I think it should go out to the other GMs and be voted on before we find someone to take over the Buds franchise.

Crusaders, Fightin' Irish, Roughnecks, Wave

[Chris_Savard]

Voting results

TRADE 93 (OUTLAWS/BUDS)

ALLOW
1. Highlanders
2. Marksmen
3. Moonheads
4. Bulldogs
5. Outlaws
6. Cow Pucks
7. Polar Bears
8. Zappers
9. Recruits
10. Oil Kings
11. Hellions
12. Houligans
13. Raiders
14. Spartans

DENY
1. Crusaders
2. Fightin' Irish
3. Roughnecks
4. Wave
5. X-Men

ABSTAIN
1. Mission
2. Jackals
3. Ice Miners



Voting results

TRADE 95 (HOULIGANS/BUDS)

ALLOW
1. Moonheads
2. Bulldogs
3. Outlaws
4. Cow Pucks
5. Polar Bears
6. Zappers
7. Recruits
8. Oil Kings
9. Hellions
10. Houligans
11. Raiders
12. Spartans

DENY
1. Crusaders
2. Fightin' Irish
3. Roughnecks
4. Wave
5. X-Men
6. Highlanders
7. Marksmen

ABSTAIN
1. Mission
2. Jackals
3. Ice Miners

[Glenn_Austen]

X-Men also vote to deny. I have zero concerns with the intentions or ethics of any of the GM's involved in the deals, but feel that the new owner of the team should not be penalized off the hop by inheriting poor deals made such a short time prior to the common owner quitting the league.
I did think it strange that such a die hard Leafs fan as Jerry would deal away the most talented Leafs with the highest upside on his roster.

[Josh Graham]

I feel awkward having to make a decision while not truly knowing Jerry's intentions. The optics of both deals don't appear good, but without knowing the facts, this decision is tough. I don't wholly agree with the challenge in terms of the players moved or that the trades were overly lopsided.

Arguably the Buds lost the best asset in each deal, but he was nowhere near "taken to the cleaner" so to speak. In my time here, I've seen worse off trades and more lopsided trades; early draft picks thrown around like candy and quantity over quality trades. At first glance, I didn't think much of them.

8th round selections are valuable and shouldn't be seen as garbage selections. In last year's draft, Bergeron, Barzal (x2), Kyle Connor were some of the names selected in the 8th round. Neal, Lindholm, Fleury in the 9th and Helle! in the 10th round (x2). Those picks are assets in my eyes. The lower, the better. But all valuable....

In some pool guides, the difference between Talbot and Andersen is ~5 wins in Andersen's favour. Hischier a possible top 100 point getter.

I vote to allow the Buds - Outlaws deal to proceed. I think it was the fairer of the two deals and just far enough out from Jerry's decision. This in light of the fact that Terry and I will be in the same division.
I vote to deny the Buds - Houligans deal as it was a deal that was made one week prior to a GM leaving our league (perhaps less).

Perhaps an added component to the constitution could help to rectify this situation.

Didn't enjoy this at all and hope we don't have to make these decisions again.
Good luck to all teams going forward.
Josh

[Mark Des Cotes]

I don't see anything wrong with the OUTLAW-BUDS trade. OUT get a boost on G and BUDS get a boost on LW. Neither C are keepers so they are moot. Anderson is the best player in the deal with Vanek coming in second. The 8th for a 10th picks make up that difference nicely. I do not believe this trade leaves the team weaker for the new GM. This is a fair trade and I approve it.

For the HOUL-BUDS trade, I'm not so sure. Schwartz for Kreider is a big lopside towards the Houligans. The BUDS best LW for the HOULs 2nd worst. Nylander for Toews is pretty even and both teams have multiple better centres so there's a good chance both are dropped. In examination, I would expect this trade, based on the LWs alone to require something better than an 11th vs. 8th swap but I have seen worse deals made in this league. If Jerry wasn't leaving I wouldn't think anything of this trade, but I cannot deny that the timing is suspect and it leaves the Buds much weaker for the new GM. For that reason alone I vote to deny it.

[Jacob Dionne]

I'm changing my vote because I can already see where this is going and how things are being implied by many of the comments (maybe including my own...unintentionally). Plus, it wasn't sitting well with me. In the end, this is a game. I do it for fun and should trust that others will do the same ... with integrity. It is what it is.

ALLOW both

PS - Look at what Ottawa just got for Karlsson

[David Murphy]

I have known Jerry Sauve for a very long time. His intentions nor his integrity should be questioned and regardless of what some have written, that is exactly what you're doing by voting against one or both of these trades.
You're also questioning the ethics of Randy Houle and Terry Turcotte - two good, long time owners.
We've all been guilty of what turn out to be lopsided trades where other GMs shake their heads in disbelief.
I can spot a couple of trades that look like friends are helping friends since January!!!
We make trades over lost bets!!!
I will not support allowing one and not the other.
I vote to allow BOTH trades to stand.
OR if it's deemed that both trades are null and void - then we should deny ALL trades made by the Buds from the end of the regular season.

[Chris_Savard]

Tough topic
We have heard from Jerry
Trades and player valuations are subjective
In this case, willing buyers and willing sellers
I think we have all made deals where others would think we made a mistake

Bulldogs in favour of allowing both deals.

[Richard_Tardiff]

I have been accused of cheating and unfair trading in another pool. I had not and I left thoroughly insulted.

These are actions from longstanding GMs, I will accord them the respect due to long standing members and give them the benefit of trusting their stated intentions.

Do they have a history that should be considered? I suspect not, so I will not vilify them.

Cow Pucks vote to allow in the spirit of friendship and camaraderie...

[Jean_Davignon]

As for the trade, I believe they were done sincerely, so you get my vote that they stay.