FFL - 2012-13 - Voting on Rule Change - draft order posted

[writersblock]

Yeah, looks like the Bucks fans were right about him. Glad I listened as I almost drafted Dally.

In related news, I'm glad I traded for Larry Sanders, even though I had to give up Harrison Barnes for him.

Interestingly, in the end, I traded Marcus Thornton and Royce White for Omer Asik and Larry Sanders. Thornton's coming off the bench and White won't be getting any minutes outside of the DLeague.

[floppymoose]

I think I have to take that bet simply because it's so creative. Well done.
Last year was Camby #116, Randolph #275. Clearly AR has his work cut out for him.

The early results... we were both right to doubt the other guy's player.

[Breakdown777]

Fran...you might wanna heed your own advice, with the way you butchered quoting that post. You butchered making sense too, but that's not uncommon . Maybe I will try the Apollo.

So I took Pek his rookie year, and he didn't blow up until the year after.
I took Larry Sanders last year, and he blows up the year after.
I think I need to lengthen my radar for "blow-up" candidates, as being a year early has been my pattern.

[writersblock]

Moteijunas sent to the D-League: Yep, when TheMan called me out for taking White instead of Motiejunas, I totally called that one.

Unfortunately, what I didn't call: White going to the DLeague. The good news for White, all his games will be by bus.

[jazzfan1971]

3SI: sent you a trade proposal. Another 24 hours or so before I cancel it.

[writersblock]

3SI: sent you a trade proposal. Another 24 hours or so before I cancel it.

You and me both, but I'm going on a week now...
I've noticed very low attention to trade offers this season.

[sabonis]

I rejected the one you sent me, I hate the lowballing strategy, sorry

btw yeah my team sucks balls

[writersblock]

I rejected the one you sent me, I hate the lowballing strategy, sorry

Sorry, but I was desperate for a response, even if it was a negative one.

[Curtis Lemansky]

Millsap for Matthews? What the hell kind of deal is this? Top-20 player straight up for a top-60 player? That's pretty much trading a low 1st round pick for a late 3rd round pick. Sorry but I call veto on this one.

Millsap has been 1) a historically MUCH better fantasy bball player 2) has been SIGNIFICANTLY better than Matthews this season 3) has been even much better than Matthews in most recent week (hence taking out the "illusion of a hot week from a lower ranked player" factor from the equation)

[stick]

Didnt I turn down MIllsap for Conley. Matthews is quite a jump

[writersblock]

Yes, you did turn down Millsap for Conley. The unfortunate thing is that even worse deals were turned down for Millsap. I think I offered Millsap to just about every person in the league. The problem with trading in this league is you rarely get fair value for a player...it's more "market value", and quite simply, Mllsap's market value was horrible. I started by offering everyone a fair deal, targeting guys with rankings in the 20s and 30s, and was summarily rejected by every single person I offered him too with some kind of response like, "Millsap's future in Utah is muddy, he'll get dealt somewhere where he'll be even less valuable". So, I started making offers with Millsap for guys in the 40s-60s.

Now, at the time I offered that deal to Fran, Millsap and Matthews were fairly close in ranking, and to be honest, I completely forgot I had made that offer. Also, to be honest, I think everyone is wrong about millsap, and if he's dealt, he'll be dealt to a bottom-feeder who will need him (someone like Houston). But unfortunately, I'm apparently in the minority (or all alone) in that opinion. No, I'm not happy for the value I got back for him, but unfortunately, that's the way it goes in this league sometimes.

[Curtis Lemansky]

Uhmm how about you keep him given that his diverse statline is pretty much a good fit for every type of strategy? This deal is similar to Dwight's deal in real life in terms of crappy return except Dwight was pretty much holding Orlando on gunpoint whereas you could have just kept Millsap especially if you felt his market value around the league doesnt match his actual value / production.

The deal is even more horrible if you really believe what you are saying (regarding Millsap's current and future situation). I MAY have seen a logic in it if you thought that his situation was gonna get worse. However you believe his situation will remain roughly same or get better (ie. top-20 player or better) and you still trade him for a top-60 player.

Whether my vote makes any difference, I dont know. Still I vote for veto.

[writersblock]

Uhmm how about you keep him given that his diverse statline is pretty much a good fit for every type of strategy? This deal is similar to Dwight's deal in real life in terms of crappy return except Dwight was pretty much holding Orlando on gunpoint whereas you could have just kept Millsap especially if you felt his market value around the league doesnt match his actual value / production.

The deal is even more horrible if you really believe what you are saying (regarding Millsap's current and future situation). I MAY have seen a logic in it if you thought that his situation was gonna get worse. However you believe his situation will remain roughly same or get better (ie. top-20 player or better) and you still trade him for a top-60 player.

Whether my vote makes any difference, I dont know. Still I vote for veto.

I do think he'll be dealt into a better situation, but again, everyone else seems to think otherwise, so maybe I'm wrong. Either way, you want to veto, go ahead and veto. I've been trying for 2 weeks to get a deal done where I come out with one extra SF, because right now, I'm losing a roster spot nearly every day because I don't have a small forward, and I can't play all my PFs either. This was about clearing a log jam. I don't like the deal one bit and would happily see it vetoed...but at some point, I'm going to need a SF.

[bww78]

Ok...

Obviously people are going to want to vote on this one.

24 hour period is now open for a vote. WB, Fran and myself are not eligible to vote. Assuming at least 2 other managers won't even see this post over the next 24 hours, that leaves 15 managers. 8 or more veto votes are needed.

[jazzfan1971]

I vote no to veto.

I see no collusion or simple error. Just a less than ideal trade made by a veteran GM. I don't veto less than ideal trades.

[floppymoose]

Yeah, I can't vote to veto this either. I see it the same was jazzfan does. Moreover, the fact that WB was offering Millsap to everyone for an SF (I got offers as well) demonstrates that there was no collusion of any kind. I would have taken him except I'm tanking rebounds.

[bww78]

FYI, via email, both Jeremy and Gokce have voted to veto.

[stick]

no veto

though methinks brian is secretly rooting for the veto

[sabonis]

how many do we need to veto 10?

[writersblock]

no veto

though methinks brian is secretly rooting for the veto

Well, Brian, you'd better put up some good numbers for me tonight in New Orleans. Another 16 point 8 assist game would be nice.