|
|
Post by Majic on Jan 8, 2020 18:59:18 GMT
Due to the recent trade/controversy I proposed an idea in shout.
Currently, the standard rule is a full season's inactivity before a GM losses their team and is contracted.
I propose that we create a more detailed description of 3-4 required Tasks that a GM must complete.(or however many we agree)
If GM's are not completing these tasks then they are not allowed to make other types of transactions, trades specifically.
After inactivity, the team could then be contracted.
For example, this recent situation does not seem fair to the league. Fecta has not been present for the whole season, neglecting to set a D, which is an essential role to running a team and really takes only a matter of minutes. Fecta also neglected to respond to several PM's, only to pop on and accept a trade for a player that many had inquired on.
I generally believe there should be a specified baseline of activity that a GM must clear in order to continue having full function of their team.
Couple Tasks I think that could be a starting point:
Setting DC
Drafting on time
Submitting bids - when applicable
upgrading players
responding to PM's
Fill out Roster
These are just a few tasks that I could quickly think of, and not all are necessarily required. However, generally all of these must be completed and take very little time for even the most absent GM's.
|
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Jan 8, 2020 19:01:41 GMT
additional comment since it was introduced in shout.
Sometimes GM's may miss one or two of these steps in a given year, life happens and sometimes theres nothing that a GM can do.
This would not apply to the people that possibly miss 1 or two items, but rather the GM's that are missing a majority or all of them in a given season, or seasons.
A GM forgetting to sign a couple players but then setting a DC and generally being active is not the problem. A GM doing 1 of the 6 items listed is a problem, especially when they swoop in to complete a trade before doing 5 of the others.
|
|
|
|
Post by 👨🏼⚕️delapandemic🚑 on Jan 8, 2020 19:04:19 GMT
Setting DC and Drafting are the two most important. I could be fine without the rest, though I would argue that filling out the roster is the next most important.
|
|
|
tompug
Guest
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by tompug on Jan 8, 2020 19:04:25 GMT
Imagine being such a psychopath you literally collude with someone who is never here to improve your already best team and then going on a shout rampage accusing everyone else of being bad actors
|
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Jan 8, 2020 19:07:14 GMT
For example, this recent situation does not seem fair to the league. In your opinion. only to pop on and accept a trade for a player that many had inquired on. many = one lol |
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Jan 8, 2020 19:09:00 GMT
Setting DC and Drafting are the two most important. I could be fine without the rest, though I would argue that filling out the roster is the next most important. the question I would pose then: If a GM is not completing both of these tasks what should happen? |
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Jan 8, 2020 19:12:14 GMT
For example, this recent situation does not seem fair to the league. In your opinion. only to pop on and accept a trade for a player that many had inquired on. many = one lol 1) mutliple GM's had an issue with how this went down, so it seems to be a few peoples opinion 2) I thought others in shout made mention to offers. If not then I am wrong, but doing the trade without responding or posting a trade block is poor form. 3) I would argue upgrading players is an important part of GM'ing. I may agree its not an essential aspect, again I tried to just rattle off some tasks that we could use. |
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Jan 8, 2020 19:18:04 GMT
but doing the trade without responding or posting a trade block is poor form. Weird, looking back I didn't see Druce create a trade block when you acquired Guyton from him during his one-day tenure and then won your first championship. |
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Jan 8, 2020 19:26:14 GMT
but doing the trade without responding or posting a trade block is poor form. Weird, looking back I didn't see Druce create a trade block when you acquired Guyton from him during his one-day tenure and then won your first championship. You love bringing up this trade. So a couple items to know: I had been trying to trade for Guyton for multiple seasons before he finally agreed to trading him. Guyton was playing backup minutes since he already had an all-star caliber PG starting in his place. Guyton was a backup taking up a large portion of the salary cap. In the trade Druce got back an elite level player in return, at a position he needed help in. I hardly think the 2 trades are similar in value. Again, I am not even fighting you on the trade at this point. Rather I want to make the league more fair and set a standard for what a GM is required to do above "no inactivity for a full year" |
|
|
tomthug
Guest
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by tomthug on Jan 8, 2020 19:30:18 GMT
but doing the trade without responding or posting a trade block is poor form. Weird, looking back I didn't see Druce create a trade block when you acquired Guyton from him during his one-day tenure and then won your first championship.
Actual quote from Timpig running for president after being accused of sexual assault:
"BUT HER EMAILS"
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2020 19:33:12 GMT
i vote opposite of tim eric can u use yuour powers to tell me how he voted |
|
|
|
Post by jhb on Jan 8, 2020 19:33:30 GMT
Upgrading players shouldn't be on this list
Responding to PMs is too difficult to litigate
Other than that I'm cool with this
|
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Jan 8, 2020 19:40:41 GMT
Upgrading players shouldn't be on this list Responding to PMs is too difficult to litigate Other than that I'm cool with this I would agree with that. The main 4 for me personally: Setting DC Drafting On Time Submitting Bids - when applicable Filling Out Roster |
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Jan 8, 2020 19:41:29 GMT
I hardly think the 2 trades are similar in value. Not sure what this even means. Multiple people have said I offered adequate value for Nash. And I'm not arguing value. I'm arguing that if you applied your new standards to yourself years back, the trade with Druce would not have happened and you wouldn't have won a title. It's a lot easier for you to bitch now because you're not the one involved. Again, you're bitching because I traded with an "inactive GM". By our current standards, he is active. A former GM and personal friend of yours "came back" and made a trade with you before leaving the next day. If you feel that Druce was an "active GM", you're 100% full of shit. You asked for the Nash trade to be vetoed. Not only did I not ask for the Guyton trade to be vetoed, I inserted myself to facilitate it even in the midst of Druce quitting. |
|
|
|
Post by skrouse on Jan 8, 2020 19:52:26 GMT
I think this is a bit over the top tbh.
The entire reason I made a comment in the trade thread was due to the trade being fecta's only activity for the season and it being at the deadline with his irl buddy. If he had set a dc after accepting or done literally anything else, it would have been no big deal imo.
I do not believe setting a formal min standard is needed. Most of the time, were trying to do all we can to cut an inactive GM slack to keep them around. So this is more of a case by case basis kinda thing that we'll need our commish to handle.
It's just not a good look for Tim or Fecta, and it sows discord throughout the league.
|
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Jan 8, 2020 19:52:47 GMT
In 2029, this would have lost us the Hornets, Bullets, Oaks, and Pistons. In 2030, this would have lost us the Hornets (again), Oaks (again), and Heat. That's at least five teams that would have been contracted in the past two years by your standards. If you want to go down to eight teams total, that's your choice, but I'd rather give GMs a bit more leeway. |
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Jan 8, 2020 19:54:21 GMT
I hardly think the 2 trades are similar in value. Not sure what this even means. Multiple people have said I offered adequate value for Nash. And I'm not arguing value. I'm arguing that if you applied your new standards to yourself years back, the trade with Druce would not have happened and you wouldn't have won a title. It's a lot easier for you to bitch now because you're not the one involved. Again, you're bitching because I traded with an "inactive GM". By our current standards, he is active. A former GM and personal friend of yours "came back" and made a trade with you before leaving the next day. If you feel that Druce was an "active GM", you're 100% full of shit. You asked for the Nash trade to be vetoed. Not only did I not ask for the Guyton trade to be vetoed, I inserted myself to facilitate it even in the midst of Druce quitting. since you seem really stuck on this, a couple more things to point out. My trade was vetoed in that instance, and yes you did help but it was at the expense of other assets. I stated in shout today, after reviewing the trade again that I didnt think it should be vetoed. Instead I pivoted to this discussion. Druce was active once he came back and he agreed with the trade for all the reasons I stated above. It benefited him as much as myself. The only reason he quit again was because the trade was vetoed, he got super pissed then said fuck it and was done. Lastly, you are correct that Fecta is an active GM by our current standards. Thats why I have stated a couple times now that your trade should stand. However, I thought a conversation should be had as to what constitutes an "active" GM moving forward as I thought it should be more detailed. And based on the votes it appears I am not the only one. If you could just remove your personal feelings for a seconds, I think what is being proposed for the rules moving forward are pretty fair. |
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Jan 8, 2020 19:55:08 GMT
It's just not a good look for Tim or Fecta, and it sows discord throughout the league. Not really sure why it's a bad look for me. Yesterday was the last sim before the deadline so I was proactive and reached out via text to make a trade. |
|
|
|
Post by skrouse on Jan 8, 2020 19:57:18 GMT
It's just not a good look for Tim or Fecta, and it sows discord throughout the league. Not really sure why it's a bad look for me. Yesterday was the last sim before the deadline so I was proactive and reached out via text to make a trade. C'mon man, if you can't see how this looks bad you're kidding yourself |
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Jan 8, 2020 20:00:55 GMT
My trade was vetoed in that instance, and yes you did help but it was at the expense of other assets. ~*~sInCe Im So StUcK oN tHiS~*~ It was vetoed because salary didn't work. Sorry if you think salary rules shouldn't apply. Druce was active once he came back and he agreed with the trade for all the reasons I stated above. Except that he had three days to amnesty Harvey and fix everything and instead didn't log on to the board at all. |
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Jan 8, 2020 20:02:07 GMT
I think this is a bit over the top tbh. The entire reason I made a comment in the trade thread was due to the trade being fecta's only activity for the season and it being at the deadline with his irl buddy. If he had set a dc after accepting or done literally anything else, it would have been no big deal imo. I do not believe setting a formal min standard is needed. Most of the time, were trying to do all we can to cut an inactive GM slack to keep them around. So this is more of a case by case basis kinda thing that we'll need our commish to handle. It's just not a good look for Tim or Fecta, and it sows discord throughout the league. That's at least five teams that would have been contracted in the past two years by your standards. If you want to go down to eight teams total, that's your choice, but I'd rather give GMs a bit more leeway. I agree with both of your points. This could be more fluid than a hard line stance to immediately contract. I guess my problem is more so with the GM's that only do 1 of the 4 items. If a GM occasionally misses doing 1 of these items I dont think its a big deal. Especially if there are no other activity issues. But if a GM is literally only drafting and nothing else, then pops on to do a trade, I think thats a problem overall. |
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Jan 8, 2020 20:04:08 GMT
C'mon man, if you can't see how this looks bad you're kidding yourself One GM apparently reached out regarding Nash while Fecta was in Thailand. Not on me that he didn't follow up. Another GM has stated he reached out regarding a different player (also while Fecta would have been in Thailand), and then didn't bother to follow up after not receiving a response to his first message. Not on me that he didn't follow up. Everyone has Fecta's phone number. It's publicly listed on the board. I have yet to hear of a GM who reached out to him via text to propose a trade. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 8, 2020 20:21:57 GMT
suppose next preseason someone's $3m over the HC and kujo's the only one with soft cap space
would kujo be allowed to take on an MLE from that team via trade?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2020 20:37:12 GMT
suppose next preseason someone's $3m over the HC and kujo's the only one with soft cap space would kujo be allowed to take on an MLE from that team via trade? Not if he hasn't done shit in years and its helping out his IRL friend Pretty simple really |
|
|
|
Post by skrouse on Jan 8, 2020 20:51:49 GMT
suppose next preseason someone's $3m over the HC and kujo's the only one with soft cap space would kujo be allowed to take on an MLE from that team via trade? Not if he hasn't done shit in years and its helping out his IRL friend Pretty simple really Agreed, the issue is fecta and tim being irl friends. That's at the crux of the whole thing. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 8, 2020 21:10:39 GMT
suppose next preseason someone's $3m over the HC and kujo's the only one with soft cap space would kujo be allowed to take on an MLE from that team via trade? Not if he hasn't done shit in years and its helping out his IRL friend Pretty simple really both kujo and fecta have done things, otherwise they wouldn't have teams how close of friends does someone have to be? if i was an absentee GM, would i be allowed to trade with tim? |
|
|
|
Post by jhb on Jan 9, 2020 0:07:32 GMT
Changed my vote to no because I’ve grown tired of this discussion
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 9, 2020 0:36:11 GMT
Not if he hasn't done shit in years and its helping out his IRL friend Pretty simple really both kujo and fecta have done things, otherwise they wouldn't have teams how close of friends does someone have to be? if i was an absentee GM, would i be allowed to trade with tim? these aren't rhetorical questions btw i'm probably never going to institute a rule that's subjective and harsher over a rule that's objective and more lenient i don't mind instituting a rule that's objective and harsher when necessary, but it will have to be objective |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 9, 2020 0:36:42 GMT
jhb just wanted to make sure you saw the above post
|
|
|
|
Post by jhb on Jan 9, 2020 2:13:04 GMT
I think everything is fine as is and this dogpiling of Tim is no longer fun it’s boring and bureaucratic
|
|
