SirA1 Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 4 hours ago, TedLavie said: Yes I get that. Am I allowed to not want it though? I just like PFA and I like having picks that you can't speculate on. Realistically the Shark Tank is actually PFA for the BDL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 3 hours ago, wwhickok said: No on 6b You do realize you have the first pick regardless unless you decide to trade it so there isn't any reason to oppose a test run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 8 hours ago, SirA1 said: You do realize you have the first pick regardless unless you decide to trade it so there isn't any reason to oppose a test run. I agree. I feel there isnt any reason to make a change. Having said that, if im a 'tie breaker' either for the yes votes, feel free to convince me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 9 hours ago, SirA1 said: Realistically the Shark Tank is actually PFA for the BDL. Minus the you can sign people who been in the league for any amount of years sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 @TedLavie I agree that Topic 8 doesn't need discussion as those processes don't need automation IMO. I would also say the same about 9b and 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pheltzbahr Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 No on 6a and 6b, I think let this year be, and revisit at Summer Meeting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted March 8, 2019 Author Share Posted March 8, 2019 I'll ask @BringinDaPain and @bcb1213 for a simple yes/no since their intermediary options did not pick up any steam. I'll ask @WFLukic @Hockey5djh to chime in @MD4L given that the issue will be revisited in Summer meeting, I'll assume you're a NO. If you want to swtich your vote, feel free to do so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 if we're gonna allow players to be traded for PFA its a no from me then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MD4L Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 Switch my answer to no @TedLavie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringinDaPain Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WFLukic Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 what are we actually voting on? 4 year deals for 1st rounders? Yes, but you can exercise the option yourself for a 5th year at the same salary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted March 8, 2019 Author Share Posted March 8, 2019 17 minutes ago, WFLukic said: what are we actually voting on? 4 year deals for 1st rounders? Yes, but you can exercise the option yourself for a 5th year at the same salary page 37 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WFLukic Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 Yes to 6B It pretty much just makes the draft 9 rounds. Whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted March 9, 2019 Author Share Posted March 9, 2019 @Hockey5djh we need your vote on item 6B (page 37) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted March 9, 2019 Author Share Posted March 9, 2019 Quote Topic: 9a. Review league roles and responsabilities (guidelines and members of committees, rules workbook, roster guys ...) 9b. Create a rule workbook master that would update the rules workook as season goes on Idea submitter: Ted/Hockey Current situation: Roster guys (update the structure): bcb, Rags, SirA, Ted Waivers and PFA (run waivers & PFA, pending item 6b): bcb Contract committee (approve all contract extensions): SirA, JLash, pheltz, MD4L, bcb (no backup) Trade committee (approve all trades, save for draft day trades): SirA, pheltz, PR, Jlash, MD4L (backup: Counselor) Ruling committee (rule on ad hoc issues): bcb, Jlash, Ted (resigned) (backup: Rags) Schedule (make the schedule): bcb Standings (update the standings): vacant No Rule Workbook master - would be in charge of update the rule workbook everytime an issue comes up / an owner's meeting is done Detailed idea Review responsibilities and roles for each item Argument for : Split responsibilities to every owner Applicable on: now The exercise here would be to try to find were each owner could fit and update some of the committees. I don't think there will be a vote per say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.