Let's try something a little bit different.

[Lee]

PHI 1st 2015 for a goaltender / tandem / system . This pick is currently 5th overall.

If this pick wins the lottery, then it becomes OTT 1st, which would slide into the same slot. This would also come with the added bonus of the fine for missing GP, likely a 2nd and 3rd rounder.

I am also willing to add the Carolina system in the right deal.

[Matthew]

5th + your goalie, or just 5th?

[bills09]

Me missing gp was because of injuries a situation out of my control..
I have had over 20 NHL players on my roster all season.
I will not be paying you anything extra Lee.

[Nick]

Billy there will be a fine for you missing, let's be clear on that. However a fine for you doesn't go to Lee/owner of the pick.


1) missing GP effects the standings, and pick location, both things we want to avoid.
2) Precedent has been set, many times here.
i) pick is moved back 1 spot if in the top 5
ii) GM is fined a different pick based on the egregiousness of the miss

[Matthew]

If lee acquired the pick before he knew billy was goin to miss, and the pick slides back due to gp, shouldn't he get something? It's not like people with injured players can't trade them for healthy guys. We are all in the same boat. It could happen to anyone, billy just had bad luck and will lose a couple mid picks. Could be me next season.

[bills09]

If I am fined I will accept but I'm not paying another Gm for me having terrible luck
I would also argue if not for the significant injuries I have had this season that pick is likely much higher

[Lee]

Billy there will be a fine for you missing, let's be clear on that. However a fine for you doesn't go to Lee/owner of the pick.


1) missing GP effects the standings, and pick location, both things we want to avoid.
2) Precedent has been set, many times here.
i) pick is moved back 1 spot if in the top 5
ii) GM is fined a different pick based on the egregiousness of the miss

I will be getting compensation, as per the current ruling ( http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1206 ... 80#p204146 ):

3- Compensation owed by the offending GM to the owner of the diminished first rounder*

- If the pick is moved 2 or less spots:
and the pick is #1, a first round selection in this same draft
and the pick is #2-5, a 2nd and a 3rd round selection (this draft year or next)
and the pick is 6+, a 2nd round selection
if the offending GM doesn't own the compensatory picks he will have to acquire them on the market

- If the pick is moved more then 2 spots:
and the pick is #1-5, the league will also compensate the GM with a pick between the 1st and 2nd round (30b)
and the pick is 6+, the league will also compensate the GM with a pick between the 2nd and 3rd round (60b)

*Obviously point #3 depends on when the owner of the pick acquired it. If the pick is acquired at the end of the season, or when its team is already on par of missing gp, #3 will not apply, as the owner acquired an asset (the pick) that already had diminished value at the time of the deal.
Points #3 also work as sanctions for the GM responsible of missing gp. If the pick is traded at a time that voids #3, instead of sanctions you would have decreased value of the pick already affecting the offending GM in the deal.

[Matthew]

5th + your goalie, or just 5th?

[Lee]

Depends on what is coming back.

For the sake of clarity, I am not trading 5th for Dubnyk / Smith.

[Matthew]

Depends on what is coming back.

For the sake of clarity, I am not trading 5th for Dubnyk / Smith.

I wasnt going to make an offer. I was just wondering.

And for the sake of clarity, I wouldn't trade Dubnyk for the 5th. A good goalie is way more effective than a good skater in this league. IMO.

My record pre-dubnyk trade: 4-10-1

My record post-dubnyk trade: 7-1-0

[Lee]

Well that's settled then.

[Bruyns]

That's interesting with the compensation being paid to the GM. I'd think that Lee already benefited from Billy's injuries since that pick is a lot higher than it would have been if Billy's team is healthy. Now his pick will be moved back one spot and he will gain a 2nd and 3rd on top of that. Seems like a big benefit to Lee getting a high pick due to injuries and 2 bonus picks on top of that.

I would have figured the picks would go to nobody since the pick being moved is supposed to represent where it would be if the team met GP. It makes draft picks from teams in danger of missing GP more valuable since you will be awarded extra picks.

[Lee]

The price to move down at that spot would be more than a 2nd and 3rd round pick. I'll gladly take 3rd overall instead of the 2nd and 3rd.

[Bruyns]

The price to move down at that spot would be more than a 2nd and 3rd round pick. I'll gladly take 3rd overall instead of the 2nd and 3rd.

It's moved down due to less GP causing the team to be lower in the standings than they should be was always the reasoning I thought.

At least something is being done since I was annoyed last season my 4th overall pick was moved back a spot, I wasn't going to receive any compensation and the offending team received no punishment. Still don't understand why I was the only person penalized in that situation, but was told it was since the pick was that high due to missing GP so I guess that reasoning has changed since compensation is now going to GMs.

[Lee]

Sorry, I mean trade value wise.

[Bruyns]

Sorry, I mean trade value wise.

I knew what you meant, I was saying that the pick in theory would have been 4th or lower instead of 3rd if he made GP and that was my understanding of why it was moved back a spot. Getting compensation is akin to believing the pick should be 3rd overall so you need to be compensated for the pick being moved down.

I'd just leave the pick where it is and only fine the GM missing GP. If it is argued that the pick wouldn't have been 3rd overall if he made GP then why should a GM get compensation when the pick is being slotted into it's proper spot.

[Lee]

If you miss GP, it is moved back a spot regardless. I think Scott's sheet pro rates GP and it looks as though he would have been in 4th if he met GP.

The counter point is why should a GM be punished for someone else missing GP. It's easy to pro rate stats but that doesn't mean that Brandon Pirri had 40 + goals this year.

[Lee]

The fact is that Billy could and should have met GP this year. He was expected to be a borderline play off team this year but sat on his ass while his team floundered.

I won't say it was because he didn't expect his team to be fined further and someone else owned the pick ( meaning that moving back had no bearing on him) , I'll let you make your own judgement there.

I know myself I was on the edge of missing GP for most of the season until the deadline where I acquired players to meet GP.

Scott did Shep a solid for actively fighting to meet GP so the pick wouldn't be devalued. I feel Shep would have case for asking for compensation from the CC. Dallas missed GP very, very handily. I'm not placing the blame on whatever his name is ( sorry, we don't know your name and I'm not calling you lightupthedarkness ). The decision was made that he would not be punished. In the end, this punishes Shep, who has 0 bearing, 0 fault in the issue and will have a devalued asset because of it.

[Bruyns]

The counter point is why should a GM be punished for someone else missing GP.

I don't think they should and the pick should be left in 3rd and Billy fined.

[Lee]

The counter point is why should a GM be punished for someone else missing GP.

I don't think they should and the pick should be left in 3rd and Billy fined.

How is that fair to Arian, who did meet GP?