Buds Board Keepers League

To SJ:
2019 7th rounder CGY

To VGK:
Chris Thorburn
2019 6th rounder SJ

Accept.

I guess foof needed to drop a contract

kyuss wroteCOLONI guess foof needed to drop a contract

Had to make room for Sustr yeah

so... claiming Sustr put you at 51?

Re: LEAGUE ANNOUNCEMENTS thread
Post by Matthew » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:09 pm
Due to Columbus (Dave) making an illegal claim that put his team over 50 contracts during the season, the claim of Biega is refused and the player shall go to the next team That submitted a claim during the 24 hour period, or if no other claim had been submitted the player shall be returned to the team originally waiving Biega, the Toronto Maple Leafs.
Also, as per the following CBA rule, Dave has been fined a 5th and 6th in 2018.
5-2 : If a team is over the roster maximum they will be charged a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft if a 3rd pick is not owned their next two highest picks will suffice

Was thinking the same thing Dave

dave1959 wroteCOLONRe: LEAGUE ANNOUNCEMENTS thread
Post by Matthew » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:09 pm
Due to Columbus (Dave) making an illegal claim that put his team over 50 contracts during the season, the claim of Biega is refused and the player shall go to the next team That submitted a claim during the 24 hour period, or if no other claim had been submitted the player shall be returned to the team originally waiving Biega, the Toronto Maple Leafs.
Also, as per the following CBA rule, Dave has been fined a 5th and 6th in 2018.
5-2 : If a team is over the roster maximum they will be charged a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft if a 3rd pick is not owned their next two highest picks will suffice

I would have claimed Sustr as shown by my attempt just at the wrong time, I saw SJS claimed and didn't re-submit as he was higher on waiver order. Not sure if that means anything since I technically didn't claim him, but SJ's claim did deter me from re-claiming.

http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1515 ... 20#p297346

I'd think sustr gets put into Chicago's minors, and sjs gets fined a 3rd in this year's draft.

Why would any one else claim after the #2 team puts a claim in?

dave1959 wroteCOLONRe: LEAGUE ANNOUNCEMENTS thread
Post by Matthew » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:09 pm
Due to Columbus (Dave) making an illegal claim that put his team over 50 contracts during the season, the claim of Biega is refused and the player shall go to the next team That submitted a claim during the 24 hour period, or if no other claim had been submitted the player shall be returned to the team originally waiving Biega, the Toronto Maple Leafs.
Also, as per the following CBA rule, Dave has been fined a 5th and 6th in 2018.
5-2 : If a team is over the roster maximum they will be charged a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft if a 3rd pick is not owned their next two highest picks will suffice

I've operated under the notion that I can be at any number of contracts during the week, so long as my roster is legal at roster lock. This isn't stated in the CBA. But if this is the rule, then we need to be more clear.

5-2 : If a team is over the roster maximum they will be charged a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft if a 3rd pick is not owned their next two highest picks will suffice.

This doesn't mention a time frame, and no one enforces this if Josh doesn't say he needed to make room for Sustr. Not only that, but fining a team and taking away the player/contract doesn't make any sense. The rule states that the fine is if a team is over the maximum, SJ is not over the maximum if the claim is invalid. Therefore he shouldn't be fined anything. To me, it is either, the claim is invalid OR the claim is valid and SJ is fined a pick. Can't have it both ways.

The little tidbit above the rule from an old league announcement post, isn't a rule, but rather a reactionary decision, it doesn't seem as though there was then a rule implemented to address this type of situation. And if I had seen that post in the past, I would make the same argument for Dave, GM can't be compliant with the limit and fined simultaneously.

koomzzz wroteCOLONI've operated under the notion that I can be at any number of contracts during the week, so long as my roster is legal at roster lock. This isn't stated in the CBA. But if this is the rule, then we need to be more clear.

5-2 : If a team is over the roster maximum they will be charged a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft if a 3rd pick is not owned their next two highest picks will suffice.

This doesn't mention a time frame, and no one enforces this if Josh doesn't say he needed to make room for Sustr. Not only that, but fining a team and taking away the player/contract doesn't make any sense. The rule states that the fine is if a team is over the maximum, SJ is not over the maximum if the claim is invalid. Therefore he shouldn't be fined anything. To me, it is either, the claim is invalid OR the claim is valid and SJ is fined a pick. Can't have it both ways.

+1

when I was fined it was stated that "at no time is a team allowed to go over 50 contracts" so as soon as his claim was valid, he exceeded 50 contracts...the same as me.

dave1959 wroteCOLONwhen I was fined it was stated that "at no time is a team allowed to go over 50 contracts" so as soon as his claim was valid, he exceeded 50 contracts...the same as me.

Ya but giving Sustr back to CHI is saying the claim was invalid, therefore SJS never exceeded 50. The claim can't be both valid and invalid at the same time.

Malette18 wroteCOLON

dave1959 wroteCOLONwhen I was fined it was stated that "at no time is a team allowed to go over 50 contracts" so as soon as his claim was valid, he exceeded 50 contracts...the same as me.

Ya but giving Sustr back to CHI is saying the claim was invalid, therefore SJS never exceeded 50. The claim can't be both valid and invalid at the same time.

did you read the announcement of my fine?

the precedent was set

dave1959 wroteCOLON

Malette18 wroteCOLON

dave1959 wroteCOLONwhen I was fined it was stated that "at no time is a team allowed to go over 50 contracts" so as soon as his claim was valid, he exceeded 50 contracts...the same as me.

Ya but giving Sustr back to CHI is saying the claim was invalid, therefore SJS never exceeded 50. The claim can't be both valid and invalid at the same time.

did you read the announcement of my fine?

the precedent was set

+1
It’s not that the claim was invalid and sustr was returned... it’s because the claim was invalid that sustr was returned.

Malette18 wroteCOLON

dave1959 wroteCOLONwhen I was fined it was stated that "at no time is a team allowed to go over 50 contracts" so as soon as his claim was valid, he exceeded 50 contracts...the same as me.

Ya but giving Sustr back to CHI is saying the claim was invalid, therefore SJS never exceeded 50. The claim can't be both valid and invalid at the same time.

He broke the rules. He gets a fine. That doesn't mean he gets to keep the player he broke the rule for.

If someone steals a car, and gets caught, do they not get jail time despite the car being returned to the owner?

Matthew wroteCOLON

Malette18 wroteCOLON

dave1959 wroteCOLONwhen I was fined it was stated that "at no time is a team allowed to go over 50 contracts" so as soon as his claim was valid, he exceeded 50 contracts...the same as me.

Ya but giving Sustr back to CHI is saying the claim was invalid, therefore SJS never exceeded 50. The claim can't be both valid and invalid at the same time.

He broke the rules. He gets a fine. That doesn't mean he gets to keep the player he broke the rule for.

If someone steals a car, and gets caught, do they not get jail time despite the car being returned to the owner?

I see it more of a credit card being declined at the register. You tried to pay and it didn't work. You don't get to walk out of the store with the product and then are charged for stealing. The transaction never occurred.

Malette18 wroteCOLON

Matthew wroteCOLON

Malette18 wroteCOLON

dave1959 wroteCOLONwhen I was fined it was stated that "at no time is a team allowed to go over 50 contracts" so as soon as his claim was valid, he exceeded 50 contracts...the same as me.

Ya but giving Sustr back to CHI is saying the claim was invalid, therefore SJS never exceeded 50. The claim can't be both valid and invalid at the same time.

He broke the rules. He gets a fine. That doesn't mean he gets to keep the player he broke the rule for.

If someone steals a car, and gets caught, do they not get jail time despite the car being returned to the owner?

I see it more of a credit card being declined at the register. You tried to pay and it didn't work. You don't get to walk out of the store with the product and then are charged for stealing. The transaction never occurred.

If we had an automatic transaction blocker sure, but we don't - we have to be on top of it ourselves. He made the add. It was processed. It put him over the roster limit. We are adults here - just as dave did there is a consequence for the action.

Malette18 wroteCOLON

dave1959 wroteCOLONRe: LEAGUE ANNOUNCEMENTS thread
Post by Matthew » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:09 pm
Due to Columbus (Dave) making an illegal claim that put his team over 50 contracts during the season, the claim of Biega is refused and the player shall go to the next team That submitted a claim during the 24 hour period, or if no other claim had been submitted the player shall be returned to the team originally waiving Biega, the Toronto Maple Leafs.
Also, as per the following CBA rule, Dave has been fined a 5th and 6th in 2018.
5-2 : If a team is over the roster maximum they will be charged a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft if a 3rd pick is not owned their next two highest picks will suffice

I would have claimed Sustr as shown by my attempt just at the wrong time, I saw SJS claimed and didn't re-submit as he was higher on waiver order. Not sure if that means anything since I technically didn't claim him, but SJ's claim did deter me from re-claiming.

http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1515 ... 20#p297346

Irrespective of the fine, I think this is to be considered for who Sustr goes to.