Commish needs some help (1 Viewer)

[turkishkamel]

we are in a keep 6 league. each player you keep costs you a pick. if you keep 6, your first pick is in the 7th round. a team in my league has two first round picks, 1.01 and 1.04. the 1.04 is his, he traded for the 1.01. he is keeping one player. how do we determine which of his first round picks he has to use to keep this player. if he can use his 1.04 to keep this player, he gets to draft adrian peterson, which is why he made the trade. but if he has to use the 1.01, he loses out on AD. unfortunately we dont have a rule about this. some feel he should have to use his highest pick in the round to keep a player. others feel it should be his choice (lowest). how do/would you guys deal with this?

TIA for the insight...

 

[tulane]

Sounds like he should lose his 1st (1.1) pick.

 

[thebestupsman]

I would say he has to give up his 1.4 pick.

 

[turnit643]

Absent a written rule, it's tough to make a ruling on it, but it sounds like everyone is operating under the assumption that your keepers replace your highest picks in the draft. That shouldn't change in this case ... it would open the door for an argument (silly as it may be) to make a selection with your 6th round pick and keep a guy with your 7th, etc.

 

[Chaka]

1.4, it's his pick that's the one he should lose.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Since you dont enforce any specific pick within your own rules currently...then it's his choice.

 

[wakelawyer]

In order to maintain the integrity of your league, you have to make it his pick. In my keeper league we state the you must use YOUR pick to keep a player. However, if you have traded away that pick you can replace it with a higher pick if you can obtain one in a trade. Using this reasoning he would lose pick 1.4 and could pick with 1.1. If not you are taking away all value in his trade.

In addition, you open the door for an owner who has pick 1.1 to trade it to the owner that has pick 1.12 and use pick 1.12 to keep a player. In case I have lost you, if the person with pick 1.1 wants to keep a player and he can use any first round pick (provided it is the highest one he possesses at the time of the draft) to keep that player, he would be an idiot not to shop pick 1.1 to the highest bidder. And he would then get something of great value (in better picks later in the draft) in exchange for something that has no value to him because he was not going to draft with that pick.

 

[kashmoney]

from your description, it sounds like you have to give up your pick in the round in order to keep a player.

so i think he should lose his pick (1.04)

 

[JimboJim]

My 3-player keeper league operates similiarly.

On the determined keeper date, each player a team retains will cost them the lowest draft pick they own in the round in which the player was last drafted. I really like this methond.

The only caveat we have is that you can forfeit a higher pick if you don't own a pick in the round the player costs. I.e; Willie Parker was drafted in the 2nd last year, and even though his owner didn't have a second anymore on the keepr date, he was able to give up his first and keep Parker.

In this case, I would force the owner to give up his 1.4.

 

[BILLY_THE_BULL]

If it is ruled that he has to use pick 1.1 will he be given the chance to undo the deal he got that pick in?

 

[tulane]

It seems like the principle is that you forfeit your top pick. So what happens when the guy trades away his 1.04 pick and his 2.x pick? "His" top pick is now a 3rd rounder. Does his keeper then only cost him his 3.x pick??????

 

[The Jerk]

His keeper should cost him 1.04, and I think it's pretty obvious, since that is "his" pick. Clearly, you should specify this in the rules going forward.

If he had traded multiple other players to acquire other first-round draft picks, and ended up with, say, 1.01, 1.04, 1.06, and 1.07 (I know it's unlikely, but stay with me here...), but still retained his 2nd and 3rd round picks, it would hardly be fair to take three first-round picks from him if he kept three players, while other owners could be giving up a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd while doing the same thing. It's just not equitable.

Also, I don't understand how it works that a team could deplete itself of early-round picks and use a 4th rounder for their first keeper while others must use a 1st rounder. Maybe I'm missing something about the rule, but as I am understanding it, I don't like it too much.

Just my opinion, of course...

 

[turkishkamel]

It seems like the principle is that you forfeit your top pick. So what happens when the guy trades away his 1.04 pick and his 2.x pick? "His" top pick is now a 3rd rounder. Does his keeper then only cost him his 3.x pick??????

in this case, since he doesnt have a first rd pick, he cant keep anyone. i appreciate all the input so far, its a little to late to force him to use his 1.01 to keep his player. this was only brought to my attention last night, 5 days before our draft. at this point, it seems unfair to force him to change his plans. especially when no one complained all off season. i am just trying to gather as much input as possible before i go back to my league mates with a decision.

 

[Exile]

I'd say it really comes down to the exact wording of your rule. I can think of several ways to word this:

"Keeping 1 player costs you a 1st round pick, keeping 2 players costs you a 1st and a 2nd, etc..."

"Keeping 1 player costs you your 1st round pick, keeping 2 players costs you your 1st and a 2nd, etc..."

"Keeping 1 player costs you your highest pick, keeping 2 players costs you your highest 2 picks, etc..."

If it's something like the first option, I would say it's the owners choice because "a pick" isn't specific.

If it's something like the second option, it would clearly be the 1.4 pick.

If it's something like the third option, not only should the 1.1 pick be used for his first keeper, but it could be argued that he has to use 1.4 to keep his 2nd player, his 2nd rounder to keep his 3rd, etc... I hope it's not worded that way because it would make the trade he made less than useless.

 

[code]

This is another great example of why I don't like pick-for-keeper systems...

Can we get the exact wording of your rulebook on this item?

 

[hove]

Since you dont enforce any specific pick within your own rules currently...then it's his choice.

I sort of agree with this because there isn't a rule set for it. Makes the most sense.The rules for the league I commish - you have to give up whichever pick you have had longer. Say you "earn" 1.12 from last season then trade that away for 1.10. Then later you somehow acquire 1.04. You would lose the 1.10 pick for your keeper since you've had that longer. Obviously if you had never traded away 1.12 but still acquired 1.04, then you would lose 1.12.My

 

[GreedoShotFirst]

clearly his pick (1.4) and you should have clearer rules.

 

[cheeseypoof]

I would say he has to give up his 1.4 pick.

 

[johnnybronco]

this is a silly situation

clearly it's the 1.4 pick. he traded for somebody else's first round pick which happened to be 1.1

let's say he traded for 1.12 instead of 1.1, he would still give up HIS 1.4 pick

 

[pack100]

Did someone not keep anybody? How did they trade for the 1.1? If the team with the original 1.1 kept someone there would not be a 1.1

Back to point, it has to be the 1.4, I should only lose my picks not picks I traded for.

 

[Dt's Mules]

i agree it should be his pick 1.4

but what if 1.1 and 1.4 just swapped picks before the draft....now, neither of them has their 1st round pick...would each of them give up their highest picks 2.1 and 2.4? that shouldn't be allowed to happen either...you might want to word it that they give up their pick provided that they have one or someone elses could be used in lieu of their own.

 

[dwarfboy]

He should have to give up his pick in the first round to keep a player.

If he had known he had to give up 1.1 he either wouldn't have done the deal to get 1.1 or he would have arranged with the other owner to complete the trade after he declared keepers and gave up his first round pick.

 

[turkishkamel]

Did someone not keep anybody? How did they trade for the 1.1? If the team with the original 1.1 kept someone there would not be a 1.1

a team did keep no one. then traded the 1.01 for addai (who can be kept for free). i appreciate all the input, thats why i love this site. unfortunately this was one thing not covered in our league rules. it was just kind of stated as 'each player you keep costs a pick.' in that sense it seems its the owners choice. i do need to clarify this rule. it just goes to show, the more rules your league has the better. some may never come up, but if they do your covered.

 

[turkishkamel]

He should have to give up his pick in the first round to keep a player.

If he had known he had to give up 1.1 he either wouldn't have done the deal to get 1.1 or he would have arranged with the other owner to complete the trade after he declared keepers and gave up his first round pick.

you're right he wouldnt have done the deal. and if he ended up having to use the 1.01 to keep his guy, he'd just cut him then draft AD 1.01, and his guy at 1.04.

 

[The Jerk]

a team did keep no one. then traded the 1.01 for addai (who can be kept for free). i appreciate all the input, thats why i love this site. unfortunately this was one thing not covered in our league rules. it was just kind of stated as 'each player you keep costs a pick.' in that sense it seems its the owners choice. i do need to clarify this rule. it just goes to show, the more rules your league has the better. some may never come up, but if they do your covered.

Not so much the more rules the better, but the clearer your rules the better.May I recommend that you use examples in your rules to make it painfully clear if there is any possibility of a rule being misinterpreted. This and many other suggestions are in an excellent thread that is pinned at the top of the shark pool, Rules Every League Should Consider....

 

[turkishkamel]

a team did keep no one. then traded the 1.01 for addai (who can be kept for free). i appreciate all the input, thats why i love this site. unfortunately this was one thing not covered in our league rules. it was just kind of stated as 'each player you keep costs a pick.' in that sense it seems its the owners choice. i do need to clarify this rule. it just goes to show, the more rules your league has the better. some may never come up, but if they do your covered.

Not so much the more rules the better, but the clearer your rules the better.May I recommend that you use examples in your rules to make it painfully clear if there is any possibility of a rule being misinterpreted. This and many other suggestions are in an excellent thread that is pinned at the top of the shark pool, Rules Every League Should Consider....

i have actually used FBGs list of rules to consider and we have an extensive set of bylaws. i tend to be the type of person to argue with loopholes so i try to make our rules "me proof." this one just slipped past me.

 

[The Jerk]

a team did keep no one. then traded the 1.01 for addai (who can be kept for free). i appreciate all the input, thats why i love this site. unfortunately this was one thing not covered in our league rules. it was just kind of stated as 'each player you keep costs a pick.' in that sense it seems its the owners choice. i do need to clarify this rule. it just goes to show, the more rules your league has the better. some may never come up, but if they do your covered.

Not so much the more rules the better, but the clearer your rules the better.May I recommend that you use examples in your rules to make it painfully clear if there is any possibility of a rule being misinterpreted. This and many other suggestions are in an excellent thread that is pinned at the top of the shark pool, Rules Every League Should Consider....

i have actually used FBGs list of rules to consider and we have an extensive set of bylaws. i tend to be the type of person to argue with loopholes so i try to make our rules "me proof." this one just slipped past me.

No problem. Just didn't know if you had seen that thread. As you know, lots of good ideas in there.