Eastside's Hockey Elite Collide

To WPG: 1st DET 2024

To DET: Mark Pysyk (79) & 1st WPG 2021

Accepted.

Salary dump and gambling! To much fun.

I know time value of draft pick calculation might make me a big loser in this trade, but I get to dump a bad contract now and hope Detrioit's 1st lands me a better player in the future.

Confirmed. The gamble is definitely the thing of interest to me here. Pysyk is whatever, I can deal with the cap hit, so we'll see how things play out in a few years (:

Jets GM wrote: ↑Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:09 pm To WPG: 1st DET 2025

You can't trade 2025 picks in-game; please change to 2024. Thanks.

SharksGM wrote: ↑Mon Jun 28, 2021 11:57 pm

Jets GM wrote: ↑Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:09 pm To WPG: 1st DET 2025

You can't trade 2025 picks in-game; please change to 2024. Thanks.

I don't like adding work for people who do the bulk of the work here and I'm not personally bothered by the change, but I do find the lack of conversation around it a bit odd. And, frankly, the rationale.

DetroitGM wrote: ↑Tue Jun 29, 2021 12:24 am I don't like adding work for people who do the bulk of the work here and I'm not personally bothered by the change, but I do find the lack of conversation around it a bit odd. And, frankly, the rationale.

What conversation do you want to have?

As far as I know, we've never entered future draft pick trades manually in draftpicks.ehm, because that file has a hideous format that I didn't even manage to parse until a couple of years ago (after people complained about not being able to see draft picks on the site). You can search for a precedent if you like, though good luck finding the right combination of keywords. So my answer to 'should we enter draft pick trades directly in the file' is no. The game interface at least offers the valuable feature of only allowing legal trades (at the relatively minor cost of making trading injured players a pain, and the more serious annoyance of trading expiring contracts in the offseason).

Should we allow trades of distant future picks? The file has entries for draft picks through 2201. It's clearly ridiculous to go more than a few years into the future. The fact that the site shows picks for the next 5 drafts is indicative only of the fact that I chose the number 5 as the maximum for a loop when I got that part of the site working two years ago. Given the above, I think it's perfectly reasonable to set the limit at the fourth next draft.

Should we allow all of the existing agreed-upon trades go through as-is, under the presumption that they were negotiated in good faith? We could, but I clearly don't want to set a precedent for the future, and it's equally clear that most of them work just as well with 2024 picks. The few that don't are indicative that people recognize that the value of a 2022 pick isn't the same as a 2025 pick, or a 2030 pick. So which of these three options do you prefer:

1. Allow all of them as is, and enter the picks manually just this once;
2. Change as many as possible to 2024, and allow only those where no modification is acceptable to both GMs;
3. Allow none of them as is, forcing re-working of a fragile chain of trades that built up over the past few weeks where I frankly felt no motivation to deal with any of this.

Ya, I was not suggesting entering future picks manually and I agree that it's ridiculous to go too far into the future. But I do think there is an argument to be made about the good faith side. I mean, the precedent doesn't matter if you add a limit directly into the rules, making clear that the only picks that can be traded are ones the game allows to be traded (these trades would then be "okay" by the previous rules, not setting a precedent).

There are a variety of things we allow in trades that the game does not. Injured players and expiring contracts, yes, but also conditional picks - those picks are just listed in a forum post, to be entered when it is possible, which is not terribly different from waiting a month or two before moving the 2025 picks. Indeed, Tampa and I made a trade on February 28th that included a signing-based conditional pick, meaning it will not technically be possible to enter it until the same day that 2025 picks can be traded in-game.

SharksGM wrote: ↑Tue Jun 29, 2021 1:29 am 1. Allow all of them as is, and enter the picks manually just this once;
2. Change as many as possible to 2024, and allow only those where no modification is acceptable to both GMs;
3. Allow none of them as is, forcing re-working of a fragile chain of trades that built up over the past few weeks where I frankly felt no motivation to deal with any of this.

I would 100% say option 2 is the best one, while using the conditional picks post to enter 2025 picks in a couple months and adding a line to the trade rules to specify which picks can/cannot be traded.
There are 8 relevant trades and 4 of them can be switched to 2024 picks (if the GMs involved don't like it, they can always wait ~ two months and swap the '24 and '25 picks).


I should add, I'd also like to offer to help more in day-to-day operations and will send you a DM about that.

I'm for option 2 as well.

Though this really should have been brought up after the first trade was posted, to avoid this buildup of a whole bunch of trades needing to be changed well after the fact.

If DET GM is, I am OK to swap the 1st in 2025 with the 1st in 2024

Amended to DET 1st 2024 as agreed.