DAV/SEA: S63 off-season

[ShawnGlade 1,010]

So what's the deal here? I was told multiple times by multiple people that I had the option to trade Charm before he reached free agency, which he did. I have Katie Warren coming up as my GM player in S65. I don't see why this would be an issue and why it would be voided after the fact

[ShawnGlade 1,010]

1 minute ago, Peace said:

 

Well, no you’re right, but being educated is a two way street. Would Glade have been asking as much if he knew before hand that it was technically a one season rental? 

 

Just my thoughts. 

That's not the issue. I was perfectly aware Charm would likely be with Seattle for one season, I just didn't know it'd be forced. I figured Seattle wouldn't keep him for long so I knew he'd be a rental so I asked for a higher price because I knew I could get it

[Peace 1,518]

Then I regress. 

[hedgehog337 3,483]

9 minutes ago, ShawnGlade said:

So what's the deal here? I was told multiple times by multiple people that I had the option to trade Charm before he reached free agency, which he did. I have Katie Warren coming up as my GM player in S65. I don't see why this would be an issue and why it would be voided after the fact

 

Seems like it won't be voided. 

[Victor 10,918]

9 minutes ago, ShawnGlade said:

That's not the issue. I was perfectly aware Charm would likely be with Seattle for one season, I just didn't know it'd be forced. I figured Seattle wouldn't keep him for long so I knew he'd be a rental so I asked for a higher price because I knew I could get it

Not Riga GM but still screwing over Seattle

[Tagger 2,722]

Yeah, to clarify my position this shouldn't be voided. Even if Bana had used the old rulebook, those followed the rules where a GM player like The Charm had to retire to be traded, so would have only been a rental there as well. Wasn't using the current rulebook as an excuse to void it, but I do still feel though that updating the rulebook accordingly to make sure future GM's who maybe weren't here or didn't read the announcement threads at the time have access to the current ruling is in order.

Edited December 15, 2018 by Tagger

[Quik 4,113]

49 minutes ago, Tagger said:

Yeah, to clarify my position this shouldn't be voided. Even if Bana had used the old rulebook, those followed the rules where a GM player like The Charm had to retire to be traded, so would have only been a rental there as well. Wasn't using the current rulebook as an excuse to void it, but I do still feel though that updating the rulebook accordingly to make sure future GM's who maybe weren't here or didn't read the announcement threads at the time have access to the current ruling is in order.

Yeah, updating the rule book is in my to-do list, but like you said, under the old rules this trade wouldn’t be a possibility until pre-season anyways, so ignorance on the new rule is invalid. 

[Devise 4,475]

Yeah to say it's identical to the Ironside situation I think is absolutely a bit off. Not only was no stance in the rulebook for what happens to a previous GM player once a new GM creates a 2nd player to come to the team when I did that, as Quik laid out at the time I had clarified with Commishes before hand to see if Ironside was eligible to be traded and not have to auto retire after being traded. Which to clarify, we all knew that was the rules as Tagger lays out, previously before we had any 2nd player nonsense. But because Dollar had stayed on longer to help out and wound up creating a second player in that situation, I wanted to ask for clarification because him losing such a young player felt unfair. 

 

All of that is in the past though, and Bana was privy and engaged in long talks about GM rules, GM's having 2nd players, and how to handle new hires. While the multiple different hire scenarios aren't defined in the rulebook they are posted in the announcements and all that was relatively recently. Important to note as well the majority of those conversations and rule changes came as a catalyst to the Ironside situation, so that we would avoid this confusion in the future. As such I would find it hard to complain about the stance that this stands, as is, and Charm is a rental who can continue playing just not with DAV or SEA in S65.