Trade protest by McDiarmid of Hedman/Pionk+Boqvist+ $5

Just to get this posted up ...

John McDiarmid <mcdiarmid5590@gmail.com>
Tue 08/10/2019 02:06
As I was trying to contact Gord since Thursday - and he was swamped at work, I am now protesting the trade between the VB's and the Posse.

Specifically Hedman for Pionk, Boquist and $5.00.

According to the league contract values:

Boquist - 2nd round pick no NHL = $0.50.
Pionk - undrafted and less than 2 full seasons = $0.50
Cash = $5.00
Total trade value acquired = $6.00


Hedman last 3 seasons = 54/70, 63/77 and 72/79 or an average of 68.6 points per full NHL season.  AHL value = $10 for 70 points so $9.75 as he is slightly below this threshold.'

Also, Hedman was resigned for $8.25 this year and would have gone for that much in the draft (at least - better schedule than Karlsson who went for $8.00).

The trade is outside of the $2.00 limit so I am protesting this formally (I would have done it on the weekend if Gord and I had been able to talk further).

The trade was upheld by a vote of 3 - 0.

For your understanding of the process:
Once we get a protest we rate the trade independently and swap emails giving us a vote. If there is disagreement or we vote to overturn we ask the trading managers to justify the trade in writing (in case we overlooked some factor). We then discuss it via email or bu phone and tell the managers involved.

In this case it never went beyond the initial vote since we all agreed to let it stand. The general consensus was that it passes marginally.

For future reference don’t pro rate a players stats unless they some significant and unusual reason for not playing a full season. Most players never play 82 games a season and pro rating them to 82 gives them stats that they never achieved historically.
Sent from my iPad

John, just to jump in here. I said from the get go the whole danger of trying to use a formula as a "guideline" has some major issues problems, especially with rookies and players in the early part of their career. You can't just assign "no value" to players in their first couple of years in the league, just because we have only data from junior, AHL etc. You have to allow managers some leeway in valuing young players over and above the blanket "nothing" you seem to. I would be perfectly happy for instance to give Al $5 for Kiprisov (which I did offer by the way), because of the potential and opportunity of a number one guy on a sure to be rebuilding Minnesota team. He turned it down by the way. To me i'd be willing to risk it especially after having Tarasenko who fueled my $50 teams for a full 6 years and made them competitive .

I personally think Pionk, after looking at his stats for Jr, has now the opportunity, on a good Winnipeg team, to at least be a 35-40 point defenseman ... which there are not that many of around. He is signed for three years at a price I would be super happy with on my team as I would certainly look at him, at the very least as a 35 point kinda guy with upside ... which I value around $2. To me I look at him as 1.25, 1 and 75 cents extra value ($3 total) at that "perceived" value for me. The fact that your perceived value of him is less is neither here nor there to me. You have to allow managers some leeway in their valuation of those type of players.

I can't accept your assumption that every player in their first year in the NHL is valued at that stat level until proven otherwise. Otherwise Stamkos would have been a 55 point guy in a trade by the manager that owned him in the first year ... Svechnikov, who I am trying to acquire, would have to be valued at 40 points in a trade ... that's ridiculous and unfair to the manager who may consider trading them. I could go on and on with that type of example as there are dozens and dozens over the years.

Obviously if its something completely wacked out I would expect people to protest ... but you can't just make your valuation and say that mine, or another manager or governor's, is completely invalid when they make a decision. I pride myself as being one of the fairer more unbiased people in the pool in terms of trades and if really thought that it was that far out of balance ... I would have voted the other way.

Gordon