Trading Waiver Priority/Spots

[playmaker26]

The recent trade has raised some questions.

The rules state that only one player can be picked up per week by a GM. So with that trade, I interpreted it as they were changing waiver priority. Brady is saying he acquired Burnsy's actual pick so that he now owns his own pick and Burnsy's.

I'd like to hear the rest of the league's opinion on this.

[Deleted]

I read the rules carefully, and there was no mention of trading waiver wire picks. So I viewed the WW selection as an "asset", which seemed to be perfectly tradeable.

It would be like trading for the someone's 1st round prospect pick... Do they in turn get yours? I didn't see it that way, it certainly didn't seem implied. Otherwise Seadawgs could never get all the 2012 1st rounders that he has! I've always felt that the WW Pick was an asset to be traded, just like draft picks. 95% of the time no one even uses their WW pick anyway.

I guess I don't see the difference in someone trading their WW pick, or picking a player with that WW selection and then trading him. To me, it's the same thing, except all the pressure is on the person receiving the WW selection to A) Put in their WW request on time and B) Hope they get the player they want.

I know I've received messages asking about both my WW pick and about possibly receiving others (mainly early on when there was a lot of good FAs)... Just nothing had come of it until now.

After a few messages back and forth with Adam, I agreed that fine... If I'm only allowed one pick, I would simply trade my other waiver wire position to someone else down the road. Considering there aren't any rules about it, and both GMs fully understood what they were trading and receiving... I felt that it was a good compromise.

Going forward if it's an issue, I'm 100% for amending the rulebook... But it seemed silly to enforce rules that aren't currently there.

[playmaker26]

You are only allowed to pick up one player per week. That means you can't obtain someone else's pick.

[Deleted]

Does that imply you can't trade for someone else's pick? Or does it imply that with your pick you can't pick up 2 players?

Or... Does it simply imply that you can only pick up 1 player... So if you do trade for someone's pick, since you can only use 1 WW priority, you would either have to then trade 1 of your 2 WW picks or face losing it.

Other than a 2 person argument, where we clearly disagree... I'll just leave it up to the rest of the GMs to decide. I felt like I read through the rules carefully before going about this trade, both GMs fully understood, and after it's complete it seems like someone else may have had a different intereptation of it.

[playmaker26]

Jun 1, 2011 12:12:45 GMT -5 @brady said:

Does that imply you can't trade for someone else's pick? Or does it imply that with your pick you can't pick up 2 players?

Or... Does it simply imply that you can only pick up 1 player... So if you do trade for someone's pick, since you can only use 1 WW priority, you would either have to then trade 1 of your 2 WW picks or face losing it.

Other than a 2 person argument, where we clearly disagree... I'll just leave it up to the rest of the GMs to decide. I felt like I read through the rules carefully before going about this trade, both GMs fully understood, and after it's complete it seems like someone else may have had a different intereptation of it.

You can't trade for their pick because you can't select two players per week. You can trade for their spot if you wanted to move up. So, you don't own Burnsy's pick. You own the spot. Meaning Burnsy's owns your spot.

[drury2396]

Here are the two rules that apply when analyzing this situation:

"Any assets may be traded at anytime during the year."

"A GM may put in an offer sheet for up to 3 players but only 1 player may be claimed per week."


In my opinion, this means a) waiver priority can be traded, and b) only one player can be picked up. That much is crystal clear, assuming one interprets waiver priority as an "asset."

By acquiring Burnsy's priority, I assumed (opinion) that meant that Brady assumed to right to have first pick amongst the free agents, while Burnsy would move into Brady's place in the waiver priority.

For future reference, we might want to make an amendment, or at the very least an understanding amongst the GMs, to clarify this matter.

[playmaker26]

Jun 1, 2011 12:37:16 GMT -5 drury2396 said:

Here are the two rules that apply when analyzing this situation:

"Any assets may be traded at anytime during the year."

"A GM may put in an offer sheet for up to 3 players but only 1 player may be claimed per week."


In my opinion, this means a) waiver priority can be traded, and b) only one player can be picked up. That much is crystal clear, assuming one interprets waiver priority as an "asset."

By acquiring Burnsy's priority, I assumed (opinion) that meant that Brady assumed to right to have first pick amongst the free agents, while Burnsy would move into Brady's place in the waiver priority.

For future reference, we might want to make an amendment, or at the very least an understanding amongst the GMs, to clarify this matter.

This is what I was saying to you all along Trevor. I'm not making up rules or on a power trip like you said. The one rule that is most important is you can only pick up one player per week.

I asked someone in my other league who has been using this rulebook for much longer than I have and he said that in the league, you aren't allowed to trade waiver priority OR your waiver pick.

I have no problem allowing the trading of priority because you are giving yourself a better chance to obtain the player you want. And in this case, you guarantee yourself 1st pick.

Hopefully we can get some others to chime in.

[seadawg]

Jun 1, 2011 12:37:16 GMT -5 drury2396 said:

Here are the two rules that apply when analyzing this situation:

"Any assets may be traded at anytime during the year."

"A GM may put in an offer sheet for up to 3 players but only 1 player may be claimed per week."


In my opinion, this means a) waiver priority can be traded, and b) only one player can be picked up. That much is crystal clear, assuming one interprets waiver priority as an "asset."

By acquiring Burnsy's priority, I assumed (opinion) that meant that Brady assumed to right to have first pick amongst the free agents, while Burnsy would move into Brady's place in the waiver priority.

For future reference, we might want to make an amendment, or at the very least an understanding amongst the GMs, to clarify this matter.

I'm not taking sides here, but I honestly interpret it exactly this way. I thought the deal meant that Brady acquired Burnsy's waiver spot.

It seems perfectly clear to me that the rule is that you are only allowed to make one waiver selection per week.

[walker]

From reading what has been presented in addition to the rules.

I would interpret the situtation that a waiver priority can be traded, as it is an asset. Therefore, I would believe that brady does own burnsy's waiver priority in addition to his waiver priority.

However, saying that, only 1 waiver priority is useful as a GM can only claim 1 player per week. I guess the arguement could be made that the 2nd waiver priority could be traded or lost.

I see that this would only be for the 1st week as once used burnsys waiver priority would be sent to the bottom of the priority list, and then returned to burnsy. So as a result burnsy is unable to sign a free agent the 1st week.

[akkei]

Personally, it never crossed my mind that it could be considered as a tradable asset. A GM cannot trade a waiver priority in the NHL, so if a fantasy league wants to allow such a trade the rules should clearly state so in my view. It is counterintuitive to view this as an asset and I hate to find out about this after the fact (and I hate it even more that I wasn’t the one who thought about making a move to acquire this spot ).

We’re probably in the only period of the year where this priority has a real tradable value. If we are to allow multiple waiver picks by a GM, then this raise other question marks. Let’s say that Trevor decides not to use Ben’s spot, does it means that he forfeits the priority and it returns to Ben? Or does it means that he will continue to keep this spot until he uses it (and hence leaving Ben with no ability to prick up a free agent until Trevor does so)? Although I’m convinced that Trevor’s view is that this is a one-off priority, in my opinion this is getting us too deep in the "implied rules" territory, which is never a good idea.

[playmaker26]

The one rule that is strict is you may only pick up one player per week. That would mean you can't acquire someone's pick. I don't see a problem with allowing the swap of spots. But that means Burnsy's now has Brady's spot in the order.

[seadawg]

Somewhat off topic, but when does the waiver period open?

Also, I believe I have the #2 spot, if anyone wants to swap with me!

[burnsy00]

I have to run but I will comment after work once I have reviewed all the comments.

[cowley]

Sorry to stir the pot but...

In a similar league that I commish we are allowed one pick (FA or Prospect) per month. We trade this pick all the time. I made a trade for player X and Team A's February and March picks for my player Y. The WW priority with the pick goes with it. I have found it is an excellent way of balancing trades or assisting with rebuilds. I understand if our rules are not set up that way but if we are looking to change that, nows the time...

[playmaker26]

Brady and Burnsy have agreed to cancel the trade. But we should get closure on this.

I don't think we should be able to move waiver priority. Like Sebastien said, you can't do that in the NHL.

Let's vote on it on whether waiver priority should be allowed to be traded. Waiver picks are definitely not able to be traded because someone can not make 2 selections in one week.