Condition chains

[TurdFerguson]

Just doing some poking around and I'm starting to see things like this (sorry Ravi - not picking on you here except I am ):

Special: Top 20 1st in 2022 owed from Dal to Cgy now owed from Dal to Cbj

Can we stop doing this type of condition and instead just have:
Top 20 1st in 2022 owed from Dal to Cgy
Top 20 1st in 2022 owed from Cgy to Cbj

In the above scenario it turns out that I owe a 2022 1st to CBJ although I do not have a record of that on my Roster page and that is not a deal I made. Instead I have a 2022 1st to CGY and that is how I will pay that condition. What CGY does with that pick afterwards is there business.

Tracking down condition chains sucks and I'd prefer if we didn't do it.

/rant

[MJK]

You are right and it is something Jiri already covered somewhere. In your example above, Dallas doesn’t owe Columbus anything. They owe Calgary the 1st and then Columbus can do what they like with it.

This has been on ongoing issue and it is time to get it right because with the conditions owed in 2022 right now, if we keep going down the same path it will be a nightmare.

[AustinL_NHL]

Yea, Jiri covered this after my trade with Florida.

Originally we had worded it "Sharks owe the Panthers a 2022 Top 25 1st round pick condition was transferred from Florida to Colorado", but then Jiri had us re-word it so that it was just "Florida owed Colorado a 2022 Top 25 1st", which makes a lot more sense.

Now, even though Florida owed me a top 25 1st and will likely use the pick SJ sends them to cover it, SJ with send Florida the pick they owe, and then Florida can decide to just send me that pick themselves or send me a different pick

[Jiri Hrdina]

I'll be honest that we are seriously considering implementing limits on conditions. It's getting out of hand. The risk to us as a league is GMs leave teams not just asset poor but with significant assets owing. And yes you can say "I'm not going anywhere" but GMs come and go.

But yes there cannot be a third team in a conditions. It is the responsibility of the two teams to work it out.

And furthermore - the league has no desire to intervene on these things. If there are issues we expect the two GMs, who decided to accept the risk of conditions, to work it out.

Please be more careful with dishing things out. At the rate things are going Ravi is going to own all the picks next year and no one is going to be able to get any. Except me.

[Hanna Sniper]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I'll be honest that we are seriously considering implementing limits on conditions. It's getting out of hand. The risk to us as a league is GMs leave teams not just asset poor but with significant assets owing. And yes you can say "I'm not going anywhere" but GMs come and go.

But yes there cannot be a third team in a conditions. It is the responsibility of the two teams to work it out.

And furthermore - the league has no desire to intervene on these things. If there are issues we expect the two GMs, who decided to accept the risk of conditions, to work it out.

Please be more careful with dishing things out. At the rate things are going Ravi is going to own all the picks next year and no one is going to be able to get any. Except me.

If I finish badly and my pick is in the top 20, there will be 27 teams needing to trade for it to fulfill a condition.

The first time a pick will be more valuable than 1st overall

or they will have to make a trade with Ravi to acquire a 1st to give back to him

[savemedrzaius]

I heard if you turn off all your lights and say "Bloody Ravi" three times into the mirror he'll come steal your team's 1st round pick. Is this true?

[I wanna be like Miikka]

Wanting to trade for 2022 firsts, preferably conditional. PM if interested