The only thing is if he changes both picks then every pick after should have the right to change picks because what if any one of us would've picked the guy he abandoned? And then in turn if one of us does want him would give up a player that the users after that should have a right to that player and so on. It's too big of a mess.

Deliberating on NC situation, may need a vote.

In meantime, league 52102

80-81 maurice cheeks  and  13-14 andre iguodala        i would vote for nc 

Posted by jkaye24 on 12/24/2015 12:30:00 PM (view original):
Deliberating on NC situation, may need a vote.

In meantime, league 52102

I think it's an issue of encouraging or discouraging the proxy system. Not to push blame, but it isn't NC's fault that his proxy was posted after a player was just drafted.

06-07 Donyell Marshall
79-80 Bill Walton

I vote for NC BUT ONLY if he doesn't try to pick someone who has already been drafted

proxy system encouragement takes precedence, me thinks... so, vote in-favor of NC

I vote against because I think everyone should have a right to his pick then if he switches.

Posted by jhsukow on 12/24/2015 1:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jkaye24 on 12/24/2015 12:30:00 PM (view original):
Deliberating on NC situation, may need a vote.

In meantime, league 52102

I think it's an issue of encouraging or discouraging the proxy system. Not to push blame, but it isn't NC's fault that his proxy was posted after a player was just drafted.

agree - vote in support of the proxy system and therefore nc

so this is really interesting. I pick now for team 1. Whether or not NC's two re picks are counted will affect the picks I make here. If both are, i have to pick different people than I would if they aren't.

the point of a proxy is that it accounts for picks not just in the event that the owner isn't there, but also in the event that certain players are taken. You list multiple choices, just in case some of them are taken, but you can't adapt to the changing draft because you're not there. When I see certain players taken, I realize that a certain player I expect not to be drafted, or to be drafted much later, might actually be drafted sooner. In that case, I pick a player a little early. By not listing other alternative choices, NC didn't afford himself the ability to do that.

Usually I list alternates for pick 1 and pick 2, so I don't get two players that are meant for the same purpose, instead of two players that fit in terms of defense, eFG%, Usg%, etc.

It is the responsibility of the owner to draft, and to set a deliberate proxy. I say that if those were the only two players on the proxy, it's NC's responsibility to list more players. You can't just assume that 07-08 Kidd will be there. If you don't set a deliberate proxy, we can't be expected to read your mind.

People will post their picks (including me, now) based on the picks that you have posted for you. If you had picked Anthony and Barry as alternates in your original proxy, we would've prepared for that. People might've picked Brent Barry if they knew they had to, in order to respect the clone rule. I think that rewriting history is an unfair way of dealing with this, and I vote for scrubbing one of the repicked players, and abiding by the other player picked in proxy.

If we actually do support the proxy system, then we'll all respect the players he picked in his proxy, including him.

There's also the possibility that alternates were sent, that my 07-08 Kidd pick wasn't seen, and that the proxy poster didn't post an alternate because mine wasn't seen. I can't confirm that without seeing the proxy.

Another solution could be to take an alternates from the original proxy, if any were sent.

Actually, now that I think about it, I have to take these players. Their clones have already been drafted.

So:
08-09 Manu Ginobili
84-85 Bill Walton

I agree bds, between the clone rule, the fact a player was picked and multiple owners proceeded to make picks knowing that player was off the board then randomly AFTER other owners picks that player was put back in the pool, and that it is truly an owner error by giving a limited proxy, there would be no logical reason to allow it.

By all means this is NOT an indictment on the proxy system, if anything it is a clarification on its value and the need to offer a complete proxy (ie enough picks because ANYONE can be picked before you and you must know that).

I am not interested in Wright, but I feel it is completely against the value of the draft system to allow "repicks." There are time limits for a reason. If he wanted to just wait to make a pick he could've not done the proxy but he CHOSE to proxy. By allowing him to repick both after his pick I feel like is more an indictment on the timed picks, because what if I realize I want a different player in round 5, can I pick wait multiple picks, then go back and decide I want a different player? No, I have to wait for the next round and see what is left. 

Maybe an official vote is needed.

Do we want to punish NC for being considerate of our time or do we want to punish him for Roadhouse's mistake?

Yah it needs to be put to an official vote

I will say this, I don't think it is nc's fault. But the thing about sending proxies is you are handing your drafts fate to another and when you do that there is always the risk they mess something up.

I say let the draft continue and if no1 picks the players he wants then he can take them instead. Technically IRL just because you draft someone does not mean they are on your active roster

Very slanted way to put it jhsu lol. How is it Roadhouse fault for posting exactly what NC wanted him too? Is it roadhouse job to make sure NC was correct in what he sent? Yes and no. Even if Roadhouse had caught the mistake, which was pointed out almost immediately mind you, wouldn't he have still most likely posted Dorell? If yes, then were at the same point more or less, if no then he would've been going against what NC sent him and delaying the draft as he was up next in order to just wait on NC.