I'm done.
It's been over 12 years since I joined ProFSL.
It's been fun.

 

Teton

I disagree. This is not fair solution.
The owner of a RFA should not have to wait for the additional RFA picks to be resolved.
What's important is that the RFA bidder had 4 leading bids and 4 draft picks when the RFA was won. As the RFA owner I was due compensation and as our rules state, intiled to make a selection from the available draft picks. The use and inclusion of the first round picks were approved my you the commissioner. Waiting for the rest of the RFA draft to resolve the issue is absurd.
The proper resolution would have been to have the RFA bidder change his bid to make two of his bids orthodox 1st round compensation picks, this would not have been costly as the bid for my RFA (Brunson) and his leading bid for Bridger are 13 mil. It would have eliminated the entire issue.

Based on the attached ruling. I will take as compensation (Panda) Dallas 2022 1st round pick # 7.

Teton / Utah

Quote from: Panda on July 06, 2022, 10:35:59 PM
I did have an inquiry:
Can I surrender a 1st round pick instead of 2nd round pick.
Eg. RFA bidding 3 players who would need a 2nd pick compensation and all decline to match so oje team gets a 1st instead?
I know it?s risky since my pick is so high but in general it seems like all owners will just match all these RFA bids especially compared to real life contracts!

Good question, I guess in theory should you (or anyone) want to put a 1st instead of a 2nd on the table as compensation I don't have an issue.

Not sure there will be many cases like your example, but if we stick with it then the 1st team to decline would have option of 1st. However, if team has same or less winning bids as 2nd rounders available for compensation, then 1st would not need to come into play.

Strong #2

FIVE