ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Dynasty NHL: Transactions => Dynasty NHL => NHL Leagues => Dynasty NHL: Invalid Transactions => Topic started by: GypsieDeathBringer on December 23, 2014, 10:02:08 AM
-
Hurricanes:
G Martin Brodeur, $0.2m (2015-2016)
2nd round pick via Chicago
2nd round pick via Carolina
FOR
Avs:
G Marc-Andre Fleury, $5m (2014-2015)
4.8 million in contract difference
Colorado retains contract renegotiation rights at end of the year for Fleury.
I do this to punch up my team for some win this year attitude. The Ducks are some kind of super team and maybe this gets me the necessary points to beat them.
-
Avs just arent competitive this year. This gives me pieces to improve with next season without really giving up anything.
hurricanes improve in their bid to win the cup. win win.
-
Im curious to see what people think but at first glance this is bad bad bad for snug. 2 picks and back up old man goalie for a sick bon-a-fied starter on a pretty decent Penguins team lol....somebody tell me what Im missing lol
-
Gills you're missing the fact that Snug gets him back at seasons end lol
-
Im curious to see what people think but at first glance this is bad bad bad for snug. 2 picks and back up old man goalie for a sick bon-a-fied starter on a pretty decent Penguins team lol....somebody tell me what Im missing lol
Colorado gets Fleury back next year. I'm inclined to approve since I think it's fair overall and I trust both owners with a deal like this. I just don't really like the contingency part of it. It feels like a can of worms kinda thing. I'll hear everyone else out on it.
-
Well smack my ass and call me stupid as I totally missed that, lol didn't even know we could do that....welllllllllll the bubble boy here changes his mind completely lol...I approve
-
Colorado gets Fleury back next year. I'm inclined to approve since I think it's fair overall and I trust both owners with a deal like this. I just don't really like the contingency part of it. It feels like a can of worms kinda thing. I'll hear everyone else out on it.
Agree we may need a rule on it in the league so it doesn't get used in the wrong ways. Some way to regulate it
-
I viewed it like Vanek being traded around last year in the NHL, except we are being very transparent with what we were doing. Vanek was on an expiring contract and many people thought he would just sign back with the Islanders in the off season making his trade to Montreal strictly a 2 month deal and a way for the Islanders to recoup some lost draft picks. He of course didn't sign with them because Garth Snow is a moron. It is much more simply in our league since whoever has the contract rights can just chose to sign or not sign the player.
-
I viewed it similar.
May want to stipulate that this can only be done for players on a final year of their contract. Or I have suggested before capping the amount of cap space someone can get over and above our set cap ( ie. 10% overage)
-
I viewed it similar.
May want to stipulate that this can only be done for players on a final year of their contract. Or I have suggested before capping the amount of cap space someone can get over and above our set cap ( ie. 10% overage)
I agree, and I think it's a fair deal. Snug is capitalizing on his circumstance. He is getting assets in return for a rental that will make him a better team going fwd.
-
I viewed it like Vanek being traded around last year in the NHL, except we are being very transparent with what we were doing. Vanek was on an expiring contract and many people thought he would just sign back with the Islanders in the off season making his trade to Montreal strictly a 2 month deal and a way for the Islanders to recoup some lost draft picks. He of course didn't sign with them because Garth Snow is a moron. It is much more simply in our league since whoever has the contract rights can just chose to sign or not sign the player.
I dont see it that way at all. Vanek could have signed with anyone. In the league the team that owns the plate can sign them as long as the team is willing to pay.
The more I thought about this, the more I hate it. I dont want every team thats out of the arc doing this. Makes no sense. So a losing team can rent me all of their players, and pay the contracts do the year? I dont like the precedent tho is going to set.
:veto:
-
I dont see it that way at all. Vanek could have signed with anyone. In the league the team that owns the plate can sign them as long as the team is willing to pay.
The more I thought about this, the more I hate it. I dont want every team thats out of the arc doing this. Makes no sense. So a losing team can rent me all of their players, and pay the contracts do the year? I dont like the precedent tho is going to set.
:veto:
I think this is an easier way for any team to "tank" for half a year, get a better supp draft pick position, and still get the good player back in the end of it. And to boot get more draft picks!
Look at it like this...
Avs give up Fleury who's great, so they're losing lots of fanpts and making the team worse short term and therefore will fall in the standings which nets a higher supp draft position
Get Fleury back "for free" in the off-season
Gain more supp draft picks
Seriously, what is Colorado losing in this trade....?
Oh and they get Brodeur who I'm sure someone will pay another draft pick to obtain his services.
I really don't care either way but all I see happening is other bottom teams doing the same thing and the playoffs will be a bunch of loaded rosters while non-playoff teams will just be tanking like crazy.
-
I think this is an easier way for any team to "tank" for half a year, get a better supp draft pick position, and still get the good player back in the end of it. And to boot get more draft picks!
Look at it like this...
Avs give up Fleury who's great, so they're losing lots of fanpts and making the team worse short term and therefore will fall in the standings which nets a higher supp draft position
Get Fleury back "for free" in the off-season
Gain more supp draft picks
Seriously, what is Colorado losing in this trade....?
Oh and they get Brodeur who I'm sure someone will pay another draft pick to obtain his services.
I really don't care either way but all I see happening is other bottom teams doing the same thing and the playoffs will be a bunch of loaded rosters while non-playoff teams will just be tanking like crazy.
You are definitely on to me, this is pretty much exactly what I am doing.
We dont really have rental players in this league since all players can be re-signed for their indefinite career, we dont even have to worry about them retiring since we are off the hook for their contract.
I saw this as a creative way to squeeze some of the top teams into giving up assets towards their cup run. Top teams dont have to give up the farm (like I did last year and will never do again,,,ever,,,) to get a couple players towards their cup run. Bottom teams get pieces towards rebuilding their teams without having to dismantle (firesale) their entire team.
As for the tanking, i could easily do that with fleury on my team or off it. Its easy enough to play Nabokov/Rannta over fleury. Or Crosby/Malkin can stay on the bench while Lance Bouma and Riley Nash take the start Or leave some top scoring players in my minors just because I can.
-
Snug, I understand what you at trying to do. But my point, and i believe Callys as well, is what's to stop a losing team from renting out all of their players to winning teams? Then there are maybe 3 or 4 super teams that have given up their picks to rent a couple of guys. Its just not fair imo.
The top teams should win with the guys they have compiled and not guys they are renting for 2 2nd Round draft picks.
-
I'm not on the TC but my opinion is I don't think trades like this are good for the league. Nothing against snug at all as its a good move by him but I just think we are opening a can of worms. There are "rental" players in the real NHL but the deals don't work like this one is constructed. I don't think loaning a player to another team is good for the league. Just my two cents. :thumbsup:
-
I personally don't like this at all. I think the team that has a player should have his resign rights. To me it's not something that should be allowed to be traded.
If we want to make a specific rule allowing it then fine but it's not something that I would vote for. Not everything can be stipulated in the rules so I don't think that anything should be allowed that isn't specifically stated. Kudos to the creativity though.
I would veto if the resign rights thing was not allowed. If people want this as an option then I guess it's fair enough but we need to come to a consensus on if this is something we want.
-
Snug, I understand what you at trying to do. But my point, and i believe Callys as well, is what's to stop a losing team from renting out all of their players to winning teams? Then there are maybe 3 or 4 super teams that have given up their picks to rent a couple of guys. Its just not fair imo.
The top teams should win with the guys they have compiled and not guys they are renting for 2 2nd Round draft picks.
Well said
-
I agree. I think it also opens up other cans of worms that nobody has mentioned. How about I trade you for your 1st round supplemental pick BUT if Connor McDavid is not available you have to send me your 2016 and 2017 picks?
I don't want to deal with weirdo contingency trades like that in the future. I'd rather just have a hard line black and white approach to this. Gray areas make my OCD brain hurt...
I'll honor the trade if the TC approves. But I personally will have to :veto:.
Sorry guys I do think the trade is fair and makes a lot of sense for each of you.
-
I will officially :veto: also.
Sorry but it's just something that I am confortable with. As I said before though I do applaud your creativity.
-
fair enough, I know when I am licked. ha ha.
Now , if you will leave me be, Me and Sean Avery have another business we are working on..
-
:(