Proposed rule change/discuson #2

[Jonathan]

Again thank you JoJo, I think open discussion is good.

Let me give this example for people who see talking as a word ryming with itching.

The have 30 players on the active roster. Under the current setup couldn't trade a Stamkos in a 5 player deal for just him and get back 4 players that can upgrade other positions essentially cashing in a superstar for multiple gap fillers.

Why? Because they are GM enough to have a full roster and maximize point potential. Does that make sense?

There are multiple players on every team that have some color flag on the active roster, a 4 for 1 would allow replacing 3 of them with serviceable players.

Add to that fact that teams are allowed to exceed 30 for a FA signing, and it just makes sense to vote on updating what seems like an archaic rule to begin with.

What's the big deal, are people discouraged from even discussing rule improvements except the ones posed by mods?

Quoting your dad to prove a point. That is pretty deep.

[Daddy]

Quoting your dad to prove a point. That is pretty deep.

Thanking JoJo and Halo for chiming in, along with PR for having mature dialect. You should try it. Having something to add to discussion is how progress is made or at the very least all sides are understood.

You just seem to want to badger, but some people are weighing in with actual opinion, which was the purpose.

Kinda tired of immature BS.

[izaman3]

Again thank you JoJo, I think open discussion is good.

Let me give this example for people who see talking as a word ryming with itching.

The have 30 players on the active roster. Under the current setup couldn't trade a Stamkos in a 5 player deal for just him and get back 4 players that can upgrade other positions essentially cashing in a superstar for multiple gap fillers.

Why? Because they are GM enough to have a full roster and maximize point potential. Does that make sense?

There are multiple players on every team that have some color flag on the active roster, a 4 for 1 would allow replacing 3 of them with serviceable players.

Add to that fact that teams are allowed to exceed 30 for a FA signing, and it just makes sense to vote on updating what seems like an archaic rule to begin with.

What's the big deal, are people discouraged from even discussing rule improvements except the ones posed by mods?

I always want there to be open discussion in the league and think all rule changes should be a discussion, if not also a vote.

I wouldn't mind there being consistency in this rule, but I would argue 24 hours makes since for FA because you don't know for certain if you'll win a FA until the second you win.

If you're talking trade, you know when you reach an agreement before anything is posted. If you're talking a 5 for 1 trade, you should either be in other trade talks to gain roster space before you post or you can pay buyouts literally 1 second before posting the trade and it's fine.

[Daddy]

I always want there to be open discussion in the league and think all rule changes should be a discussion, if not also a vote.

I wouldn't mind there being consistency in this rule, but I would argue 24 hours makes since for FA because you don't know for certain if you'll win a FA until the second you win.

If you're talking trade, you know when you reach an agreement before anything is posted. If you're talking a 5 for 1 trade, you should either be in other trade talks to gain roster space before you post or you can pay buyouts literally 1 second before posting the trade and it's fine.

All very good points 

Having said that, when a trade is posted it doesn't mean it's an auto approve, also drops are not always processed the same time as trades because of the 48 hour minimum it takes trades to be fully updated. Voting & Processing of trades have taken a full week give or take to go through.

Your points are no less valid. Still the 24 hour window doesn't seem to hurt.

[TheBeef]

I understand why there was that exchange between Daddy and PPG.

This series of suggested rule changes is pushing an exercise in pushing buttons.

The way I see it, there are 30 players on a team's roster in Franchise NHL.
The NHL only allows 23.
7 extra players to work with sounds reasonable.

[Daddy]

I understand why there was that exchange between Daddy and PPG.

This series of suggested rule changes is pushing an exercise in pushing buttons.

The way I see it, there are 30 players on a team's roster in Franchise NHL.
The NHL only allows 23.
7 extra players to work with sounds reasonable.

Appreciate the feedback.

I never meant to step on toes. That's not what it used to be like. To me leagues evolve in this manner.