View Single Post
11-27-2012, 08:12 PM
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 15,717
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Firefoxx View Post
I think it's relatively even on value tbh. But for a franchise player it shouldn't be just equal value, it should be equal + something significant since the team wouldn't be trading them just to trade them. They would need that extra incentive to make the move. It's sort of like why would Winnipeg trade Kane for fair value when their are plenty happy with him? They would need a deal that blows them away. At least thats how I look at it and how I think they intended for it to be in the rules.
But if Johnson is the "Franchise" player for CBJ, and Kane is the "franchise" player for Winnipeg, don't they cancel out?

I say we drop the whole designation as unworkable.

Sensi has a veto right. If he vetos a trade, the GM(s) have a right to appeal to the rest of the league.

Isn't that enough?

Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote