View Single Post
12-02-2012, 05:47 PM
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 15,719
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by noexult View Post
I was against that trade though...a few others were too.
But the Commissioner accepted it, right?

There seems to be a basic contradiction here. On the one hand, people are required to over-pay to get "franchise" players--which apparently Kane has been designated as for the purpose of this league. On the other hand, people are critical of teams that then give up overpayment required to get those players.

To me a deal should only be reversed if it becomes apparently that 1) it was made in bad-faith, 2) it was lob-sided, and 2) it leaves one team so poor that it becomes difficult to find a replacement.

Obviously there was an overpayment here. I don't think anyone disputes that. On the other hand, in real life, the Jets would pretty easily pass on the package, so we shouldn't blow the overpayment out of the proportion here.

I see no evidence that it was in bad-faith. CBJ simply decided he didn't want to / couldn't commit to it--which is absurd, of course, but I don't think he did the trade knowing he was going to leave. I also don't think it renders CBJ unusable. They are worse off, no doubt, but they have a very good young player.

The thrust of the trade limit rationale, as I read it, is to keep things somewhat realistic. New GMs have to deal with their predecessors decisions. We hope that this league will run for multiple seasons, right? There's going to be turnover, and those new GMe will have to live with the rosters they inherit. Obviously this is only about 1/3 of the way through the first season, but doesn't the same logic apply?

Jack de la Hoya is offline