View Single Post
12-03-2012, 09:39 AM
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 15,287
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by xX Hot Fuss View Post
Here's the write up for the potential new Franchise Player Rule...

Let me know what you all think
Some of those names aren't like the others, no?

M. Reilly is a fine prospect--but hardly a franchise caliber-player in NHL 13 (GM Connected). Shinkaruk would fall into the same category. Columbus could have traded that pick, right? Because of the way the offseason advances, don't they then have to be allowed to trade the prospect?

As to the past list, I don't think a guy like Brendan Morrow really qualifies either. He's frequently the subject of real-life trade rumors.

I was and remain a bit skeptical of the "franchise" player thing in Sitwell, so I'm probably not the most neutral observer here. I'm also new, and I'm more than happy to go along with whatever is decided.

But it seems to me that, if we are going to use something like this, there needs to be a much narrower definition of "franchise" player that takes into account age as well as contract status. Datsyuk will be 36 next season, no? Obviously Detroit is one of the better players in this league, but if, for example, he was forced to drop out, and a lesser player (such as myself ) took over and fell out of the playoff hunt, is it really that much of a stretch to suggest that an aging superstar could be dealt to jump-start the rebuild?

It seems to me that to qualify as a "franchise" player, they should have to actually be elite players in their prime--not superstars on the decline, or superstar prospects on the rise.

Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 12-03-2012 at 09:48 AM.
Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote