Who said that someone is breaking the rules?

I thought it was someone not from the game, making fun of, or trolling the game, but I wasn't able to find anything when I looked.

Would love to hear some thoughts on the Nylander trade.

Want to post the details here for convenience?

You mean post all of the trade?

oh, okay.

Justin Faulk
Elias Lindholm
Jordan Staal ($1M retained)
2017 2nd round pick (PHI)


William Nylander
Joffrey Lupul
2017 4th round pick (TOR)

I think we're picking dates for both drafts (entry and expansion)

Carolina gave up a ton for Nylander. Even if they didn't want Faulk. I think Staal and Lindholm is overpay alone. Taking on Lupul means you should have had to pay less.

Staal has 6 years left at $6M per year, I only retained $1M. Plus I have 2 really good 1st round picks and 2 really good 2nd round picks in this year's draft + free agency to completely fill out my roster.

Yeah. It isn't reflected on Toronto's roster, so it's difficult to judge how it impacts them.

Faulk: Indications are that Zaitsev is their guy, so one of those players becomes 2nd pairing by default. It's a good problem to have, but I personally wouldn't have made Faulk the key return on the trade.
Lindholm: Solid player that can play up and down the lineup and in all three zones. Downgrade from an offense perspective, but a more rounded and versatile player. Good pickup.
Staal: Another solid player with similar benefits. I actually feel his current contract is fine, but I'm also familiar with Plekanec's contract, which is not fine. Could be diminishing returns down the road. My presumption would be that Toronto wants to make some changes up the middle, and Staal allows them the flexibility to move both Kadri and Bozak, if they should choose.
2nd Round Pick (Phi): Considering the magnitude of the trade, I would have insisted on Arizona's or Carolina's pick. Not a sticking point, but Carolina would concede and it helps maximize the return for Toronto.

I'd give Toronto a B+ for their return. Staal and Lindholm immediately help stabilize their lineup, where they have a fair number of offensively tilted rookies that need more NHL experience in playing the other side of the puck. The less-than-ideal acquisitions in my opinion, were Faulk and the 2nd. I explained the pick already. This might be more of a personal opinion, but I would have preferred a high quality defenseman that excels on the defensive side of the game. If I'm going to pick up a top 2 and displace either Rielly or Zaitsev, I'd want that player to be well suited to partner with whoever remains on the top pair. I'd prefer a more defensively responsible partner for a young and aggressive Rielly.

Nylander: I don't think there's any question that Carolina received the best player in the trade. Highest ceiling and potential to be a top point producer for years to come.
Lupul: Not much to say. From a "real life" standpoint, I don't like the idea of Carolina paying someone who isn't playing, as they are a budget team. I would have preferred to see them take back a bad contract attached to a usable player, just so they are getting "something" for their money. That said, it's only a minor negative in a fantasy trade scenario.
4th Round Pick: I think you already won the pick side of the deal by giving up PHI instead of a higher pick.

I'd give Carolina an A-. You lose the '+' for taking on Lupul's contract, and drop to a '-' for retaining salary.

Overall, I'd say the trade is pretty fair for both teams, but I feel both teams could have spent more time on the deal and taken a step back to see a bigger picture.
Carolina in overpaying and wasting money by not getting a usable asset for it, although to be fair, an overpayment was probably going to be unavoidable on such a high profile target.
Toronto could have made sure the key element of the trade addressed their needs better.

All just my personal feelings. Carolina gets the better player, but Toronto becomes a better team.

I think Nylander is overrated. I don't think we can quantify how much of his production is due to Matthews when they play together. He has 60 points playing with an elite offensive talent and Lindholm has 45 playing with guys who are not as solid. Who's to say that Nylander wouldn't go down 10 points from this deal and Lindholm wouldn't go up 10 points? That would mean you traded 2 similar players, which should mean the rest of the deals should be even from both sides as well. However it weighs grossly in favor of Toronto. They traded a negative asset in Lupul along with a poor pick, for a bonafide #2 center, a clear top 4 defender and a better pick. This seems like more of a package for Matthews (maybe add a bit more) or Marner (not even sure he's worth Staal, Faulk and Lindholm, but he's better than Nylander IMO.) Carolina got hosed big time.

This is a poor draft. Not the best draft to try to get impact players from. You'll be lucky to get 2 2nd liners and 2 3rd liners with those picks if you totally crushed it.

That could very well be. I'm not denying Carolina overpaid, but that was more or less expected to happen with a Nylander deal.
We might have a difference of opinion on his potential. He did well in his short stint last season, and there's no Matthews in that sample.
Lindholm has been steadily improving his production on a not-so-good Carolina team, so he may indeed end up a comparable player, but Nylander has a higher ceiling.
You have a point, but I still think Nylander is the best player in the deal.

I can't really say "fleeced" because Carolina went after him pretty aggressively of their own volition.

So have decided to let the owning teams match offers and retain UFA's?

That would be interesting. Would make player rights have an effect at least. If I acquire the rights to Shattenkirk for example, it gives me the option of matching the highest offer to keep him, rather than trading for his rights and simply losing him to the highest bidder. I'd like to see a silent auction somehow, myself. Rather than an open bidding war, everyone put their best offer on the table. The best offer is only shown to the owner of the player, who then has the right to match or let him go.

-----

On a side note, saw a Vegas deal that involved salary retained on the player Vegas picks. I don't think that's possible as simply as it is done.
Vegas would have to pick a separate player, and trade that player back for the player with salary retained, at least. When you pick a player, you are picking him "as is", there's no option for a team to retain salary on the player they are losing.

For all who care to know, Matthews had a 7 game pointless streak from games #63-#69, Nylander started his 12 game point streak on game #63 and went to game #74 in which he had 14 points, while equaling a leauge high 12 game point streak.

So big picture here is this, from games #63-#69 of the Maple Leafs season this is how the players preformed

Matthews 7 games - 0 points
Nylander same 7 games - 7 points

This + last season's showing proves that with or without Matthews, Nylander is still an amazing point producer, and is my favorite of the Leafs big trio of rookies.

+ Look at who I have Nylander on a line with.

Are there any teams open?

What's up with Dallas?

I don't know, but people keep insisting that we let Dallas stay inactive until around draft time, whenever that is.

so i have a question, since we are useing 2017-2018 rosters, the contracts are a year ahead right? for example if a player has one year left, that really means 2 years?

I'm using a 2016-17 roster right now, but I'm switching to a 17-18 when the season ends. I don't know how everyone else is dealing with their contracts.