but the trade could be deleted.

It is very simple to follow the rules. I am more concerned about trades that individuals don't see as jokes, and take seriously, something that is vividly one-sided and they think they one the trade.

An example trade that would get one star is this

PL Dubious
Cam Atkinson
2020 1st


Matt Duchene

So we like the idea of being able to sign 1 or 2 upcoming UFAs but the rest have to go to FA? If that's the case then I will drop any suggestion of "Home team advantage" because they already got their advantage.

Here's what I have gathered:

Teams that hold rights to players that haven't been part of a trade are eligible to be offered a contract extension, with certain parameters to be established (TBD). Each team will have the opportunity to sign 1 or 2 upcoming FAs, based on the maximum amount of AAV allowed, for example, I'll say 10M in AAV can be allowed between 2 upcoming FAs.

BOE can remove a current GM, so long as there is a replacement, if the BOE deems that the current GM is making trades that are detrimental to the integrity of v2. Example of a lop-sided trade would be the following:

Matt Duchene


Sean Couturier
Philippe Myers
German Rubstov

An example of analysis as to why the GM of the Flyers would get 1 star is because they traded two high end prospects and a defensive forward that can score 5v5 for Duchene, who can produce, but is nothing more than a 2c.

*bolded is my own addition to the suggestion

I think traded players should still be part of it because when they are traded they will be worth their true value.

I agree with your idea jabroni about signing to FA's prior to free agency as long as they meet the set bounds. But I also agree with Dangles, in the sense that traded players should still count, as an owner of Carey Price I've noticed that his trade value is way lower than it should be, only because he's a soon to be FA.

I'm fine if thats what everyone wants. Thats the point of the plan. Not to just have my thoughts and opinions be used and then if you disagree with me you get demonized by me, the point is that we can collectively determine what is best for the future of the game.

What if we limited it to you can only retain the ability to offer a contract extension to players that haven't been traded more than two times? In other words, Carey Price can be traded twice in order for the team that has him to retain ability to offer contract extension.

Yea, that looks good to me.

Haven't looked at it all yet, just caught these posts.

Ordinarily:
A pending UFA will either sign an extension with his team or be traded at the deadline.
He may then sign an extension with the team that acquired him.
If he still hasn't signed, his negotiating rights may be traded prior to free agency, where he may agree to sign with that team.

That's one trade deadline deal so his team isn't "losing him for nothing" and one trade of his rights prior to free agency, so two trades works from that perspective and is realistic.

ok then, this makes sense ... i still have a few suggestions:
1) They might get a chance to be the GM of another team after if a spot is available.
2) This is not in v1
3) they have to be multiple trades and really bad trades like a 'this is horrible' trade more than a 'not great' trade.
4) You can't fire GMs for not making trades.
Who likes these ideas? Once again, just ideas.

RAIF some of the trades you made should of got you fired a long time ago. Since you don't have a boss to keep you in line, you just go on your marry way trading entire teams to just draft Nolan Patrick.... Making bad trades isn't against the rules. Having a bad GM repeat many bad trades and such should be though.

First off, I think if you start over-analyzing, you start putting personal preference into your beliefs, Jab. The trade mentioned above may not be technically a fair value trade based on IRL rumours and such but Im not about to loose my s**t over it either.

WW trading Matthews for virtually anything other than McDavid does make me want to though. RAIF trading everything he owned for the 1st overall pick does. Zach trading Erik Karlsson for Barrie definitely does. These were clear cut, no bias needed trades that made no sense. If you can eliminate these, we'd be on a closer path to reality and have a couple less trades.

Secondly, there seems to be a lack of "vision" for some GM's. Trading for X player that is really good, for two Y players. Then 2 days later trading that X player for a Y player, Z player and a pick.... By the way Im guilty of this too. My only defense is that my team has clearly shown that I am gearing for a rebuild so I'm trading true and tested talent for Picks and prospects. Ex: I have Malkin. I want four 1sts for him but no one GM wants to pay up. So I trade Malkin and then whatever else I get from his returns until hopefully it amounts to four 1st round picks at the end of it. That's my logic. The problem where trades start to feel pointless is when some GM's do all the above and then trade those four 1sts that they worked so hard for, for a Malkin-lite and a prospect........ I see this with PLNHL all the time. He trades and trades until finally he gets a good player. Then goes out and trades that good players for virtually the same return he gave to get that player. Sometimes, arguably less than that........

Lastly, this is why I bring it up, making a lot of trades is not the problem. If its organic and fair minded trades, there is nothing wrong with that. Its the over the top, Its the undersell, Its the negative value not being taking into consideration, trades that are the problem. The problem isn't the structure of the GM game. Its the GM's that are the problem. Have any of you checked the Armchair Gm threads? 98% of them are pure and unadulterated garbage. What did you expect if they had the reigns to a team?

Like I've said, i don't have an answer to fix it. Just bringing up what I see as the true culprit.

I feel that most teams don't understand what they do when they make multiple trades. Here's an example from Math.

Carlo/Miller/2018 5th round pick (CGY)/2018 7th round pick (CGY) for Shea Weber

Matt Barzal/Shea Weber 2019 1st round pick(BOS)/2019 2nd round pick (BOS)/2019 3rd round pick (BOS)/2019 4th round pick (BOS)/2019 4th round pick (NYR)/2019 4th round pick (DET)/2019 6th round pick (BOS)/2019 7th round pick (BOS) for Drew Doughty.

This is essentially what he traded for Drew Doughty (random teams)

Drew Doughty


Carlo, B.
Miller, K.
Barzal, M.
Weber, S.
2018 5th round pick (CGY)
2018 7th round pick (CGY)
2019 1st round pick (BOS)
2019 2nd round pick (BOS)
2019 3rd round pick (BOS)
2019 4th round pick (BOS)
2019 4th round pick (NYR)
2019 4th round pick (DET)
2019 6th round pick (BOS)
2019 7th round pick (BOS)

When we can choose team

that would be done at a later time, probably after we solidify the plan.

Absolutely. No GM in their right mind should of accepted my portion of that Doughty offer. So you see once again, eliminating the amount trades wouldn't stop it though. Bad trades will still happen regardless if their are 100 or 2. Eliminating bad trades of the ilk shown above is what the real problem is. Not quantity of trades.

I think we can suppress bad trades by removing GMs if the BOE feels that they are detrimental to the league

There have been many trades in V1 that would have got a GM fired immediately so I think this is a good idea.

Any time a GM is removed from their active post, they are removed from seniority, unless they are voluntarily stepping down from their GM post to become an AGM. Max, you voluntarily left the game completely, thus resulting in you loosing seniority.

If someone like BreKel or NobodyCares were to come back, they wouldn't get their place back in line since they removed from their active post.

Thanks for the clarification. Even though I dont remember ever actively leaving the game completely I wont fight you on it because I'd only want the Oilers and if somebody took it before me I'd end up becoming their AGM instead of taking another team.

bump - need to get some more conversation going, if not, we would need to finalize the plan.

changes made - ability to offer contract extensions to more than (2) players per season (AAV max TBH) ; in order to retain rights to match, a player cannot be traded more than (2) times during the expiring year of the contract *see above posts for example* ; BOE can remove a GM from their post if they make trades that the BOE deems detrimental to the integrity of v2.

bump, just making sure people see these suggestions because v2 starts in only a month.

RAIF, September 15th is the tentative start date.

I'm not entirely sure what your suggestions are, mainly because they seem like incoherent thoughts. Can you please re-phrase them

lmao....


when are we having a draft (team) date?