It's a tactic to see who is paying attention and who isn't. It also prevents outside users from voting.
It's just to supress any manipulation or accidental voting. Teams are forced to read through what they are voting for, which ideally makes them think more about what they are voting for rather than selecting a button.
It's a tactic to see who is paying attention and who isn't. It also prevents outside users from voting.
It's just to supress any manipulation or accidental voting. Teams are forced to read through what they are voting for, which ideally makes them think more about what they are voting for rather than selecting a button.
Hi I was told to claim my team as I'm next in line for Toronto
It will be a challenge. You need to copy the current toronto team. Let us know when you have that done. We will notify the mods to put your team in place
It will be a challenge. You need to copy the current toronto team. Let us know when you have that done. We will notify the mods to put your team in place
Also there is a trade not on the roster you will need to complete...
Gardiner for Maata,Husso and 2018 0tt 6th
It will be a challenge. You need to copy the current toronto team. Let us know when you have that done. We will notify the mods to put your team in place
Also there is a trade not on the roster you will need to complete...
Gardiner for Maata,Husso and 2018 0tt 6th
Ok I'll try to asap but I'm traveling every day for a 10 hours so I won't be that active till around September 4th
Is there any way we can re-open the discussion about being able to trade FA we signed? It seems to be severely restricting some teams from making deals.
Is there any way we can re-open the discussion about being able to trade FA we signed? It seems to be severely restricting some teams from making deals.
Possibly. If you think of it from the FAs POV, no FA would sign with you the next offseason (or the likelyhood of them signing would decay dramatically) if they decide to join your organization but then a month later they are traded to a team they didn't even consider. That is something that would need to be taken into account.
The only topic previously on discussion was that of FAs GMs owned prior to FA could be "signed and traded". For the reasons above, the then BOG never considered trading FAs that you just signed.
Do you have any teams in particular that it is severely restricting?
Not really. I have ample bottom-six forwards that I have not moved and other depth defensemen. I signed 6 FAs. I am not in any way considering myself restricted.
If I was considering myself restricted, I would have spoken up about it.
Not really. I have ample bottom-six forwards that I have not moved and other depth defensemen. I signed 6 FAs. I am not in any way considering myself restricted.
If I was considering myself restricted, I would have spoken up about it.
We have had multiple trade talks that stall because all you have is bottom 6 forwards.
Not really. I have ample bottom-six forwards that I have not moved and other depth defensemen. I signed 6 FAs. I am not in any way considering myself restricted.
If I was considering myself restricted, I would have spoken up about it.
We have had multiple trade talks that stall because all you have is bottom 6 forwards.
Let's assume I didn't sign any FAs. The outcome of the trade talks would be the same. All I have are low-tier players. The trade talks stalled because I lost interest in your players (Boychuk)
I signed FAs with the intent on keeping them, not flipping them right after I signed them.
Raif is stuck not being able to do anything with guys like Vanek and Bonino.
Well thats why you dont sign players to huge contracts if you knew they werent allowed to be traded.
Man changing this rule now is a big no no. We need consequences to our actions in terms of the cap and etc and that was it. ..... Plus there are plenty of trades to be made, just got to get creative.
Well thats why you dont sign players to huge contracts if you knew they werent allowed to be traded.
Come on, it's raif...
To suggest that there should be a rule change because someone you deem not competent enough to understand Free Agency is cruel and asinine.
If you cared about making those GMs that you think are not up to your standard of intelligence, you wouldn't have the ulterior motive to benefit yourself with being abele trade with them. GMs who made ill-advised Free Agency signings will have to deal with those repercussions in salary cap hell.
To suggest that there should be a rule change because someone you deem not competent enough to understand Free Agency is cruel and asinine.
If you cared about making those GMs that you think are not up to your standard of intelligence, you wouldn't have the ulterior motive to benefit yourself with being abele trade with them. GMs who made ill-advised Free Agency signings will have to deal with those repercussions in salary cap hell.
It was a joke...
I asked for a discussion and we had it but then you have to go on and get all high and mighty like you always do. All you guys do is rip on Raif but as soon as I say something jokingly it is cruel. Booth 2.0 here he is
How am I supposed to know that is meant as a joke?
I will gladly have a conversation with you, but I will defend my fellow GMs before I do that. Not sure how I got "all high and mighty" for defending a GM.
You want to discuss a rule change on Free Agency trades because you feel as if teams are restricted in trades. Why should we consider a get-out-of-jail card for ill-advised free agent signings?
I asked for a discussion and we had it but then you have to go on and get all high and mighty like you always do. All you guys do is rip on Raif but as soon as I say something jokingly it is cruel. Booth 2.0 here he is
Here we go again with you being like this. Every day it's something. Just enough already.
PrincessChloe liked this.
Reply
CapFriendly
CapFriendly