Question:
Is trading rights of a UFA still not allowed?
I don't know if anyone is arguing that an official trade of a UFA isn't possible. I'm not. I think most know it'll be rejected. I'm not questioning integrity either. For me, it's more of how there's a loophole to trade away player rights without actually trading their rights.
Let's go back to my Holtby example:
If I had not released him, I could have posted that he was available (after I signed him) to guage interest. He's highly rated, so I probably get a great offer. I then do whatever I can to get enough free cap space to sign him and then flip him for those assets instead of letting him walk into free agency. I'm getting something in return nstead of nothing just like you would when signing away their rights.
If I post him as available and no one give me an offer, I let him walk. Even though I've said I would sign (and trade) him.
I think that needs to change. If I posted him as available, it means I had full intentions of signing him. Otherwise, it's basically the same as trading the player rights away, which isn't allowed right? ***If I'm wrong on this rule, lemme know as it's the whole basis of this post***
Can we get full clarification of that? I'd NEVER have released Holtby if I thought I could guage public interest and assess a return value before deciding to let him go or not. That's doesn't seem right.
Is this a solution? :
Is there any negative consequences to saying that a team who offers a UFA as a sign and trade has to sign that player (even if there's no interest) because it's essentially the same as trying to get around trading their rights?
Does that make sense or am I missing part of the big picture?
|