|
|
Post by Freak93 on Feb 23, 2007 20:34:35 GMT -5
I was wondering what some of the stances were on this. If you don't know, it is when a player is in the final year of a contract and is on a team that is out of playoff contention. The player is then traded to a contender only to return to the original team in free agency.
The best example of this was Doug Weight's situation in St. Louis last season (Mark Recchi had a similar situation with the Penguins). The Blues traded Weight to Carolina for some prospects. Weight helped aid Carolina on the way to a Stanley Cup win only to sign with St. Louis this past off-season.
I've heard a few people suggest that the NHL adopts a 'Doug Weight Rule'. This rule would state that if a player is in the final year of a contract and is traded to a contender, they cannot sign with the team that traded them. Thoughts on this rule?
|
|
sep
All-American
Posts: 7,153
|
Post by sep on Feb 23, 2007 20:42:31 GMT -5
Yeah they need to do something about that.
I've never heard of this before, but that is some major bull.
|
|
|
|
Post by PrimadonnaPictures on Feb 23, 2007 21:01:42 GMT -5
i think its fine... some people want to get a ring before they retire and well some teams accomdate them if they come back and want to retire with the team they have thier team bond with...
|
|
cooljayhu
All-Conference
You Moterboatin' Son of a Bitch
Posts: 3,418
|
Post by cooljayhu on Feb 23, 2007 21:16:29 GMT -5
I have no problem with it. Hell most of the guys who are rentals have no-trade clauses so they could easliy say I dont want to be traded and then stay with the team. But most of them would rather win the cup.
|
|
|
|
Post by detroitbasketball on Feb 23, 2007 21:19:01 GMT -5
The player gets a title, the team he heads to gets a title, and the team he leaves gets prospects and a shot at getting him back.
Seems fine to me.
|
|
McGahee
All-Conference
Raaraaraa It's A Boy
Posts: 3,684
|
Post by McGahee on Feb 23, 2007 22:26:02 GMT -5
ESPN.com'd
Anyways, I personally don't think it's bad as long as it benefits both teams. If a team trades some of their better prospects for a guy like Keith Tkachuk, and then he returns to the Blues next year, there's no harm. It's not the Blues fault for getting prospects and the other team gets the services for only a brief period of time. Look at the NBA for christ sake. Gary Payton gets traded and never shows up, prompting a release so he can re-sign with the team that traded him just a week later. The NHL's situation isn't half as bad.
Plus, consider a guy that's been on a team around fifteen years and never won a cup. He's in the last year of his contract, and he's contemplating retirement. If another team's interested, he should be allowed to get traded to the other team. So say he wins a Cup and decides he wants to play one more year. Well he won't be able to go back to the team that he played fifteen years for because of this rule. The idea behind it is in good intentions, but someones going to end up getting screwed because of it.
It's really not unfair the way it is now. Look at Peter Forsberg. He's heavily favored to come back to Philly. Isn't it better for a star player to get a chance to succeed and help out the league as a whole. Nashville gave away a coveted defensive prospect and a sub-par winger who's actually been playing well, and a draft pick. Maybe it was highway robbery to an extent, but if it helps both teams out, the other 28 shouldn't be complaining because what they're doing isn't unfair...
|
|
TJFOR3
All-Conference
Posts: 1,785
|
Post by TJFOR3 on Feb 23, 2007 23:03:26 GMT -5
I think its fine for a player to do it. When there a free agent they can sign with anyone, and if another team wants to give up prospects to get a gur for a cup run, so be it.
|
|
|
|
Post by eaglesrownage on Feb 24, 2007 12:05:55 GMT -5
Yep, it is probably going to happen with Forsberg to, if he returns to the NHL that is.
|
|
TJFOR3
All-Conference
Posts: 1,785
|
Post by TJFOR3 on Feb 24, 2007 12:07:49 GMT -5
Forsberg wont go back to the Flyers. I hope not, and I'm a Flyers fan.
|
|
|
|
Post by Freak93 on Feb 24, 2007 13:09:49 GMT -5
A Forsberg return will depend on if he wants to be with a rebuilding team. There were times this year he looked like he didn't want to. He would just eat up a lot of cap space if they did re-sign. They need to look at defense, that should be top priority.
Anyway, I think this rule would suck. It takes the unrestriced out of unrestricted free agency.
|
|
TJFOR3
All-Conference
Posts: 1,785
|
Post by TJFOR3 on Feb 24, 2007 21:36:38 GMT -5
Teh Flyers need the go in a different direction. Like you said Freak, they need some good young defensemen. At forward, they have a lot of good young talent.
|
|
McGahee
All-Conference
Raaraaraa It's A Boy
Posts: 3,684
|
Post by McGahee on Feb 24, 2007 21:40:18 GMT -5
The point I was making about Forsberg is that it's not unfair for him to come back to Philadelphia if that's what he wants to do... whether or not Paul Holmgren makes that decision however...
For their salary cap's sake, it shouldn't be done. Forsberg's value to the Flyers isn't worth the price...
|
|
TJFOR3
All-Conference
Posts: 1,785
|
Post by TJFOR3 on Feb 24, 2007 22:03:10 GMT -5
I agree with you Drury that it should be allowed. Like I said earlier, if a team wants to give up prospects for a player, that's fine. It's that players decision who he wants to sign with...
|
|
JackTheRipper
All-American
I farted my way out of an elevator..
Posts: 5,476
|
Post by JackTheRipper on Feb 27, 2007 17:13:41 GMT -5
I disagree with it. As Scott Burnside said, how is it fair to other teams if say two owners are buddy buddy, agree to basically send an established guy for a package of picks knowing that the guy will go back to his original team? I think there should be a rule in place, simple as that. You want the ring? Fine. But you can't help make trades unfair, that's all I think.
|
|
