NYI willing to trade a starting goalie
- Thread starter Wildman
- Start date
are we ok to trade just signed UFA's? I thought we cracked down on that after Zubov a year or two back?
I'm not shopping Gerber actively. The reason I put him there as well as Denis was to give GM's another option, in case they want to trade for an NHL starting goalie.
but yes, it would be nice to know if you are actually allowed to trade an UFA-signing, and if not why is there nothing written about it in the rules.
but yes, it would be nice to know if you are actually allowed to trade an UFA-signing, and if not why is there nothing written about it in the rules.
Last edited:
SPG
Registered User
From what I remember, and I could be wrong, you cannot trade a newly signed UFA until after the All-Star break. Maybe someone else can confirm that or correct me
Ohio Jones
Game on...
From what I remember, and I could be wrong, you cannot trade a newly signed UFA until after the All-Star break. Maybe someone else can confirm that or correct me
UFAs sign at their own risk, I believe. The restriction is on trading players who have re-signed with a team prior to testing free agency.
That said, I'll go back through the Zubov incident and see whether there was another rule put in place to cover that situation.
***EDIT: I must be going senile, but I can't find any trace of the discussion about the controversial Zubov trade, either in this forum or among the league or admin team message group archives, so I have no idea how that discussion netted out. Sorry!***
Last edited:
Why don't you just make one of them your GM and sign the other to a 15 year deal?
Sorry, bitter Isles fan.
Sorry, bitter Isles fan.
LMAO.
Anyway, I don't recall any Zubov incident either unless it was b/c he had resigned prior to becoming a UFA. The restriction is only on players resigned prior to becoming a UFA.
The reason there is no restriction on truly signed UFA's is that logically it doesn't make sense for anyone to trade for a just signed UFA. In theory any GM who wanted the UFA did not feel that UFA was worth the highest bid and so why would anyone not only change their mind and take on the salary but also trade away other assets in the process.
I don't believe there is any restriction either.
After all, what GM would be stupid enough to give up and decent asset for a player they could have signed for a just a few dollars more during free agency?
In previous years, where there was at least a signing bonus the original team was on the hook for, it made at least a bit of sense. But now, with no signing bonuses, just the full weight of a fat contract in a cap environment weighing on each player you take on, anyone trading some thing decent for one of these players has to seriously re-evaluate how they acquire players. The one exception might be dumping a heavy salary in exchange for another heavy salaried player that is a better fit I suppose.
After all, what GM would be stupid enough to give up and decent asset for a player they could have signed for a just a few dollars more during free agency?
In previous years, where there was at least a signing bonus the original team was on the hook for, it made at least a bit of sense. But now, with no signing bonuses, just the full weight of a fat contract in a cap environment weighing on each player you take on, anyone trading some thing decent for one of these players has to seriously re-evaluate how they acquire players. The one exception might be dumping a heavy salary in exchange for another heavy salaried player that is a better fit I suppose.
