Compensation for Philly

[Robin Hood]

For an undisclosed Gentleman's Agreement:

To Philadelphia

2012 2nd Rounder (COL)

[Lee]

Confiirmed

[bills09]

Shady business me thinks

[Scott]

What's this for exactly?

[Robin Hood]

What's this for exactly?

Lee and I made a trade and he wanted a 2nd included which I didn't own. So he said, just send me one when you have one. Given that future considerations are not allowed for unowned assets, we made a gentleman's agreement. Simple.

[Nick]

lol...so not good practice or legit. Could that happen in the real NHL? No.

Should it be able to happen here...nope... and we have rules about intentional avoidance of the CBA. Please avoid stupid shit like this, it's not good for the league.

[Robin Hood]

lol...so not good practice or legit. Could that happen in the real NHL? No.

Should it be able to happen here...nope... and we have rules about intentional avoidance of the CBA. Please avoid stupid shit like this, it's not good for the league.

Don't give Lee or Myself shit for this, Nick. I don't appreciate the tone of your post either. This Gentleman's Agreement was made before you all in the CC realized these stupid rules in the CBA were just leading to Gentleman's Agreements. There will never be a way for the CC to regulate a Gentleman's Agreement. Put as many rules in place as you like. I could've easily just shipped Lee a 2nd for his shit prospects. Same difference. We both disclosed it without hiding anything.

[Nick]

It's stupid simple: don't trade assets you don't own.


My tone? How would you like me to have said it? I'm pretty sure with this medium it's more about the tone the reader places on the writing then on what's actually being said. I'm more concerned about the message -> this deal is in direct circumvention of the CBA.


You say it happened before the rule, I don't/didn't question that. You're right it could be just for some shit prospect, we'd all call rape or w/e. But sometimes it'd be nice to think past your (any gm* not you in particular) own team and realize that the CBA isn't written to be against any one member...it's for the good of the league, to create a realistic, fair situation for us to pretend to be NHL GMs. It should be competitive, but doesn't need to be hostile.

[Robin Hood]

It's stupid simple: don't trade assets you don't own.


My tone? How would you like me to have said it? I'm pretty sure with this medium it's more about the tone the reader places on the writing then on what's actually being said. I'm more concerned about the message -> this deal is in direct circumvention of the CBA.


You say it happened before the rule, I don't/didn't question that. You're right it could be just for some shit prospect, we'd all call rape or w/e. But sometimes it'd be nice to think past your own team and realize that the CBA isn't written to be against any one member...it's for the good of the league, to create a realistic, fair situation for us to pretend to be NHL GMs. It should be competitive, but doesn't need to be hostile.

Nick. Your point is flawed. I can GUARANTEE that GMs in the real NHL make deals where similar circumstances are involved.

Recent Example from Memory: Poni Traded to PIT for Skoula + Caputi. Burke promised the Penguins that he'd send back a pick once Skoula was traded. This happened the same day and a pick was sent to the Penguins

This is not a Circumvention. You can say what you want. We didn't break any rules.

[Nick]

Shiv please don't read my message in hostility. We've outlawed the trading of un-owned assets, future considerations, etc. it's simply something we've decided that creates situation we don't want here in the BBKL, and should be avoided in future dealings.

[Robin Hood]

Shiv please don't read my message in hostility. We've outlawed the trading of un-owned assets, future considerations, etc. it's simply something we've decided that creates situation we don't want here in the BBKL, and should be avoided in future dealings.

I'm not taking it as hostile at all.

I concede and respect the rule that unowned assets cannot be traded. It is because I do that I will never post a trade where an unowned asset is being traded.

But I think you should also realize that:

1) no matter that you do, you will not be able to control a gentleman's agreement.
2) If two GMs are separated by the difference of a 2nd rounder (or a 3rd or whatever) in a trade, and if they trust each other, they have the freedom to make a gentleman's agreement.
3) Such handshakes are not all against the rules. Once the deal is posted, the Gentleman's agreement does not need to be honoured nor is it binding in terms of BBKL law. It is a honour-system agreement. And it will exist just like there is a code for not holding back-up goalies hostage or any other honour code there is.