EHM The Blue Line

It's been something that's been bothering me for a while now, but, after getting burned by it again I've decided to bring it forward.

My proposal is this: Just like in the real world if you are to sign a player to an offer sheet the picks must be for the next draft.

I just had Kent Hagglund sign an offersheet I don't think he's worth, but, I won't see the pick until 2048, same as I let Pontus Lilja walk a season ago for a 1st and 3rd I won't get to use until this upcoming draft.

I agree completely, if you attempt to sign a player to an offer sheet, the picks need to be in the next draft.

In real world the picks are the teams own and wouldn't include other teams. So if my Kings signed someone with 2 1sts as compensation they would have to be Kings 1sts the next two years. The game just pulls the first two.

Flawed either way.

I voted no because I feel like it would cause more headache than it's worth to try and manage. For instance, what happens when someone wins a RFA that they shouldn't have bc they lack the picks? Can't go back and undo it.

i voted no, it is what it is imo

Cap'n wrote:In real world the picks are the teams own and wouldn't include other teams. So if my Kings signed someone with 2 1sts as compensation they would have to be Kings 1sts the next two years. The game just pulls the first two.

Flawed either way.

I voted no because I feel like it would cause more headache than it's worth to try and manage. For instance, what happens when someone wins a RFA that they shouldn't have bc they lack the picks? Can't go back and undo it.

I'd have to watch the next time it happens but I thought it was the next two of your own picks. And it would involve moving the RFA's to the boards like how the NB does UFA.

voted

ditto

I'll stick with my no vote. I understand the concern but that's part of the risk when you let your guys go to RFA in order to try and get more compensation than they're worth on the open market. (see example A. Morrison)