Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers
I think it is less of an issue when it is part of a larger deal. There is nothing really stopping you from saying the decline on Barlow wasn't part of the deal. There is no way to police that. My issue is setting a precent that a decline can be negotiated in and of itself and traded for value. Could the Derby Cars have traded you a 2005 rookie pick straight up for your decline? I would strenuously argue no, because you are not giving up value, as you previously have indicated is a strict requirement of a trade. In order for Barlow to have value for you, you would have to match the high bid. If you decline the high bid, the only value to you is the compensatory pick, which you retain, and thus you surrender no value. Again, that is my only issue, and what I want to make sure we are clear on. If this is not clear and not agreed, I'll add it to the list of items for 2006.
|
I agree getting additional compensation soley for the decline is a bad thing as Team A is being sent value but not DIRECTLY sending value back to Team B.
Indirectly, as part of a package, I see no problem. Straight up though, I'll agree is a no-no.