Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers
That decline and trade sure goes against the spirit of the rule, but as long as there is other value involved, there's not much to be done about it. However, I would say that if the decline is officially part of the trade (ie, we aren't setting a precedent that a decline it and of itself can be traded for value alone), the rules committee needs to look at that.
|
Decline's happened as part of a couple deals last year as well, but they were never in and of themselves the only part of a deal. In general they went indirectly as part of a package, as this does.
This is no sign and trade where a guy that bidded on a player has athe tendering team match and trade them elsewhere. The winning bidder still gets there guy, the trst of the pacakage just creates a guarentee that'll happen.
Also, the spirit of the rule is to not inhibit open market bidding on a players services. Since anybody can still bid on a guy till he sells this kind of deal cannot hamper that.
FYI, none of these discussions started until after he sold anyhow, so again, the market still dictated the players value, which is the intent of the rule.