Insects and Predators strike a 2nd deal

[Preds]

After going nearly 4 years without swinging a deal with each other, the Preds and Insects struck a 2nd deal within minutes of their 1st ever trade!

In this one, the Predators send RB Michael Bennett from our IR to his IR

In exchange the Predators get back their 2005 2nd round pick sent in the previous deal.

[Flaxwless]

Confirmed

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

Wow... it's a day of moving and shaking. I'm guessing that the Insects didn't need a roster space to officially sign Bennett to a contract, then IR him... because anything within 24 hours is still "in limbo"? Is that correct?

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Royal Hawaiian Opihi

Wow... it's a day of moving and shaking. I'm guessing that the Insects didn't need a roster space to officially sign Bennett to a contract, then IR him... because anything within 24 hours is still "in limbo"? Is that correct?

Bennett never left the IR... he moved from my IR to Franks.

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

Yah... so IR moves, just like DS moves... never actually have to be on the "active squad" first... they can just move laterally? Just trying to keep all our rules square in my head! lol

[Preds]

it's not really covered in the rules, but I don't see a problem with it

[Mutts]

Originally Posted by Preds

it's not really covered in the rules, but I don't see a problem with it

I think we should clarify moves like this a little better. Its kind of liking dropping a newly acquired player without ever assigning him a roster slot. I don't have a problem with either scenario, but it should probably be addressed in the rules.

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Wonder Mutts

I think we should clarify moves like this a little better. Its kind of liking dropping a newly acquired player without ever assigning him a roster slot. I don't have a problem with either scenario, but it should probably be addressed in the rules.

but he did make a slot... he cut Edinger, activated Winslow, and moved Bennett from my IR to his... how is that like the scenario you describe above?

[Nittany Dodgers]

Originally Posted by Preds

but he did make a slot... he cut Edinger, activated Winslow, and moved Bennett from my IR to his... how is that like the scenario you describe above?

I think either way you look at it, it works. Either Bennett moved from one IR to the other laterally, or he was traded to the active roster, and within the 24 hour window was moved to the IR to make room. It wouldn't be any different than moving a different player to the IR within the 24 hour window to make room for Bennett on the active roster.

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

Sounds like we just need to clean up the rules in the offseason... I don't think anyone's having a problem with what's happened.... it's just never been clear what the letter of the law is. Lateral moves are fine with me (IR to IR, DS to DS, Active to Active).

Especially if we can cut a newly signed player within the 24 hour period & not face a penalty (aside from the cap hit).

[Mutts]

Originally Posted by Preds

but he did make a slot... he cut Edinger, activated Winslow, and moved Bennett from my IR to his... how is that like the scenario you describe above?

They're similar in that the affected player bypasses assignment to the active roster in both scenarios. (This would be important if, for instance, the Insects didn't have the cap space to sign Bennett to the active roster at his full salary, but could only accomodate the 1/2 of his salary that counts when on IR) Again, I don't really see a problem... but like you said, it's not really covered in the rules. I was just suggesting that maybe it should be covered in the rules.

Allowing lateral trades from IR to IR, I think there are related issues to resolve. Example, a player is required to stay on IR for 4 weeks after he's first declared. Does this 4 week period reset when a player is traded?

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

Originally Posted by Wonder Mutts

Allowing lateral trades from IR to IR, I think there are related issues to resolve. Example, a player is required to stay on IR for 4 weeks after he's first declared. Does this 4 week period reset when a player is traded?

I was just wondering the same thing

[Preds]

I don't see why the 4ks would reset... the player never left IR... just teams IR's ya know?

[Flaxwless]

Agreed. Seems like the 4 weeks wouldn't reset.

[Mutts]

Originally Posted by Preds

I don't see why the 4ks would reset... the player never left IR... just teams IR's ya know?

I don't know... that's the point where I start to get a little uncomfortable about it. It seems to me that each team should have to "declare" IR players at some point. Even if you're acquiring a IR player through a lateral trade, there still needs to be an official declaration of IR status on the part of the new team. I think that declaration should be considered an entirely new placement on a new team's IR. At which point, certain benefits are given to the new team including 1 extra year and 1/2 salary back. I think upon receiving the benefit, the new team should also assume any burdens i.e. 4 week requirement.

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Wonder Mutts

I don't know... that's the point where I start to get a little uncomfortable about it. It seems to me that each team should have to "declare" IR players at some point. Even if you're acquiring a IR player through a lateral trade, there still needs to be an official declaration of IR status on the part of the new team. I think that declaration should be considered an entirely new placement on a new team's IR. At which point, certain benefits are given to the new team including 1 extra year and 1/2 salary back. I think upon receiving the benefit, the new team should also assume any burdens i.e. 4 week requirement.

I can't say I agreee with you at all on this one Jake... the player never LEFT IR... he just got traded while on it, and the receiving team left him there as well.

I think you're overthinking this or other situations, and making things much more complex than they need to be... it's a lateral move... thus all the penalties and benefits should be inherited IMO.

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

The difficulty here is that we have a situation we haven't prepared for... and we need to make a decision. I'm not sold either way... but I was initially leaning along the lines that Jake expressed.

Especially good point about the one extra year and half salary...

It seems as though we have 3 options:
1. All IR moves are automatically lateral... all release dates apply, and the receiving team automatically assumes the contract/salary ramifications...
2. The receiving team must re-declare the new player as an IR player, thus the 4-week stipulation applies anew. If a player has already served his 4-week "stint" on the transferring team, then the receiving team can activate him w/o further penalty...
3. Any player traded from IR-status has his status automatically terminated upon trade. If the receiving team wants to keep him on the IR, that owner must re-declare, and the 4-game restriction applies. However, the owner can also choose to activate him, no matter how many/few weeks he's been on the IR.

I'm guessing we're going to be debating between options 1 & 2... as I wouldn't personally be in favor of #3.

[Nittany Dodgers]

Originally Posted by Wonder Mutts

I don't know... that's the point where I start to get a little uncomfortable about it. It seems to me that each team should have to "declare" IR players at some point. Even if you're acquiring a IR player through a lateral trade, there still needs to be an official declaration of IR status on the part of the new team. I think that declaration should be considered an entirely new placement on a new team's IR. At which point, certain benefits are given to the new team including 1 extra year and 1/2 salary back. I think upon receiving the benefit, the new team should also assume any burdens i.e. 4 week requirement.

If a team receiving a player on IR has to redeclare his IR status, and this start the IR period anew, means that a team receiving an IR player could just place him on the active roster prior to his four week service being up. I'm not in favor of that. I'm in support of Mike's reading on this.

[Liquid Swords]

I see nothing wrong with a lateral IR to IR move, and I think the period of time spent on IR should transfer too (along with cap and roster year adjustments as described in the IR section of the rules). So, if the player has been on IR for 3 weeks and 1 day, then the team acquiring him in a trade must keep him on IR for 6 more days before becoming active roster eligible. If the 4 week period has passed before the trade, the the team receiving the IR player in the trade can opt to move him laterally to his IR or activate him immediately. My two cents.