Post by Greenville Drive on May 17, 2012 11:34:32 GMT -5
What is your take on PTBNLs (Players to be named later) being part of trades in this league?
Here is one example:
I want to trade with an owner, but we can't agree on a price for his player. We decide to add pieces to the deal, but one of the guys was a 2012 free agent signing, meaning he can't be traded until June 1. Do you think it is fair to call this player a "PTBNL" in a trade that you do in May, with this player not changing hands until after June 1 has passed? This player must be stated to be involved in the trade and anything that happens to the player after the trade is complete does not effect the trade, so it is complete "buyer beware".
I think we should allow a trade like this, but wanted others opinion before it actually came up. To me, it is similar to the CLE-COL trade where Drew Pomeranz could not be named until 1 year had passed from his signing. He remained with Cleveland for about another month after the Ubaldo trade was done.
Please give all opinions.
Here is one example:
I want to trade with an owner, but we can't agree on a price for his player. We decide to add pieces to the deal, but one of the guys was a 2012 free agent signing, meaning he can't be traded until June 1. Do you think it is fair to call this player a "PTBNL" in a trade that you do in May, with this player not changing hands until after June 1 has passed? This player must be stated to be involved in the trade and anything that happens to the player after the trade is complete does not effect the trade, so it is complete "buyer beware".
I think we should allow a trade like this, but wanted others opinion before it actually came up. To me, it is similar to the CLE-COL trade where Drew Pomeranz could not be named until 1 year had passed from his signing. He remained with Cleveland for about another month after the Ubaldo trade was done.
Please give all opinions.
