If you look at NHL, NFL, NBA and MLB, wich franchise would you consider as being Siberia, i.e. the place where a team would ship a player in exchange of virtually nothing, just to get rid of him?
Limited to existing franchise only.
:huh:
I don't think such a thing would occur in the NFL.
Pittsburgh Pirates or Kansas City in Baseball.
Basketball, the Clippers or the Nets.
The Buffalo Bills. The Witness Protection Program of the NFL.
Quote from: Valmy on May 04, 2011, 03:12:36 PM
The Buffalo Bills. The Witness Protection Program of the NFL.
Yeah but to his OP, why would you do a trade for nothing?
Quote from: Caliga on May 04, 2011, 03:13:25 PM
Quote from: Valmy on May 04, 2011, 03:12:36 PM
The Buffalo Bills. The Witness Protection Program of the NFL.
Yeah but to his OP, why would you do a trade for nothing?
IN salary cap leagues it happens frequently. You do it to dump salary off your books.
Quote from: Caliga on May 04, 2011, 03:04:14 PM
:huh:
I don't think such a thing would occur in the NFL.
It used to be New Orleans. Back before the NFLPA was recognized, lots of player reps got traded to the Saints. Of course, it wasn't just player reps, but anyone a particular owner wanted to both get rid of, and send somewhere the player probably didn't want to go. To make it even better for the rest of the league, the Saints were so poorly run that you didn't even have to trade the player for nothing to get the Saints to take him; you could usually at least get value for the trade and often fleece the Saints.
Quote from: Barrister on May 04, 2011, 03:15:27 PM
IN salary cap leagues it happens frequently. You do it to dump salary off your books.
Why is Siberia willing to pick up the salary? Presumably they operate under a cap too.
Dumping a player to the Rams would be just cruel.
Quote from: Caliga on May 04, 2011, 03:04:14 PM
:huh:
I don't think such a thing would occur in the NFL.
fucking socialism
Quote from: dps on May 04, 2011, 03:17:43 PM
To make it even better for the rest of the league, the Saints were so poorly run that you didn't even have to trade the player for nothing to get the Saints to take him; you could usually at least get value for the trade and often fleece the Saints.
Yeah, that sounds more like it.
OP makes no sense. Teams that are anxious to get rid of a player can always just cut them and teams shopping players around are going to go with the one that offers them the best deal.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on May 05, 2011, 07:23:45 AM
OP makes no sense. Teams that are anxious to get rid of a player can always just cut them and teams shopping players around are going to go with the one that offers them the best deal.
No, the idea isn't just to let the player go and leave him free to find a place that he wants to go to and that wants him; it's to be vindictive and send him someplace undesirable. Petty, yes, but it does happen.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 04, 2011, 09:00:59 PM
Why is Siberia willing to pick up the salary? Presumably they operate under a cap too.
Sometimes, a player moving elsewhere will change his attitude, work harder and start to perform.
Say, John Leclair. He was playing the Canadiens on the 3rd or 4th trio. Barely a noticeable player, laughing stock of the fans, overpayed player. He got traded to Philadelphia. He played with Eric Lindros and suddenly became the #2 player of the team for a real bargain.
Mike Ribeiro. A reputation of a party goer in Montreal. Some shit came out in the papers, he got traded to some weird team in the US. He's a star player there now.
Serguei Kostytsyn. Overpaid in Montreal, regularly made the headlines for refusing to speak with journalists and had some stories supposedly involving organized crime. Got traded to Nashville for next to nothing. He's now a star player there.
Plenty of examples like that. Some player are abandonned and take a while to be recuited. Marc-André Bergeron was laid off by the Canadiens. Took him six months to get a contract in the NHL, but he finally landed in Tampa Bay. He's now a valid asset of the team in playoffs.