Crosby introduced as Lightning captain

[Jets GM]

The Tampa Bay Lightning unveiled their new superstar Sidney Crosby this week in sunny Florida. After taking a back seat to teams making high profile moves, TB GM reappeared at the discussion table when it came to talking trade. Crosby, along with Jonathan Tavares and Marian Gaborik, were the surprise big name acquisitions made this summer. In exchange, the Lighting swiftly shipped away former core players Ryan Murray, Ryan Kesler, and Brent Burns. Few expected the Lightning to make such bold moves after reaching the Eastern Conference Finals in their first post-season appearance in three years.

When questioned about effecting team chemistry, or returning to the infamous TB GM tactics years ago, TB GM responded bluntly “We got swept. When you get shut down, you get shut down for a reason.” The Lighting, despite losing three one-goal games, lost in four straight to the eventual cup winning Pittsburgh team. “It was close, but we couldn’t find a way to take control of a game or break it open. I believe we now have two or three more players that can take over a game.” That statement is noteworthy given the status of Jonathan Tavares contract.

Tavares has one year left at $4.5 million dollars. He’s expected to qualify for at least $7 million dollars at the end of the season. Despite being a first overall selection, Tavares has struggled to produce at the level expected when he entered the league. TB GM stated that he believes a fresh start for Tavares and lower workloads given the centre depth the Lightning possesses will equal a breakout season. However, given the teams cap constraints, the Lighting might not be able to afford Tavares services at years end and his name could end up back on the block.

[Bruins_GM]

N: To the Flyers: Jonathan Tavares (81), Zach Hamill (76), and Mayson Raymond (72)

To the Lightning: Jeff Carter (80) and Claude Giroux (72)

V:

[Singin the BLUES]

N: To the Flyers: Jonathan Tavares (81), Zach Hamill (76), and Mayson Raymond (72)

To the Lightning: Jeff Carter (80) and Claude Giroux (72)

V:

I know eh....thats a pretty far cry from the B.Schenn and a 1st he wanted from me just for Carter

[flyergp21]

Mmm, PM like in private message..The ideas discussed there should not come out on the big board IMO..

[Jets GM]

I think discussion, separate from the trade thread itself, is a good thing. Creates action on the boards and allows GMs to get know to each other.

I didn't think to much of this trade as far as it's fairness. Tavares has the ability to play in all situations (5o5, PP and PK) and all strategies. Carter has a more dangerous offensive game, but has a fewer tools and more weaknesses then Tavares. I preferred a 1st line of Gaborik-Crosby-Carter, then with Tavares. Carter is a better winger, and is right handed. I thought it was a perfect fit. If I was a young rebuilding team, like PHI, I would rather build my team around Tavares at C then Carter.

I thought the issue of a second team trading a franchise tagged player this summer would cause a bigger stir, or me flipping Tavares. Either way, glad to see people are still so passionate and active during the summer!

[SharksGM]

I don't think the trade is in anyway unbalanced or unfair, it's just tiresome to see what should be franchise players cycled through teams at unrealistic rates. The franchise tag clearly needs an overhaul at least.

[Jets GM]

I think it's the nature of "fantasy" sports. I'm in a 5 year MLB keeper currently finishing up season 2; some GMs have gutted their entire roster, and some haven't made a trade for two seasons. Everyone's tendencies are different.

As far as the EHEC franchise tag, it's no longer doing what it was brought in to accomplish. When I traded Stamkos, I received a harsh penalty for removing the tag. Since EDM got to trade a tagged player at no cost, it's opened up the possibility of any tagged player being moved. We should decide how the franchise tag is going to work moving forward, because we are in a grey area right now. I still think it should be a flexible tool, which you can apply to a different player every off-season.

Perhaps since the tag isn't creating the desired effect any more, why not introduce a "loyalty discount" of sorts? For every X amount of seasons or x of amount of calender years a player has been on your roster, you get a discount when re-signing the player. 3 years gets you 5%, 5 years gets you 10% etc. It would add incentive to keep your core players in house, because you would save more money on bigger contracts.

[Calgary.Flames]

I'd be in favor of keeping the FT if it was used as a yearly discount like Justin mentionned.
Otherwise I would remove it, specially now that we can offer longer contracts to our players.

It's been on my mind a lot lately as I don't think it's fair that some teams don't have a FT player.
Everyone deserves the opportunity to have a 25% discount.

[VancouverCanucksGM]

Maybe use a "chance" decider.

Like the one used to decide if RFA offer would be matched.

Assign each team a number 1-30, roll (or however), using an option of up to 50, roll 10 times, and whatever teams the numbers land on, those become the franchise players list of teams they'd accept a trade to.

Example.

You have player A. Roll 10 times, and the numbers are 10,35,44,6,24,21,47,36,2, and 33.

The results would be.

10- Detroit
35- NA
44- NA
06- Chicago
24- San Jose
21- Philadelphia
47- NA
36- NA
02- Boston
33- NA

So the only teams you could trade that player to, or accept offers from, would be Detroit, Chicago, San Jose, Philadelphia, and Boston. Could be more team, or less, depending on the roll.

Or I could be talking outta my ass, either way, figured it was an idea.

[Jets GM]

It doesn't need to be that complicated. Every off-season GMs should have the option of trading a their tagged player, or removing the tag and placing it on a different player. This could only be done once per off-season. Once the first regular season game is played, the tag becomes static and cannot be removed (or the player traded) till the playoffs end.

At least that's what I am proposing.

[VancouverCanucksGM]

Moving from player to player, unless you trade the original franchised player, seems like a moot point.

[Jets GM]

Moving from player to player, unless you trade the original franchised player, seems like a moot point.

What if you are considering moving your tagged player, and want to remove the tag so you can trade him during the season. Also, to save money by transferring it to a new more expensive contract.

[VancouverCanucksGM]

Just another form of complication to me.

The franchise tag is an updated concept in an format that can't really be updated properly.

[Jets GM]

Meh, I thought it was simpler then bringing dice and randomness into the process. Making it that you can switch, trade for, or trade away a franchise player once per off-season is pretty simple to understand I think.

[VancouverCanucksGM]

Didn't say it wasn't simple to understand, just seems like a waste of time.

Again, it's a current idea in a format that just isn't cut out to handle it "in game".

[Bruins_GM]

I'm not saying it's a bad trade, I'm just saying it's a shitty trade as a team in the Atlantic Division.