[USML Announce] Rights to Reclaim FAAB -- Issue #1

[Richard E. Robbins]

I'm not sure I agree with you Jim.  

It seems to me that this would be an issue for the trading partners to handle under the circumstances.  

If the trade involves a player who is rumored to be moved, then the two teams should discuss what would happen in advance.  

If the trade involves a player who was not expected to be traded, I'd think that the FAAB matter is small potatoes.

Of course, none of this would be an issue if we allowed NL stats under the circumstances :-)

-- Rich

On February 10, 2004, Jim Barrett wrote:

I would support option 2 but if option 1 is accepted by the group then I think we also need to add a provision allowing the losing owner to void the trade.  I'd draft a provision now but am running late.  If someone else wants to take a shot, fine. Otherwise I'll try to draft something over the next few days.