| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bigsportzbabe
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Libertyville
Back to top |
 Posted: 08/17/05 8:00 pm ::: PLAYERS UNDER CONTRACT 2006 |
Reply  |
|
In order to intelligently discuss the expansion draft it would help to know what players signed contracts for 2006
they said on Sunday that Sam signed a 3 year contract with Charlotte so she will have to be protected right? cored?
_________________
Senility Prayer: God grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked anyway, the good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to tell the difference. Amen.
|
|
Keegan
Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 6861
Location: The Cathedral of Snark
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/17/05 8:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Lauren only signs one year contracts so I think she's theoretically a UFA? (not sure)
Sam did sign for 3 years. So did Kamila.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66922
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/17/05 8:09 pm ::: Re: PLAYERS UNDER CONTRACT 2006 |
Reply |
|
| bigsportzbabe wrote: |
In order to intelligently discuss the expansion draft it would help to know what players signed contracts for 2006
they said on Sunday that Sam signed a 3 year contract with Charlotte so she will have to be protected right? cored? |
Yeah, that would be good to know.
If Sam signed for three years, she would not be cored. That only happens when the contract is up and you don't want the player to sign elsewhere. She would need to be protected if the team wants to be sure she doesn't get taken in the expansion draft.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
threefrom60
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 2576
Location: Olympia, WA
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/17/05 8:11 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| And true UFA's not under contract do NOT need to be protected, that's correct?
|
|
Keegan
Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 6861
Location: The Cathedral of Snark
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/17/05 8:11 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| threefrom60 wrote: |
| And true UFA's not under contract do NOT need to be protected, that's correct? |
Yes.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66922
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/17/05 8:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| threefrom60 wrote: |
| And true UFA's not under contract do NOT need to be protected, that's correct? |
If by true UFA you mean UFA eligible players that aren't given a core designation, then yes.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
threefrom60
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 2576
Location: Olympia, WA
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/17/05 8:15 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Not given a core designation... so a cored player doesn't have to be protected? They don't count in the 6? That can't be... that'd give you 9 total protected. Oy now I'm confused, I don't think I was before!
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66922
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/17/05 8:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Players who are cored must either be protected or be available for Chicago to draft. I can't imagine why a team would core a player just to leave her out there for Alter & company.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
threefrom60
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 2576
Location: Olympia, WA
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/17/05 9:15 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
No, neither can I, that's why I was confused! So we have 6 total, including the 3 max that you can have cored. I'm straight again, thanks.
Or er... not the best word choice... heh. But I'm not confused anymore.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66922
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/17/05 9:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| You can only have two cored, but otherwise correct.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
TDAO
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 555
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/17/05 11:54 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Keegan wrote: |
| Lauren only signs one year contracts so I think she's theoretically a UFA? (not sure) |
LJ will be a five-year vet, so she's still an RFA as I recall it.
|
|
|
|
