Trade information

Accepted

Information
Start of negotiation 2022-09-30- 01:17
End of negotiation 2022-09-30- 01:48
Restrictions' level 10
logo
Danny Granger
Salary: 24444 Eu
Contract: 1 S Age: 27 y.
RT: 285 Height: 203 cm.
Potential: 3
logo
Kao LaoShi Player is lent and will not be available in your team until the end of season
Salary: 6793 Eu
Contract: 3 S Age: 25 y.
RT: 252 Height: 212 cm.
Potential: 4
flag Vaidas Giedrikas
Salary: -
Contract: School talent Age: 15 y.
RT: 54 Height: 185 cm.
Potential: 7
Icon Trade/Lending players: Fung911 & Big Dipper
-- 89 S 33 d.
Team made a trade offer
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
Show hidden replies: 3
Trade offer accepted -- 89 S 33 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
https://www.basketpulse.com/en/Trade/information/1123333
The first trade was reverted and I want to clear something here based on the reasons given by the FPC members.
The goal for Fung here is not only saving, and Vaidas is not a useless player, he is a young talent. And also the goal is not only helping one team but both teams, Fung gets a young talent and saves while I get a ready-now player to help my team now. I think this is very common in both game and IRL, for example. NBA teams could use their trade exceptions to trade away big contracts and save money, just like how Fung and I use our restrictions' level 10 here. I don't think one can argue a trade is unfair when this trade helps both teams. I added Kao in this new offer to reduce the salary difference. I hope the FPC members will understand and vote accordingly if the trade is reported again, thanks and best regards. -- 89 S 33 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
RT 285 = RT 252 + POT 7. Granger is back in his mother team :) Happy
Trade restriction level 10 is valuable when we both trade win-win, If salary drop is a reason to revert this trade, this investment to level 10 is simply useless, and which NONE will invest again. -- 89 S 33 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0