|
|
Post by Toronto Maple Leafs GM on Jan 29, 2014 14:59:03 GMT -5
I don't think anyone can say anything to you about this anymore. It was put to a vote, the league incredibly favored this method, your trade got rejected and now the world is over. Minny honestly im not sure why you are discussing whether this trade should be accepted or rejected as this is an admin/mod decision. also, your comments arent needed or wanted. Personally I dont appreciate this quoted comment. |
|
|
|
Post by Florida Panthers GM on Jan 29, 2014 15:56:55 GMT -5
I don't think anyone can say anything to you about this anymore. It was put to a vote, the league incredibly favored this method, your trade got rejected and now the world is over. Minny honestly im not sure why you are discussing whether this trade should be accepted or rejected as this is an admin/mod decision. also, your comments arent needed or wanted. Personally I dont appreciate this quoted comment. Minnisota is just as important to this league as you ,Cranker or anyone else . Anyone except Pens that is lol |
|
|
|
Post by Mike - Former Wild GM on Jan 29, 2014 16:55:53 GMT -5
The only reason I commented on this is because it is turning into Cranker's nervous nilly-ness over something I, and the rest of this league, have voted on twice. If anything, his constant public outcry over something that hasn't even happened yet (despite 2 mass-polls in which we all voted like 75% in favor of TWICE) can become detrimental to the league. If he has such a huge problem with it, he should have discussed it privately among the admins and trade mods of this site before the polls even happened. The more he fights everything the league asked for, the more he places a stigma and a blackmark on the site.
But somehow, I'm the bad guy for standing up for what the league voted for twice in a trade in which an admin is trying to get an 89 that he liked enough to move a 91 and not have to use more than one spot to keep said player so he can keep his depth, but then get upset that the league rejected it so that the no-gm team could keep ITS depth. Right.
My apologies, sirs, for speaking out of line.
|
|
|
|
Post by C00kies - Retired Kings GM on Jan 29, 2014 17:19:39 GMT -5
I'm still surprised this got rejected lol. I think people let their love of Tavares (who wouldn't love a young gunner like him) affect their views of the trade.
The deal is: 89, 84, 84 FOR a 91, 84ish player (first round pick), 83ish (second round pick). I added the 84s (lost due to this trade) and the picked players (used to show the replenishing of the lost players). The Capitals would gain ~1 overall to their top 10 players, while not screwing up their depth.
Devil's advocate says that the Capitals would get two 84s in the draft regardless of doing this trade. While it is true that the Capitals would improve their depth without doing the deal, the Capitals improve their best player (top line) instead of improving their 3rd or 4th lines.
There is no right or wrong strategy, but I'm just showing that this wasn't an unfair deal and was one many GMs would do as the GM of the Capitals (meaning it wouldn't deter others from picking up this team).
Do not hate me, I'm just trying to broaden the scope of acceptance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Calgary Flames GM on Jan 29, 2014 17:28:24 GMT -5
I don't think anyone can say anything to you about this anymore. It was put to a vote, the league incredibly favored this method, your trade got rejected and now the world is over. Minny honestly im not sure why you are discussing whether this trade should be accepted or rejected as this is an admin/mod decision. also, your comments arent needed or wanted. Personally I dont appreciate this quoted comment. Well that's kind of an asshole thing to say. You could have just said only mods and admins, but no you gotta be a total dickwad and say his comments aren't needed or wanted?? Who put you in charge of our opinions?? Thank you Mike - Former Wild GM for you beautiful response and I find that your comment was extremely needed and wanted. |
|
|
|
Post by Pittsburgh Penguins GM on Jan 29, 2014 20:53:18 GMT -5
I appreciate everybodies input in all this stuff, just try not to attack anybody if you can. Politically correct if you can LOL. I believe atleast half the first RD or better will be 86-89 players or better. First RD will be huge with this. I know I will losing and 87 and 88 to the draft and some teams will be losing a lot more than that
|
|
|
|
Post by Calgary Flames GM on Jan 29, 2014 21:18:12 GMT -5
I'll be losing 1 84  |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jan 29, 2014 23:40:47 GMT -5
This is a recording, the point is a 91 is now less valuable then a 89. That is ridiculous. Correction, this particular 89, at 23 years old and one of the league's biggest young players, is not worth the offered 91 i n this No-GM trade to this team. If you did this with a different team, who had a human GM, then the 89 would be worth the 91. So, do that. |
|
|
|
Post by Winnipeg Jets GM on Jan 29, 2014 23:45:46 GMT -5
This is a recording, the point is a 91 is now less valuable then a 89. That is ridiculous. Correction, this particular 89, at 23 years old and one of the league's biggest young players, is not worth the offered 91 i n this No-GM trade to this team. If you did this with a different team, who had a human GM, then the 89 would be worth the 91. So, do that. Someone fill me in. Why did canes refer to Tavares age? Theres no retirements or downgrades so why would this matter? Or am I missing something here? |
|
|
|
Post by Calgary Flames GM on Jan 29, 2014 23:56:47 GMT -5
When the next game comes out Tavares would most likely be upgrade to a 91.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tampa Bay Lightning GM on Jan 30, 2014 0:31:12 GMT -5
When the next game comes out Tavares would most likely be upgrade to a 91. ^ Probably higher. |
|
|
|
Post by C00kies - Retired Kings GM on Jan 30, 2014 0:40:29 GMT -5
When the next game comes out Tavares would most likely be upgrade to a 91. That may be so, but we're not supposed to take next games into account, especially with this not being anywhere near the game change season. |
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jan 30, 2014 4:24:08 GMT -5
I didn't with my rejection. Another reject mentioned it. I said, and still believe, upgrading a measley 2 overalls is not worth 2 additional 84 players. If this was a human GM trade, I would not care - that is their call to make. With no GM trades, we need to be tougher.
|
|
