Flyers/Sharks Deal

OH ya
And Happy Birthday Joe

well, gee, mark. i guess if you're going to hold everyone else to such a high moral standard on their trades, then you should look in the mirror first.

haha

Joe I dont like Mirrors unless they are hanging from my ceiling and some 19 yr old wannabe stripper is riding me. But thanks for the Advice.

btw, mark, i'd like to hear how'd you'd react if the situation was reversed: ie, had a deal tanked because it supposedly wasnt good enough, only to see someone else come and make a similar deal two days later.

if marleau isnt worth "stuff" then he's not worth "stuff" regardless of who it comes from.

Joe, the fact that you're fighting this deal so hard doesn't bode well for your argument in favour of your Ovie trade.
Because if Marleau can't be traded for 'stuff' neither can Ovie. (a lot of the peices are in your Ovie deal as were in your MArleau one)

I disagree with the assessment on the Ovechkin trade...first off the main return piece is Havlet and he is a high end player. so the trade is Superstar for high end player, solid players and picks....seems reasonable

cbj wrote:

I disagree with the assessment on the Ovechkin trade...first off the main return piece is Havlet and he is a high end player. so the trade is Superstar for high end player, solid players and picks....seems reasonable

while i dont completely agree with this, its true

When trading a top 3 player in the league you should get a franchise player in return, Havlat is not a franchise player.

I'm not saying the Ovie one should be vetoed, i'm just saying that if this one is, it means the other should as well. Both are lopsided, but are unfair for the team giving up the star player, so both should either be allowed or dis-allowed, as Joe said, same standards for everyone.

Garth Snow wrote:

Joe, the fact that you're fighting this deal so hard doesn't bode well for your argument in favour of your Ovie trade.
Because if Marleau can't be traded for 'stuff' neither can Ovie. (a lot of the peices are in your Ovie deal as were in your MArleau one)

I think what Joe is trying to say is his peices are valuable Kobasew dosen't look out of place in the top 6 ryder is easily a top 6 forward and picks and cash are picks and cash similar to what Philly is offering... I completely understand how Joe is frustrated by his deal not being accepted but this one being accepted... to be honest I don't think this enough to give up for Marleau. He's a top 6 forward on the best team in the league last year... at least during the regular season, he sees #1 Power play time and this will continue to happen with him their if not being moved up to the top line for the whole season with Pavelski being a strong candidate for second line center... he will re-rate better as SJ has to proove their worth this year. the picks are always good but I'd have to say this deal is better for Philly then SJ

Garth Snow wrote:

Joe, the fact that you're fighting this deal so hard doesn't bode well for your argument in favour of your Ovie trade.
Because if Marleau can't be traded for 'stuff' neither can Ovie. (a lot of the peices are in your Ovie deal as were in your MArleau one)

people will be able to vote however they want on the OV deal. that is up to them. i gave up more for OV than the canes did. the reason this particular deal has been vetoed is because this trade is no better than the last trade san jose tried to do for marleau. maybe we dont have a completely clear idea of what marleau is worth, but we know for sure that he's not worth "stuff".

as for the ovechkin deal, i think that i gave up more than "stuff" for sure. havlat-1st liner who is now minnesota's top offensive player. should do AT LEAST as well in minnesota as in chicago. keep in mind that injuries arent a big factor for skaters in the sim. as long as you put up good per game numbers you're rate really well. wheeler and ryder are both top 6 guys. in fact, they played both played on the same line in boston for most of the year. (2nd with krejci) then of course the 4 picks speak for themselves. anyway, i suppose this is the wrong forum for this discussion.

Garth Snow wrote:

When trading a top 3 player in the league you should get a franchise player in return, Havlat is not a franchise player.

I'm not saying the Ovie one should be vetoed, i'm just saying that if this one is, it means the other should as well. Both are lopsided, but are unfair for the team giving up the star player, so both should either be allowed or dis-allowed, as Joe said, same standards for everyone.

but why do i have to trade a franchise player for a franchise player? so only sid for ov deals? c'mon. i realize im getting by far the best player in the trade, but thats why i gave up a lot of extras. thats a completely normal trade structure.

As I said Joe, I don't neccessarily think yoru OV trade should be vetoed, I just think that since you're getting him at a discount (due to the GM not shopping him), that Marleau should be able to be had at a discount as well.
It's the GMs fault for not getting proper value for their assets.

[quote="bure_HOF"]
but why do i have to trade a franchise player for a franchise player? so only sid for ov deals? [quote]

There are many more franchise players in the league than those two. Havlat is not one of them, he's on the next level down.

And again, as i've said, i'm not saying yourse should be vetoed, i'm jsut saying that this one shouldn't be either

First off I have no idea what your deal was. I was away this weekend at my cottage.

And are you telling me you dont talk to other gms and let them know if you think they are getting ripped off on a deal?

We all do it. We all ask for peoples advice. Most of it do it before the deal is posted though.

And yes I would be pissed.
I get pissed everytime my deals are vetoed or I see a bad deal happen.

can we get to 5 pages of bitching i sure hope so

So glad I am at work getting paid for this

marc,

there is also another issue that differentiates this trade from bos-car; san jose has done a number of trades and mostly people are saying that he's taking the short end of the stick. my trade with him was viewed that way. fair enough. this should be viewed the same way.

bure_HOF wrote:

marc,

there is also another issue that differentiates this trade from bos-car; san jose has done a number of trades and mostly people are saying that he's taking the short end of the stick. my trade with him was viewed that way. fair enough. this should be viewed the same way.

Yes but those other ones were accepted.

So... what is the deal with this one... where is Marleau at now? Cuz if he's in SJ i'd like to make an offer

He's in San Jose apparently.

Even though he should be in Philly.

San Jose's other terrible deals were not vetoed, this one is for some reason.

well he's still on my roster. lol. no need to bash my old deals continuously. i get the point now

A little birdy has told me the SJ-PHI deal is being slightly reworked.

I've looked over the new one and support it 100%.

As stated before, Marleau is a sim disaster. Up until this point he was up and down, last year he was rated 72, this year 81. The difference being his PK time and the fact the little fucker started scoring more then Skwids mom on a 2 for 1 Friday night.

Even if his scoring goes down, he'll be rated around 78 OV. Two firsts, 2 seconds a fill in 76 OV player and a handful of prospects for him and another prospect (not even SJ's best one) is well worth it.

Let's accept it and move on.

I agree.

Are all trades going to be phillibustered this way?

Garth Snow wrote:

bure_HOF wrote:

marc,

there is also another issue that differentiates this trade from bos-car; san jose has done a number of trades and mostly people are saying that he's taking the short end of the stick. my trade with him was viewed that way. fair enough. this should be viewed the same way.

Yes but those other ones were accepted.

so was my deal. it was posted.


i have to keep repeating myself on this point, but--the reason this trade was vetoed is because it was already established that san jose shouldnt trade marleau for "stuff". and if one gm has his deal killed because he's offering "stuff" then another gm shouldnt be able to come along and make the same kind of deal two days later. he shouldnt cost less for one team than he does for me. its not like san jose and boston or philly are in the same conference.

bure_HOF wrote:

Garth Snow wrote:

bure_HOF wrote:

marc,

there is also another issue that differentiates this trade from bos-car; san jose has done a number of trades and mostly people are saying that he's taking the short end of the stick. my trade with him was viewed that way. fair enough. this should be viewed the same way.

Yes but those other ones were accepted.

so was my deal. it was posted.

I mean they were accepted by the league and put through

at this point, i think the deal should go through. it's not like your old deal would have get vetoed. I'm pretty sure it would have been accepted. It wasnt vetoed, it was pulled by SJ because he's been influenced by someone else...

If SJ likes that one better (for god knows which reason) it should go through. Both deals were bad for him, but fine to go through. He was tlkaed out of yours, wasnt talked out of this one. Might be unfair if the guy talking him out is Mark's friend, but what can you do....