Calgary Flyers deal

To Flyers: Greg Nemisz, Year 4 CGY 4th, $400K

To Flames: Radek Bonk, Christoph Schubert

flames agrre


Flames are adding some much needed depth and a solid checker in Schubert Whereas Bonk will be Solid center for the last year he is in the NHL

Flyers Agree

Now looking for a 3/4th line LW
If you are shopping one shoot me a message

I hate doing this, but I'm going to have to challenge this deal.

Nemisz is a top prospect. Bonk is an unsigned UFA forward who may never play in the NHL again. Schubert doesn't even fit in the top thirteen forwards of the Senators, nor their top seven on defense. Sure, Bonk and Schubert are capable third/fourth-liners in the SDHL now, but Nemisz will almost positively be a top-six forward far better than those two.

I agree with the Nordiques here.
Two guys that won't be in the NHL is not a decent return for a prospect of that ilk

Garth Snow wrote:

I agree with the Nordiques here.
Two guys that won't be in the NHL is not a decent return for a prospect of that ilk

Right. And also, I forgot to mention that not only is Schubert not likely going to crack the Senators' team as more than a secondary option spare player, he could end up playing in Europe sooner or later. He's a versatile player, but I think Murray has tried to trade him numerous times, without success.

That's right he requested a trade a year ah and Murray wasn't able to move him.

Guys.... please understand something... Challenging a deal is for franchise-altering trades that make 0 sense for the franchise and are insanely lopsided that it could alter the integrity of a team... This deal is just not that.. Is Nemisz gonna be good, very likely. Are Bonk and Shcubert gonna play in NHL again...not sure, maybe Schubert but 4th liner, depth guy... Is it enough for Nemisz...likely not.

Now the real questions:

Is it of our business if Philly made a good deal and Calgary got owned? NO
Does it destroy or alter Calgary's franchise? Not at all....
Can Calgary use Bonk and Schubert on his roster right now and feels that giving Nemisz isnt too bad if it can get him some depth for the year? YES

Finally... Is this deal challengable?? NOT EVEN CLOSE

People better start understanding what challenging a deal implies, and what it should be used for... Random useless insignificant deals like this one are not when it's good to do it. Calgary got owned, I agree. So be it, too bad for him...

Insignificant deals? If Greg Nemisz becomes a first-line power forward in the NHL, and Schubert and Bonk never set foot in the NHL again, is that really so insignificant? I mean frig, there's even more coming from Calgary than just Nemisz. Besides, there are a few decent depth players still available through free agency.

Challenging deals that are a 2nd-rounder away from being fair is stupid, but this one is a colossal rip off.

i strongly disagree. You said it yourself... If Nemisz...

the deal is stupid, but unchallengable. I mean come on... people are allowed to make deals, to rip someone off a bit once in a while. As long as the team integrity isnt compromised, i think it's fair game. Winning a deal is legal and encouraged lol....

I actually do agree with CHI. He does put up a good point. As of right now, this does not effect the teams, not the slightest bit. Flames are getting a two depth players, which is good. Flyers are getting a great prospect plus a useless pick, not improving his team by a whole lot, but an improvement nontheless. But wait, doesn't the two depth players improve the Flames? Yes it does. So is this trade not improving both teams? YES it is. So, why should it be challenged?

Chicago said it best, when you trade away a franchise player, a player you should be careful to move, then a challenge could happen. A trade between players that are second liner best (yeah I think Nemisz is a second liner, not a first) this should not be alerting all teams to challenge. A team getting a better deal in the trade can happen, in most trades a team does get the better deal and one teamgets the short end, only a few trades that have happened so far are even, others one team won in the trade, and like this one, some would say Philly won, and I am one of those people.

SHould you challenge this trade? I don't think so. We can't challenge a trade if it isn't 100% fair, because then there would be no trades at all. Flyers got the better end, IMO, that's all. Live with it.

ChicagoGM wrote:

Guys.... please understand something... Challenging a deal is for franchise-altering trades that make 0 sense for the franchise and are insanely lopsided that it could alter the integrity of a team...

Wrong.

Challanging deal are for ANY deals you see as unfair for one team or the other.
These two teams have already made a deal that was challanged and reversed. Calgary has now made only 2 trades since the new GM took over, both involved him giving up a very good prospect for guys who are no longer in the NHL

The other train of though should be looking out for the new GM's. Ass raping them now basically means that when their team starts to wither they'll be on the first train out of dodge leaving a barren team for some other poor sap to take over.

Dealing high end prospects should never be done for 4th line players.

Now, there's a good chance the Calgary GM didn't know the value of Nemisz which would be a tsk tsk to him for not doing his homework... but the new GM rule could kick into effect here when Joe see's this. Which is fine, no harm no foul.

Now if he didn't know the value and the Flyers took clear advantage of that, that would be a tsk tsk as well to them.

Winning is fun, everyone wants to do it... but we're also people trying to have fun. Screwing people brings hurt feelings later and other knowledgeable GM's stay away from those people later on. There's no point in doing it. If you can't win a trade by making it fair, why insult the rest of us by trying to obviously cheat someone out of a player simply so you can "win".

This deal was right to be challenged.

All of you should take note and read between the lines of my post. I personally wouldn't tolerate anyone trying to cheat anyone in any league I was running or apart of.

Make a deal, make it fair for both sides, but also make sure the value of the players switching sides is equal. It's not that hard.

If you don't have the pieces to make a deal fair... don't make the deal. Saves me the trouble of having to come out here and hold people's hands.

HurriCanes wrote:

We can't challenge a trade if it isn't 100% fair, because then there would be no trades at all. Flyers got the better end, IMO, that's all. Live with it.

That's the problem. I completely respect your and Chicago's input, and I feel you are both very knowledgeable GM's. But I feel you're under-estimating the degree to which the Flames are being ripped off here.

There are deals, like one a couple of weeks ago that Ben challenged (sorry to throw you under the bus, Ben ), where his justification was that a 2nd-rounder shouldn't be coming from 'x' team, it should be coming from 'y' team. Those are the types of deals that do not deserve to be challenged.

The Flyers offered me Bonk and $300K for a YR4 3rd-rounder. A YR4 4th and $400K for Bonk is basically fair, based on that offer (which I turned down). Therefore the Flames are trading a top prospect for Schubert? I don't know if anyone else here is a Sens fan, but I am one through and through, and participate on several forums, and I have not seen a single line-up for a year include Schubert. NO knowledgeable Sens fan thinks Schubert should be included in the line-up. He is a secondary spare forward or defenseman, and his ratings will drop, if he remains in the NHL at all.

the problem with trades like this (and yes there is a problem imo) is that nemisz is a valuable piece(2008 1st rd pick) while players like bonk(old) and schubert(not any good) are not. they're dime a dozen while there are only 30 picks in the first round of an nhl draft. that is what both alex and marc immediately recognized.

guys like bonk and schubert can be found anywhere around the league. for example, philly just acquired bonk for $550K. is schubert+$550K worth nemisz, $400K and a 4th?! with $400K+4th worth $450-$500K its nearly a straight up schubert for nemisz trade, which is way too don waddel like for me. (hey, at least zhitnik was good at one point...)

i would be more receptive to the arguments made by francis and daniel if the calgary gm wasnt brand new. i think there is definitely more leeway given to our strongest and most veteren GMs to watch their own backs trade wise, but it is different with new GMs.

yes, i am going to new guy veto this trade as it is not even in the ballpark of being close.

Thanks, Joe, I think that is a reasonable course of action.

And sorry Mark and Mike... hate tampering with other GMs' deals, but this one was too bad to let through without challenging.

maybe eventually we'll all have a better understanding of what a good deal is and make this league that much better. Experience in trading is real important