|
|
Post by bengoavs on Aug 20, 2006 15:40:22 GMT -5
It's never too late to wake up. Our newest GM is making some one sided trades and they're not to his favor. That's the Jets owner of course.
Bouwmeester, Theodore and a pick for Penner and the ducks' backup?!?
Gerber for Fatchuk??
Is it just me here? I'd like to get those vetoed. Tell me what you think.
|
|
Andrew
Second Liner
25%
Posts: 320
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 20, 2006 16:53:46 GMT -5
Gerber for Tkachuk is questionable, but the other one sounds fine by me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Aug 20, 2006 18:16:11 GMT -5
...says the guy who essentially just traded Zubrus for Zetterberg.
|
|
Ryan
First Liner
100%
104-139-33
Posts: 726
|
Post by Ryan on Aug 20, 2006 23:28:22 GMT -5
Zubrus for Zetterberg but I also upgraded a lot in Net and got an extra dman that I can trade for another Center and I have a lot of LWers n e ways
|
|
|
|
Post by bengoavs on Aug 21, 2006 1:23:07 GMT -5
Let's do some math :
Zetterberg >= Zubrus + Chara
Fernandez <= Lundqvist
Bouwmeester >> Penner
Theodore >>> Giguere (as a backup)
and a pick for good measure
Gerber >>>>> Tkachuk
Maybe we need to make a qualifying exam for newcomers.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Aug 21, 2006 1:32:27 GMT -5
Lundqvist - 30-12-9 .922% 2 so
Fernandez - 30-18-7 .919% 1 so
...i guess if .03% and 1 so is "a lot" lundqvist for fernandez is a wash.
chara was his 5th dman, value was at its lowest, easily expendable.
zubrus = bench
zetterberg = 1st round draft pick
im not arguing the trade for either party, and i wouldnt have even said anything considering the circumstances. i just found this complaining rather ironic coming from a man who just stole zetterberg.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil - Blue Jackets on Aug 21, 2006 4:53:55 GMT -5
Let's do some math : Zetterberg >= Zubrus + Chara Fernandez <= Lundqvist Bouwmeester >> Penner Theodore >>> Giguere (as a backup) and a pick for good measure Gerber >>>>> Tkachuk Maybe we need to make a qualifying exam for newcomers..... I hate this crap. Your little "value" chart means nothing. Know why? Cause thats what YOU think the values are, not to mention that "<<<<<" is a real accurate way of grading a player. You're not the one making the trade so it doesnt matter what you think. The "veto" option isnt something you just pull out when you see a trade you wouldnt have done or that you think is tilted one way or the other. Values are subjective and I'll let you in on a little secret, a trade will look different to different people. Neither you or anybody else has the right to be the trade police for other managers choices. This is ignoring the fact that you cant speak up for a veto weeks after a trade goes down. Honestly, "I think we should veto those trades that let this guys team get so good....." This would be another good one "I think we should veto that guys draft pick. Player X shouldn't have gone that high...." |
|
Ryan
First Liner
100%
104-139-33
Posts: 726
|
Post by Ryan on Aug 21, 2006 8:05:39 GMT -5
ok so you think Fernandez and Lunqvist are so close well lets see there stats were close this year well Manny played 10 Seasons in the NHL this is Henriks first year in the nhl, Lundqvist will play for for a lot longer then Fernandez will, nad as For Zubrus if he plays with Ovechkin then i'll get lots of points from him and Chara should help me get a decent 3rd goalie
|
|
Andrew
Second Liner
25%
Posts: 320
|
Post by Andrew on Aug 21, 2006 9:20:29 GMT -5
I'm with Phil to some extent. You're not the one making the trade so it doesnt matter what you think. I disagree. We should certainly be able to veto things if we think collusion is a factor. Ben saw a new manager make two unbalanced trades to other teams right away so he thought he would say something. Granted, it would have made sense to say it earlier... . The "veto" option isnt something you just pull out when you see a trade you wouldnt have done or that you think is tilted one way or the other Exactly. I think we have to be careful that the veto option doesn't act as a "safety net" whenever somebody makes a bad move. Regarding Bouwmeester+Theodore for Penner+Giguere. I don't know how this is considered to be a terrible trade. Giguere is a talented goalie, the only reason he doesn't play is money issues. But between him, Biron, and Nabokov, they are the most readily available goalies and can easily be moved to other teams during the season. Hell, he may even take over the role from Bryzgalov. Theodore is a mess, he is not a reliable goaltender in the least. Bouwmeester is a defensemen, and an average one at that. He's young, so what. Regarding Tkachuk for Gerber. I really don't like this deal... if this was moved to veto I would have to consider but again, the veto system is not a safety net for bad trades. Regarding Zubrus, Zetts, Fernandez, etc.... I think Ryan overpaid. I think Fernandez is horribly underrated, and I don't think Zubrus will play much with Ovechkin. Ryan traded talent for talent, sure it looks like he gave up to much, but I wouldn't say that one deserves a veto because as Ryan demonstrated, he believes that he received fair value in the trade. |
|
|
|
Post by Phil - Blue Jackets on Aug 21, 2006 13:10:44 GMT -5
ok so you think Fernandez and Lunqvist are so close well lets see there stats were close this year well Manny played 10 Seasons in the NHL this is Henriks first year in the nhl, Lundqvist will play for for a lot longer then Fernandez will, nad as For Zubrus if he plays with Ovechkin then i'll get lots of points from him and Chara should help me get a decent 3rd goalie What kind of a goalie is Chara going to "net" you exactly? Zubrus + Ovechkin = lots of points? Well he had 57 last year. You had your chance to get a solid goaltender with Zetterberg. Instead, if you flip Chara, you got a mediocre 3rd goalie and a player that could be DECENT without the could be. As far as your goalie comments, I think lundqvist is better than fernandez yes, but theres another way to look at your argument. Last year was Henrik's first year. You don't have any idea what he is going to be, how long he's going to be around, etc. A marginal upgrade at best. With that said, the value you got in return is your business. Even if I think you got hosed, it doesn't matter. Trades that are clearly won by another team is part of fantasy sports. It's what we all signed up for. Somewhere in the fine print it says "you, or someone in your league, will get hosed at some point in the season. Deal with it." Vetos are gay. Very rarely are they warranted. When this thread was started, there was no mention of possible collusion. There was merely statements like "I think this guy wins this trade. Veto? Who's with me?" Thats simply ridiculous. It's just like when everyone was up in arms about the Briere for 1st overall prospect trade. There was no collusion but people "didn't like" the trade. Bullshit. I know if I were to pull off a trade in which I owned the value exchanged and it got vetoed, I would be pissed beyond belief. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Aug 21, 2006 15:58:57 GMT -5
ok so you think Fernandez and Lunqvist are so close well lets see there stats were close this year well Manny played 10 Seasons in the NHL this is Henriks first year in the nhl, Lundqvist will play for for a lot longer then Fernandez will, nad as For Zubrus if he plays with Ovechkin then i'll get lots of points from him and Chara should help me get a decent 3rd goalie nobody is screaming veto, except colorado. as far as im concerned, the only way anything should be veteod is if it is CLEARLY lopsided, not based on your opinion alone. ( ie, eric staal and roberto luongo for alexei yashin and dan cloutier) with that said, this isnt up for debate. its right there for everyone to see. you cant argue that chara isnt his 5th D or that zubrus isnt a backup LW, or that based on what we know without assuming that lundqvist and chara dont have similar numbers, its fact, those are the rules. backup LW = zubrus "backup" 5th dman = chara goalie that was traded for similar goalie + 1st round draft pick, defense killer, 25 year old fantasy daddy = zetterberg ________________________________________ stolen ...and thats all i ever implied, is that zetterberg was stolen. if you have the "talent" to trade. more power to you (colorado) however, i think you could have gotten a better deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark - Bruins on Aug 22, 2006 12:12:58 GMT -5
The only trades I thought were capable of veto were Gerber for Tkachuk and the Zetterberg deal.
Gerber is a lot more valuable than a single, aging power forward who will probably end up with around 70 points if he's healthy all year. I don't care for that deal, but I think its okay to go through.
Also, I think the Zetterberg deal was a bit unfair. Lundqvist is great and all, but he's had only 1 solid year so far and you can't say he's the second coming of Marty Brodeur just after 1 year (*cough* Jim Carey *cough* Andrew Raycroft *cough* Blaine Lacher *cough* the list goes on). IMO his youth and potential to be consistently good give him only a slight advantage over Fernandez, who has shown his consistency, is on a defensive dynamo team like Minnesota, and is a former All-Star. Besides, Zetterberg is one of the top 15 fantasy forwards (there is a reason why he went top 20 in our draft) and is worth way more than Zubrus (there are TONS of guys who are identical to what stats Zubrus will get you -> around 25g, 60 points) and Chara (average offensive d-man who is overrated because he gives you PIMS).
|
|
|
|
Post by bengoavs on Aug 22, 2006 13:32:03 GMT -5
OK. First of all, Phil, your reply seemes to be a little agitated.
It actually does. we're in a league.
Maybe some of you see the veto thing differently than I do. I see it as a precaution from future problems. In ESPN leagues, which are way more stable than the yahoo ones since people pay their money to play, almost every trade gets vetoed. Why? exactly Phil, people see things differently. So It's just a tool to protect the league, and have the majority opinion implemented. Very reasonable. So when I say that I wanna get this trade vetoed, it's not a war declaration - It's just a call for a voting. My slow reaction is due to the fact that separately each trade is not awful (well the Takchuk one is), but together they show a tendency to give up too much. It's for the favor of the Jets owner.
So leave the players value argument alone. It doesn't matter. All that counts is if the majority agrees or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil - Blue Jackets on Aug 22, 2006 16:41:19 GMT -5
OK. First of all, Phil, your reply seemes to be a little agitated. It actually does. we're in a league. Maybe some of you see the veto thing differently than I do. I see it as a precaution from future problems. In ESPN leagues, which are way more stable than the yahoo ones since people pay their money to play, almost every trade gets vetoed. Why? exactly Phil, people see things differently. So It's just a tool to protect the league, and have the majority opinion implemented. Very reasonable. So when I say that I wanna get this trade vetoed, it's not a war declaration - It's just a call for a voting. My slow reaction is due to the fact that separately each trade is not awful (well the Takchuk one is), but together they show a tendency to give up too much. It's for the favor of the Jets owner. So leave the players value argument alone. It doesn't matter. All that counts is if the majority agrees or not. I don't care if Chris is the biggest dumbass in the history of fantasy sports. He's not cheating so who are we to pass judgement on his decisions? "It's for the favor of the Jets owner?" Like i said, why don't we just vote on every decision thats made during the season. "Lets veto that draft pick. That player shouldn't have gone that high." Thats basically what you're talkin about. Why manage your own team at all? Why dont we just post what we're thinking about doing and vote on every decision? Oh that's right. That would be gay. Almost every trade gets vetoed? Exactly my point. I think I speak for all the other managers when I say don't do me any favors. I know whats best for my team, not you or anybody else. This entire thread is ridiculous. If every trade in your league gets vetoed, it's not because thats what is "best" for the managers involved. It's because people don't want other teams improving. But believe me, if they work out a deal that benefits their team they're not going to not do it cause that would best for the other manager. Take your trade for zetterberg for example...... That shouldn't be vetoed either, but you clearly won the deal. By your logic, thats unacceptable. |
|
|
|
Post by bengoavs on Aug 22, 2006 23:53:38 GMT -5
It's not. But I would not continue it if that's how you feel.
One last thing... think of Iran's presidenent Ahmadinjad. ;D
(now we're getting ridiculous).
Anyways he's kinda like Phil, saying who are you to involve with my decisions? I will do what I want and mind your own business.
Why does the world interfere? To keep stability. Yes it's a lousy comparation. I'm done, promise.
|
|
So exciting.
You better make that pick or trade it! I'm excited to see if we can use up all the draft picks this year.