|
Post by AvsGM on Oct 16, 2009 13:55:52 GMT -5
What's your prob man, when you single people out and don't use diplomacy In Jake's defense I don't think he really singled you out as much as you have singled yourself out by being so adamantly against what we have been discussing
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Oct 16, 2009 13:58:44 GMT -5
Yeah i did, in defense of FLA. I don't feel I broke any rules, so i was not afraid to single myself out.
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Oct 16, 2009 13:59:57 GMT -5
...and if youg guys want, we can easily just say that you can't send a player to the farm who makes more than a certain amount of money. I don't think that's what you guys really want, so please, in the nicest way possible....stfu already!
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Oct 16, 2009 14:01:03 GMT -5
...and if youg guys want, we can easily just say that you can't send a player to the farm who makes more than a certain amount of money. I don't think that's what you guys really want, so please, in the nicest way possible....stfu already!
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Oct 16, 2009 14:13:03 GMT -5
Or we could just make it something easy like players from unassiged must be signed to a minimum of 2 years, and apply some form of the rule that if you do drop a player you are accountable for a percentage of their salary against your cap. That way there is nothing that needs to be manually tracked and looked up. Umm...k If keeping track of all that extra salary is easier than keeping track of the players, go for it. You put a dummy player on each team, "Chicago Cap-hit", "Colorado Cap-hit" etc...that can't be moved from scratched and keep track of it that way. Simple!
|
|
|
Post by RangersRon on Oct 16, 2009 14:24:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by RangersRon on Oct 16, 2009 14:28:35 GMT -5
Umm...k If keeping track of all that extra salary is easier than keeping track of the players, go for it. You put a dummy player on each team, "Chicago Cap-hit", "Colorado Cap-hit" etc...that can't be moved from scratched and keep track of it that way. Simple! Wow Ray! I thought when Jon said dummy here, my mind went right to you and thought he was talking about you! LOLOLOL
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Oct 16, 2009 14:58:16 GMT -5
You put a dummy player on each team, "Chicago Cap-hit", "Colorado Cap-hit" etc...that can't be moved from scratched and keep track of it that way. Simple! Wow Ray! I thought when Jon said dummy here, my mind went right to you and thought he was talking about you! LOLOLOL Me Too !!
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Oct 16, 2009 23:45:31 GMT -5
When you make a 5.7 million dollar bid on Ville Leino, you single yourself out! The same goes for bidding 3 million on a goalie with no NHL experience.
That being said, no one should take it personally, like a couple of you did. And... I don`t know about you... but I don`t think calling someone a "fucking hypocrit" (Florida`s post) is diplomatic.
My suggestions are: - Put a 2-3 year contract limit on unassigned players who get bids over $2 million. - If a team drops a player, 50% of their salary goes against the teams cap. - If the above rule is put into place, then maybe we can consider removing the 64 OV dropping limit.
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Oct 16, 2009 23:54:12 GMT -5
How can i not take it personal when you suggest, I did a really stupid thing, don't you think that's abit personal? I assure you he will sit on my farm and be much much cheaper next season Jake He is a top goalie prospect rated 8.0 B That's a projected almost 100% a future No1 Goalie and it's a need for me, I gave up Morrow for the other dude who is 7.5 D. I'm tired of tryin to find a Goalie every season, and merely thinkin of the future in an area I need big improvement in, and like i said he will be much cheaper next season As far as Fla, he wouldn't have said a word, you were the first to pass your expert judgement Jake, we have been friends for along time and I don't carry grudges. So let's just run our teams and leave insults behind man.
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Oct 17, 2009 0:08:46 GMT -5
When you make a 5.7 million dollar bid on Ville Leino, you single yourself out! The same goes for bidding 3 million on a goalie with no NHL experience. That being said, no one should take it personally, like a couple of you did. And... I don`t know about you... but I don`t think calling someone a "fucking hypocrit" (Florida`s post) is diplomatic. My suggestions are: - If a team drops a player, 50% of their salary goes against the teams cap. I like your other suggestions, but I feel this one is a bit absurd Jake JMO
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Oct 17, 2009 0:27:16 GMT -5
He is a top goalie prospect rated 8.0 B That's a projected almost 100% a future No1 Goalie Actually he is rated 7.5C, kind of a big difference
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Oct 17, 2009 0:40:43 GMT -5
He is a top goalie prospect rated 8.0 B That's a projected almost 100% a future No1 Goalie Actually he is rated 7.5C, kind of a big difference That's still a no1 goalie, just not elite. I saw him at 8.0B last Sunday, and those numbers do change.
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Oct 17, 2009 0:52:25 GMT -5
How can i not take it personal when you suggest, I did a really stupid thing, don't you think that's abit personal? I assure you he will sit on my farm and be much much cheaper next season Jake This is exactly why this rule needs to be changed. Rules are not meant to be manipulated in this way. If you have actually been reading through this thread, I don't see how you can be that confident of that at all. And when did I say "stupid"? I'm giving my opinion. If you don't like reading opinions, get off the internet, because its full of them. And no, I do not think its unreasonable to ask you to stop taking critical opinions personally... we're talking about hockey here. Its not absurd at all to suggest a rule that makes team responsible for part of a dropped players salary. In fact, that idea has been the main idea that keeps coming up in this thread. Why exactly do you think its absurd? You haven't given any reasons against it, except that you feel it "handcuffs" GMs... which makes no sense at all. A side note - If you use HF boards ratings as a gospel of hockey prospect knowledge, thats fine... but if you think a 8.0B player is a "100% future starting goalie" you have been extremely misled. At the very most, 1/4 prospects rated 8.0 actually make an impact in the NHL. And I just read another comment from you in the thread... if I tried to move Weber last season and was unsuccessful, its because no one would pay what he's worth. Do you really think I would have trouble getting rid of a Norris trophy calibre 24 year old defenseman?
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Oct 17, 2009 0:59:26 GMT -5
Actually he is rated 7.5C, kind of a big difference That's still a no1 goalie, just not elite. I saw him at 8.0B last Sunday, and those numbers do change. I grabbed him in another league about 2 months ago and he was a 7.5C back then too. Maybe you got him confused with another player you were looking at. Just trying to change the subject
|
|