|
Post by RangersRon on Sept 24, 2010 22:30:46 GMT -5
That is sad that this trade is not passing. i mean the guy is one year and gone, no other offers came in.....it is what the market is willing to pay at this time. Market value guys not your opinion.
If you think he should have gotten more you should have offered it..... I'm just saying!
|
|
|
Post by MontyBurns on Sept 24, 2010 22:54:42 GMT -5
That is sad that this trade is not passing. i mean the guy is one year and gone, no other offers came in.....it is what the market is willing to pay at this time. Market value guys not your opinion. If you think he should have gotten more you should have offered it..... I'm just saying! No thats okay ron, because i sure that now that half the league has said i need to get more for backstrom, they are about to offer it. I can imagine the cascade of offers i am about to receive. All sarcasm aside, there must be people who want to give up more, and know backstrom will come cheap. So make me an offer.
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Sept 25, 2010 1:19:48 GMT -5
The trade is passing right now 10-8.
|
|
|
Post by MontyBurns on Sept 25, 2010 2:03:06 GMT -5
Canthis be possible?!?!?! I as looking forward to an avalanche of offers!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2010 17:34:55 GMT -5
The trade is passing right now 10-8. We heard from the teams that voted YES (AND I AGREE) ,but to the teams that voted NO, I'd love to know WHY???........Should I have...(1)...add any other 4th or 5th round draft pick in the next two drafts....(2)...take one away and give him a higher pick in the next two drafts...(3)...give him a late round prospect from last years draft...(4)...all of LOS picks (7) in the next two drafts??? What is a good enough deal for a very good goalie with a ONE year contract??? I can't wait to see who or what Monty gets now, I hope I'll get a chance to counter that offer
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Sept 25, 2010 18:19:42 GMT -5
The trade is passing right now 10-8. We heard from the teams that voted YES (AND I AGREE) ,but to the teams that voted NO, I'd love to know WHY???........Should I have...(1)...add any other 4th or 5th round draft pick in the next two drafts....(2)...take one away and give him a higher pick in the next two drafts...(3)...give him a late round prospect from last years draft...(4)...all of LOS picks (7) in the next two drafts??? What is a good enough deal for a very good goalie with a ONE year contract??? I can't wait to see who or what Monty gets now, I hope I'll get a chance to counter that offer I voted no and here's why.....it's simply not enough for a top-flight goalie, 1 year contract or not. I understand Monty can only take the best offer he can get, but that doesn't solely determine the value of a player. I want to move Brodeur, if a 4th round pick is the best I can get for him should the league pass the trade? I would certainly hope not. A lot of time when people put a player on the board other GMs don't even bother to inquire because they feel they price might be too high. However if Monty would have said "I'll take two 4th's and a 5th for Backstrom", I guarantee he would have received offers better than the standing trade. I've gotten a whopping two offers on Broduer, but I bet I'd get a bunch more if I posted that I'd take a 4th for him lol. There is no need for Monty to move Backstrom right this second and get the only offer he can. If he was up against the cap or had other roster issues then I might look at the deal differently. Nor is it even like the 3 picks will ever be pieces/building blocks to his rebuild, so why the urgency? For Backstrom he should get more, could get more, and would get more sometime before the deadline.
|
|
|
Post by LeafsGM on Sept 25, 2010 19:02:08 GMT -5
I disagree Jon. The 7.5 mil tag is the deal breaker, and reason to not invest something of high value in him. He had a very shitty year and his ratings will not win you a cup.
The 4ths are basically 3rds in nhl, and many good players have been picked in those rounds. Monty is in a rebuilding year and has no need/want for backstrom. It's a good trade and should not be rejected.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2010 19:15:09 GMT -5
OK...I appreciate that point of view and I can certainly acknowledge that.....it's a vallid reason, but here's the thing...you can't sign a player during the offseason expecting that the return on that player is going to be "X" amount and you won't take anything less than the "X" amount in your head. Just because a team doesn't " have to" get rid a player doesn't meann he's worth more or less. "That's why I was also in favor of Montys post a couple of weeks ago..... I wanted to float this out there: I dont think you should be able to sign FAs and then trade them right away. Much like in the real NHL and NBA. I would vote to have the trade ban lifted on the same day the cap increases $5 Million.... Thoughts? So what I'm to understand by this point of view is that...depending on the time of year...a players value may go up or down, and if that's the case..... at this time of year Backstrom is worth 2 4ths and a 5th. Maybe in Febuary Backstrom will be worth more, but I'm trying to get him now.
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Sept 25, 2010 19:17:20 GMT -5
I disagree Jon. The 7.5 mil tag is the deal breaker, and reason to not invest something of high value in him. He had a very shitty year and his ratings will not win you a cup. The 4ths are basically 3rds in nhl, and many good players have been picked in those rounds. Monty is in a rebuilding year and has no need/want for backstrom. It's a good trade and should not be rejected. Yeah I'm not here to argue/debate our opinions. Mike wanted to know why people voted no so I told him why and my thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Sept 25, 2010 19:31:30 GMT -5
OK...I appreciate that point of view and I can certainly acknowledge that.....it's a vallid reason, but here's the thing...you can't sign a player during the offseason expecting that the return on that player is going to be "X" amount and you won't take anything less than the "X" amount in your head. Just because a team doesn't " have to" get rid a player doesn't meann he's worth more or less. I'm not really sure the point of that scenario. Monty already had Backstrom. If you are referring to Brodeur, I was just making a point about the best offer received determining the worth of a player, not that I had certain return expectations for trading him. Regardless the time of year Backstrom is still worth more than two 4th's and a 5th. If we want to go by your logic then we should just remove trade voting all together. If any GM accepts a deal then that is obviously the best offer they got. And if they want to really move that player AND that's the best offer on the table, then who are "we" to deny that trade P.S. - This is exactly why people don't post that they voted no. "You" ask why, but then proceed to debate their opinion
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Sept 25, 2010 19:34:39 GMT -5
I too disagree... a players value is determined by the market for him, and there is not much of a market for Backstrom. These things are going against him: big price tag, average ratings, few teams can afford him, and very few teams want him.
I agree he probably could have gotten more, but you can say that about most trades. I doubt he could have gotten much more.
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Sept 25, 2010 19:41:32 GMT -5
I too disagree... a players value is determined by the market for him, and there is not much of a market for Backstrom. These things are going against him: big price tag, average ratings, few teams can afford him, and very few teams want him. I agree he probably could have gotten more, but you can say that about most trades. I doubt he could have gotten much more. So then I ask you, if Brodeur was being traded for a 4th would you pass it? If that was the best offer I got and I do want to move him.
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Sept 25, 2010 19:49:13 GMT -5
You have received better offers for Brodeur than a 4th, because he is an elite player (I offered much better myself), so that is kind of a moot point.
My point is that Backstrom is an average starting goaltender, a UFA, and has a huge price tag. Who would want to make room for that? Contenders have better places to spend the money, and rebuilding teams have no interest in moving prospects or picks for a UFA. There are not many teams that fall in between these days.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2010 19:49:39 GMT -5
I too disagree... a players value is determined by the market for him, and there is not much of a market for Backstrom. These things are going against him: big price tag, average ratings, few teams can afford him, and very few teams want him. I agree he probably could have gotten more, but you can say that about most trades. I doubt he could have gotten much more. So then I ask you, if Brodeur was being traded for a 4th would you pass it? If that was the best offer I got and I do want to move him. No... not with a 5 year deal, but if Brodeur had a 1 year contract than maybe another pick/prospect would be sufficent because his OV ratings are a lot higher. This vote is close, so if I add another pick, shouldn't that put it over the top? For Backstrom at least...We weren't talking about the 75 OV Brodeur...
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Sept 25, 2010 20:03:09 GMT -5
You have received better offers for Brodeur than a 4th, because he is an elite player (I offered much better myself), so that is kind of a moot point. My point is that Backstrom is an average starting goaltender, a UFA, and has a huge price tag. Who would want to make room for that? Contenders have better places to spend the money, and rebuilding teams have no interest in moving prospects or picks for a UFA. There are not many teams that fall in between these days. I know you offered more than a 4th lol, that's why I said "if". It was a hypothetical So let's use Knuble then. I have received zero offers on him but posted on the block several times. If later on tonight there was a trade posted that was Knuble for a 4th, would you pass or reject? I do want to move him and obviously that would be the best offer I've gotten.
|
|