Page 3 of 3
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:14 am
by lightupdadarkness
This thread all kinds of lol thanks guys
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:17 am
by CasperX22
Fraser wroteCOLONCasperX22 wroteCOLONFraser wroteCOLONWell mate if you think your gonna get something considerably better you need to start paying attention a bit more.
If I don't, then he won't be dealt. I don't need to move him and have no problem keeping him as I have stated over and over. You made an over with 100% self serving interest that neither matched value nor my needs.
That just not true at all. You would drastically improve if you added a star asset like Simmonds to your lineup without subtracting elsewhere. When you sit a starter on the bench he's not doing anything for you. Simmonds would have been a big production boost for you.
And you can put your > wherever you like but Goligoski + Bolland is real close to Franson + Anisimov. It needed to be a feature to help absorb Lundqvists 8.5. Which is such a major thing for anyone to consider taking on. When you get a strong young backup and some propsects as well thats what we call mutually beneficial by definition.
I was hurting my team by not have more consistent goaltending. You were hurting your team by sitting a valuable asset on the bench every week. This would have addressed both of those.
Simmonds is no star Lmao! He is a 3rd line caliber pp specialist that is playing in a role greater than he is suited for. His current situation+contract is what makes him a great asset. In reality he really isn't a much better asset than Anisimov if at all if not for the contract situation.
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
by kimmer
Fraser wroteCOLONCasperX22 wroteCOLONFraser wroteCOLONWell mate if you think your gonna get something considerably better you need to start paying attention a bit more.
If I don't, then he won't be dealt. I don't need to move him and have no problem keeping him as I have stated over and over. You made an over with 100% self serving interest that neither matched value nor my needs.
That just not true at all. You would drastically improve if you added a star asset like Simmonds to your lineup without subtracting elsewhere. When you sit a starter on the bench he's not doing anything for you. Simmonds would have been a big production boost for you.
And you can put your > wherever you like but Goligoski + Bolland is real close to Franson + Anisimov. It needed to be a feature to help absorb Lundqvists 8.5. Which is such a major thing for anyone to consider taking on. When you get a strong young backup and some propsects as well thats what we call mutually beneficial by definition.
I was hurting my team by not have more consistent goaltending. You were hurting your team by sitting a valuable asset on the bench every week. This would have addressed both of those.
lol bro, are u gonna meet ur season's GGP?
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
by lightupdadarkness
Fraser wroteCOLONCasperX22 wroteCOLONFraser wroteCOLONWell mate if you think your gonna get something considerably better you need to start paying attention a bit more.
If I don't, then he won't be dealt. I don't need to move him and have no problem keeping him as I have stated over and over. You made an over with 100% self serving interest that neither matched value nor my needs.
That just not true at all. You would drastically improve if you added a star asset like Simmonds to your lineup without subtracting elsewhere. When you sit a starter on the bench he's not doing anything for you. Simmonds would have been a big production boost for you.
And you can put your > wherever you like but Goligoski + Bolland is real close to Franson + Anisimov. It needed to be a feature to help absorb Lundqvists 8.5. Which is such a major thing for anyone to consider taking on. When you get a strong young backup and some propsects as well thats what we call mutually beneficial by definition.
I was hurting my team by not have more consistent goaltending. You were hurting your team by sitting a valuable asset on the bench every week. This would have addressed both of those.
You both have points that can't be argued all day and night but what it comes down to is all it takes is one GM to meet the asking price of another GM. 29 others against the others but Simmonds isn't a star in real life or here sorry to burst that bubble
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:19 am
by CasperX22
And Bolland is absolute dogshit. Not sure where he has any real value to anyone other than teams that need gp.
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:27 am
by Fraser
He's in the top 40 most productive BBKL wingers this year. That's a star to me. But its really meaningless terminology. If that deal had gone through we would've iced better rosters this year. Maybe you think holding onto the value of your goalies exceeds the worth of improving your on ice roster. But the longer you wait the more risk you are running of that value never bleeding into BBKL production. I offered you an out into that. And a pretty damn fair one too if you consider contract, age and BBKL market for the player in question. But you don't see this. We clearly don't agree. And i wouldn't be interested din Lundqvist now. So whatever.
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:31 am
by CasperX22
Fraser wroteCOLONHe's in the top 40 most productive BBKL wingers this year. That's a star to me. But its really meaningless terminology. If that deal had gone through we would've iced better rosters this year. Maybe you think holding onto the value of your goalies exceeds the worth of improving your on ice roster. But the longer you wait the more risk you are running of that value never bleeding into BBKL production. I offered you an out into that. And a pretty damn fair one too if you consider contract, age and BBKL market for the player in question. But you don't see this. We clearly don't agree. And i wouldn't be interested din Lundqvist now. So whatever.
Of course you think he is a star. It's the same mentality that allows gms like Mike to rape and pillage the rest of the league.
In what way did me adding another winger, arguably my strongest position, help me ice a better roster? My needs were clear and your needs were clear. YOU chose to ignore them.
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:32 am
by Mike
eh?
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:33 am
by kimmer
lol
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:35 am
by CasperX22
Mike wroteCOLONeh?
Which part didn't you understand?
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:37 am
by Mike
How I'm relevant to this conversation, I've made about 6 trades since 2014
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:40 am
by CasperX22
Mike wroteCOLONHow I'm relevant to this conversation, I've made about 6 trades since 2014
I think you know perfectly well and the damage was done beforehand anyway. You don't have to apologize for being smarter than most of these guys.
Re: "The King"
PostedCOLON Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:58 am
by Matthew
Mike wroteCOLONHow I'm relevant to this conversation, I've made about 6 trades since 2014
HandsomeMike and Rape&PillagerMike