Another one

Eric_Isles · BRHL2 Co-Commish

Another one

capsgm · Senior Member

disgrace

OilersBrent · Senior Member

That's too bad. He had a decent team.

-- Edited by OilersBrent at 19:41, 2007-12-03

Philippe27 · Guru

That's a shame...

HOTLANTA · Guru

are the recent deals and jagr thing being looked at? why should the new guy be punished for those crappy deals in the last week.

Hawks_G · Guru

HOTLANTA wrote:

are the recent deals and jagr thing being looked at? why should the new guy be punished for those crappy deals in the last week.

I brought up to Eric the possibility of us being willing to retro our deal, although I did say I would have to talk to Dave about it.

There is one big problem though. The deal I made after it to cut cap space would have to be recinded as well because obviously it was a cap move only.

Still, I would need to talk to Dave about it....

HOTLANTA · Guru

good to see george as you see it is a little bad for the new g.m to step into a team a guy tore apart for fun for a few weeks..

BluesGM · Guru

sorry, but i would be a greedy bastard... i commend george on his willingness, but the fact that i've been on the wrong end of most deals i've made in this league, coupled with the fact that my team needed a jolt of youth means i can't have my trade reversed....

Hawks_G · Guru

HOTLANTA wrote:

good to see george as you see it is a little bad for the new g.m to step into a team a guy tore apart for fun for a few weeks..

The hard part is not only would my partner have to agree, but Rod would have to agree to reverse the Dumont/Schaeffer deal as well.

I will get with Dave to find out.

Hawks_G · Guru

BluesGM wrote:

sorry, but i would be a greedy bastard... i commend george on his willingness, but the fact that i've been on the wrong end of most deals i've made in this league, coupled with the fact that my team needed a jolt of youth means i can't have my trade reversed....

Well, it could possibly be league mandated that a team was being ripped apart by a GM that didn't give a crap and hence quit. They could go ahead and reverse all the deals and subsequent deals that Vancouver made.

I would be surprised if they did, but it would be within the realm of possible. I would accept such a move if they deemed it necessary for the Vancouver franchise. But that would have a snowball affect, like I mentioned with our Dumont deal which we made because of the deal with Vancouver.

I feel that we have the most to lose since we acquired a star player from them.

-- Edited by Hawks_G at 17:04, 2007-12-04

CalgaryGM · Member

both the deals seem iffy... add to the fact he traded away his top youth for vets (when his team won't make the playoffs) seems like a bogus deal. Did it a couple days before he left too...I uno but IMO a pay to play league shouldn't have stuff like that stand :/

capsgm · Senior Member

CalgaryGM wrote:

both the deals seem iffy... add to the fact he traded away his top youth for vets (when his team won't make the playoffs) seems like a bogus deal. Did it a couple days before he left too...I uno but IMO a pay to play league shouldn't have stuff like that stand :/

yup

Hawks_G · Guru

CalgaryGM wrote:

both the deals seem iffy... add to the fact he traded away his top youth for vets (when his team won't make the playoffs) seems like a bogus deal. Did it a couple days before he left too...I uno but IMO a pay to play league shouldn't have stuff like that stand :/

Trevor, you aren't playing with all the cards here. The chronology of the problem was this.

1. Goes over cap.
2. Loses best player.
3. Decides he is screwed and starts rebuild.
4. Rebuilds to the point where he is under the floor.
5. Loses best player.
6. Trades youth for vets to get back over floor.
7. Quits.

I personally think a review of the whole situation is in order to protect the franchise. GMs involved in the deals should be notified via email that all transactions from that moment may be recinded and any subsequent ones by those teams reviewed, and reprocessed if both GMs still agree.

But that is only an opinion. The league as a whole has to be worried about far more than any individual team. Considering ours has the most to lose,(Star player) I would like the commissioners and the commissioners only and not the BOD make a ruling on this.

HOTLANTA · Guru

totally agree with you george except on the order of what went down.. i think after he lost jagr he decided to quit and the rest in between was his stupidity....

BluesGM · Guru

i know i sound like an a**hole but i think the trades should stand as they are.... in my viewpoint this makes up for the first trade i completed with atlanta, general opinion then was that i got ripped off, and if i had the choice? yes i wouldn't have done that trade in hindsight... i would have looked for a better trade elsewhere...

now if other gms would like to consider reversing their trades, by all means i commend them for their generosity to the new incoming gm... however, as someone who's felt they've been on the losing end of most of the trades he's done (mainly due to the need to bring in players), i can't help but feel frustrated that my trade might be reversed....

i've finally been in on a trade where i feel that i've won, and if mike hadn't quit, seeing how my trade went through the BOD, that there wouldn't be any of this discussion.... i'm sure that all of you would agree that if mike had stayed as gm, there would be none of this talk about reversing trades... taking on a new team always has its problems, when i took over as the st louis gm, it needed two top six forwards, two top four defensemen, and a starting goalie... i managed to turn the team around and put together a playoff ready team... steve took over a team that was run into the ground by the previous gm and put together a team that could make the playoffs in a couple seasons... vancouver's in better shape than that...