Hawks looking to add a bit of salary/roster players!

VancouverGM · Senior Member

RE: Hawks looking to add a bit of salary/roster players!

Hawks GM 2 · Senior Member

Florida Panthers wrote:

That's for trying to enlighten me. You can make the assumption that I'm a rookie GM if you like, however you'd be quite incorrect.

No disrespect intended. Just by the way you responded I assumed that you might be new to this.

That's all fantastic stuff! And in 99% likelyhood is entirely irrelivant the deals that guys are looking to make here right now, and yes, that makes me guilty of some assumptions myself. In the many years of experience as a GM in several FHL leagues as well as other non FHL leagues with players and prospects, when someone says "I'll give you prospects for your players", especially when they say they have a tonne of prospects, they look to give quantity over quality, and get back something decent in return. "I'll give you these 5 no-name scrub prospects that nobody's ever heard of for you guy!". So what??? 5 guys that in all likelyhood will never amount to anything for a guy that can play. And for all the talk about drafting ability, and all the great prospects out there... both here... and in the real NHL... the VAST majority of players that get drafted, never play in the NHL and are a total crapshoot.

The reality is that there are only 2 teams with 21 players (no teams with more) that are 70+ OV. OV of course is only a general indication and should no way be solely looked at given how OV can easily be skewed high certain high ratings.

And as my original comment mentioned, it was made based on the fact we're talking about non top end prospects, who certainly DO have value.

Yes, every situation is unique and there are indeed many factors that play into things. However as pointed out previously, my response was directed towards the VanIslander sarcastic comment about Columbus' unwilling to trade "good players" for lack of a better term, for prospects. And it still stands, that it's in no way unreasonable to want to give up decent players for prospects that will likely never play. And frankly, a large part of why I made it is because there's no need to try and take a shot at a GM simply because you don't like the offer they were making. Especially when all they did was not fall for a bad deal.

And I agree... but it's a bit of a slippery slope either way. You will have the GMs out there that think you're nuts that you're turning down a five-for-one deal, even if the prospects being offered up are marginal at best.

The other side of the coin of course is that you'll also get the GMs out there that think that asking for say a Robbie Schremp for a Bryan Marchment is fair as well.

And I whole heartedly agree about it being unnecessary to take pot-shots at each other over trade offers. The one thing I've discovered is to take all trade offers with a grain of salt. Some offers are just posturing, and others the other GM genuinely believes that they are offering value. If you don't like the offer, counter with something you think is more reasonable, or politely decline.