To Chicago: Niclas Wallin, Paul Mara, NYR 2007 Rnd 1, NJ 2007 Rnd 4 To Philly: Ed Jovanovski, Ty Conklin, $2,000,000
Seems like sort of a joke...mara is close to jovo straight up, and i dont think you realize how valuable that NYR 07 pick is..thats prob for sure going to be a top 5 pick...and the 2,000,000 is nice, but really is that just one of those things you throw in to make it look nicer..
Sabres wrote: anyone see that this trade was made? To Chicago: Niclas Wallin, Paul Mara, NYR 2007 Rnd 1, NJ 2007 Rnd 4 To Philly: Ed Jovanovski, Ty Conklin, $2,000,000 Seems like sort of a joke...mara is close to jovo straight up, and i dont think you realize how valuable that NYR 07 pick is..thats prob for sure going to be a top 5 pick...and the 2,000,000 is nice, but really is that just one of those things you throw in to make it look nicer.. Philly got ripped the frig off.
Jovo is wayyy better for this year. And considering Chicago is only slated to make about 3 million more this year 2 million is a pretty big sum. I also don't think the pick is as valuable as you might think because the Rangers could still finish out of the bottom 5, and whoever that pick is, Chicago is going to likely have to wait 2-3 seasons for that player to make a significant impact, which IMO makes picks less valuable especially in a cash league.
__________________
To NYIslander: Daniel Tjarnqvist, Duvie Westcott, Ilja Bryzgalov, Pat Rissmiller, Tom Poti, Bjorn Melin, Karri Ramo, Tom Gilbert
To Boston: Chris Pronger, Doug Murray, Jocelyn Thibault, Ken Klee, Wade Brookbank, Denis Istomin, Viktor Dovgan
There's absolutely no reason whatsoever this trade should even be considered to be looked at. It's not even close to being super lopsided. Especially given we're not even a quarter through the season and that NYR pick could be worth far far less than a top 5 pick. And even if it is. Whoop dee doo.
There's absolutely no reason whatsoever this trade should even be considered to be looked at. It's not even close to being super lopsided. Especially given we're not even a quarter through the season and that NYR pick could be worth far far less than a top 5 pick. And even if it is. Whoop dee doo.
For once we agree, I agree with you that trades should be vetoed only in extreme circumstances and this isn't even close to being one.
Every deal is going to have a winner. In this deal Philly got a player in Jovo who can be in his top pairing for years to come. While Mara is a solid defender, he has only really had one solid year and while his future should be bright, it isn't set in stone. The first round pick is a big asset to move but prospects take years to develop especially in this upcoming draft. I think it is a fair trade overall with Philly being the winner now and Chicago winning in the future.
Sabres wrote: anyone see that this trade was made?
To Chicago: Niclas Wallin, Paul Mara, NYR 2007 Rnd 1, NJ 2007 Rnd 4 To Philly: Ed Jovanovski, Ty Conklin, $2,000,000
Seems like sort of a joke...mara is close to jovo straight up, and i dont think you realize how valuable that NYR 07 pick is..thats prob for sure going to be a top 5 pick...and the 2,000,000 is nice, but really is that just one of those things you throw in to make it look nicer..
Philly got ripped the frig off.
You are only sad because I got the pick and you didn't...
There's absolutely no reason whatsoever this trade should even be considered to be looked at. It's not even close to being super lopsided. Especially given we're not even a quarter through the season and that NYR pick could be worth far far less than a top 5 pick. And even if it is. Whoop dee doo.
Whats with you and being so definite? I mean OF COURSE IT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT. I can understand that you think if we are paying money and get raped in a deal its tough luck, but whos to stop 1 person from owning two teams with alternate names for each team and slowly transfering all the talent from one team to another?
Sabres wrote: anyone see that this trade was made?
To Chicago: Niclas Wallin, Paul Mara, NYR 2007 Rnd 1, NJ 2007 Rnd 4 To Philly: Ed Jovanovski, Ty Conklin, $2,000,000
Seems like sort of a joke...mara is close to jovo straight up, and i dont think you realize how valuable that NYR 07 pick is..thats prob for sure going to be a top 5 pick...and the 2,000,000 is nice, but really is that just one of those things you throw in to make it look nicer..
Philly got ripped the frig off.
You are only sad because I got the pick and you didn't...
There's absolutely no reason whatsoever this trade should even be considered to be looked at. It's not even close to being super lopsided. Especially given we're not even a quarter through the season and that NYR pick could be worth far far less than a top 5 pick. And even if it is. Whoop dee doo.
Whats with you and being so definite? I mean OF COURSE IT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT. I can understand that you think if we are paying money and get raped in a deal its tough luck, but whos to stop 1 person from owning two teams with alternate names for each team and slowly transfering all the talent from one team to another? Sabes, be careful of what you bring up...because I am an easy going guy, I don't care, but if you brought up collussion in the thread of other GMs, they would likely FREAK out.
This deal is for a bonafied number one dman. Wallin was a farm guy, and the pick, well, a top five pick can be Patrick Stefan or Joni Pitkanen.....Mara is decent but as you can tell by his production so far this year, he isn't a number one guy.
This deal should have very little question, besides the fact that the Sabres and Hawks both highly value first rounders and prospects.
Sabres wrote: Whats with you and being so definite? I mean OF COURSE IT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT. I can understand that you think if we are paying money and get raped in a deal its tough luck, but whos to stop 1 person from owning two teams with alternate names for each team and slowly transfering all the talent from one team to another?
Allow me to rephrase for you. There's absolutely no reason this trade should even remotely be considered to be vetoed. Look at it all you like. Read it backwards and forwards.
You're now using the collusion/cheating arguement which I've fully supported as being a reason for reversing trades. Fortunately, there is absolutely zero reason to suggest any such thing in this case.
As someone else also pointed out, there is almost always going to be a "winner" and a "loser" in a trade.
Even if the league is going to be reversing trades on the basis of one side being too much of a "loser" (as it appears it will do), this trade isn't even remotely close to it.
I'm also so definite because every time someone wants to have a marginal trade reviewed, it just brings things closer and closer to implementing the "trade police" where everything is looked at to make sure it's 100% fair to everyone all the time and nobody loses a trade.
Sabres wrote: Whats with you and being so definite? I mean OF COURSE IT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT. I can understand that you think if we are paying money and get raped in a deal its tough luck, but whos to stop 1 person from owning two teams with alternate names for each team and slowly transfering all the talent from one team to another?
Allow me to rephrase for you. There's absolutely no reason this trade should even remotely be considered to be vetoed. Look at it all you like. Read it backwards and forwards.
You're now using the collusion/cheating arguement which I've fully supported as being a reason for reversing trades. Fortunately, there is absolutely zero reason to suggest any such thing in this case.
As someone else also pointed out, there is almost always going to be a "winner" and a "loser" in a trade.
Even if the league is going to be reversing trades on the basis of one side being too much of a "loser" (as it appears it will do), this trade isn't even remotely close to it.
I'm also so definite because every time someone wants to have a marginal trade reviewed, it just brings things closer and closer to implementing the "trade police" where everything is looked at to make sure it's 100% fair to everyone all the time and nobody loses a trade.
Why are we even talking about this trade being unfair? It's not. Are we comparing this to one that looks like Malik for Bergeron next year?
I think the concern that was brought up just started a useless debate when this isn't even comparable to th eprevious trade that was vetoed.
Philippe27 wrote: Why are we even talking about this trade being unfair? It's not. Are we comparing this to one that looks like Malik for Bergeron next year?
I think the concern that was brought up just started a useless debate when this isn't even comparable to th eprevious trade that was vetoed.
Absolutely agreed. And that was my point as well. Trades like this don't even need to be looked at...
