Atlanta-San Jose trade

HOTLANTA · Guru

RE: Atlanta-San Jose trade

Sabres · Guru

Either way, crap like this will get rejected once this league matures. Im surprised no one knows the value of prospects or picks like whatsoever. Oh well. Have fun SJ and ATL.

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Sabres wrote:

Either way, crap like this will get rejected once this league matures. Im surprised no one knows the value of prospects or picks like whatsoever. Oh well. Have fun SJ and ATL.

If you mean by "crap like this will get rejected..." that the league will step in and veto something like this, they'd better not, or I guarantee you it causes a tonne of problems.

-- Edited by Florida Panthers at 17:55, 2007-01-11

CBJackets · Guru

Those prospects are pretty much junk. And even if they do turn into players, they're all likely 3rd/4th line grinder types that it would be easy to trade for or sign in the off-season anyway.

I've seen Kreps, and he sucks. Too soft to be a checker and not good enough to play on a scoring line. He'll be back in Europe within a few years. I have to claim ignorance on the rest of those prospects, but if Kreps is the best, well, there sure ain't much quality in the rest.

But really, who cares, cause all he dealt for Kreps and Co. was Jeremy Fricken Roenick

And LA 1st for Marek Zagrapan should be vetoed WAY before this deal. That is a deal made by Buffalo two or three days ago. Toews, Kessel, Backstrom, Staal, Johnson >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Zagrapan

So you should be thanking the committee that this one isn't being vetoed because your deal would surely be next.

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

CBJackets wrote:

And LA 1st for Marek Zagrapan should be vetoed WAY before this deal. That is a deal made by Buffalo two or three days ago. Toews, Kessel, Backstrom, Staal, Johnson >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Zagrapan
So you should be thanking the committee that this one isn't being vetoed because your deal would surely be next.

I truly don't understand this desire for trades to be vetoed. Where does this thinking come from that it's the league's job to ensure that trades are equal for both teams? It's absolutely not. I've accepted the fact that the BOD can veto trades in this league despite the fact that I abhor the idea of vetoing unless it's for someone cheating. I don't like it, and still disagree with it, but at the very least, a rationale exists for things such as that last LA trade that was veto'd as it was about to decimate the team. I don't agree or like it, but I at least understand it.

But where the notion comes from that trades should be veto'd because they aren't even astonishes me. Who cares if LA's first >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Zagrapan??!? It's nobody's business, and the teams can do whatever they like. If it's a bad deal, it's a bad deal. Too freaking bad, so sad. Someone makes a bad deal for their team, suck it up, learn from it, and don't do it again. It's not the league's place to step and coddle GMs to ensure that trades are even, or aren't one sided. It's simply not.

CBJackets · Guru

Geez, I didn't say that it was. You could really benefit from actually reading what people write instead of thinking they wrote whatever you want so that you have something to post.

I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of crying foul over a trade after having made an equally or more lopsided deal 48-72 hours ago.